Islam:Peaceful and Tolerant?

[Deacon Don]

Danny777]
Muslims naturally insist that Islam is a peaceful and tolerant
religion.

And they are wrong. Period.

Can anyone think of an Islamic country that gives it's citizens the
same freedom and opportunity to practice Judaism and Christianity
as Muslims enjoy in Western "Christian" nations?

No. That "religion of peace" doesn't address freedom or Liberty.
It only knows hate and domination.

 

[All Englands Skies]

Being that France just banned the niqab, and the rise of violence and prejudice attitudes towards Muslims in the UK and other European nations, are you reallly going to start touting superiority? Let's not forget all that's been done in the name of the Church and Crown by your country as well.

I don't wanna hear that "No True Scotsman" cop out either; it's pretty pathetic, and since you're showing pride and vanity, let's keep the sins on coming down.

If you knew anything about the UK as it is today, you'd know its actually more dangerous for a Muslim to convert to Christianity than it is for Christians to convert to Islam, in a supposedly "Christian" country.

You've got gangs of Muslims who think they can violently enforce sharia in the areas they live

and you've got Muslims free to preach there faith.

As for the increase in aggression against Muslims ,thats come around as a backlash at the way Muslims have been acting, but as usually its been twisted out to try and make out the Muslims are the backlash.

Like when the EDL came around, they tried to make out Muslim extremism was a backlash against the EDL, when the timeline of events, the facts show (and yes, the facts, what actually happened) show the EDL was the backlash against Islamic extremists!!!

We're not touting superiority, we're debunking the attidute amongst many muslims who are deluded to acually think they get it worse in the west than minorities get in Islamic lands.

Its the audacity that you muslims shout about how badly you are treated in the west, but wherever Islams in control, its much much worse for non-Muslims living there

Its you lot doing the touting, about how bad you get it, while mainly turning a blind eye or acting flippant about how you lot treat others.

you've got Muslimah on here, who if you read what she says obviously has no problems with the restrictions Islam enforces upon non-Muslims and actually thinks its moral and wants that world to be a reality, while at the same time moaning about how Muslims are treated in the west, all while laughable calling us the hypocrites, yet as much as I dont like Islam, I dont want any laws that restrict Islam, which means my position is not hypocritical, as I wouldnt support a law lets say, that punishes people for leaving Christianity, but shes more than happy to support laws that restrict us in Muslim lands, which means she doesnt care about pesonal freedom of others, but then condemns the way Muslims are treated and cant in anyway see the hypocrisy in that.

 

[All Englands Skies]

Muslims who are persecuted everywhere at the hands of Christians (Serbia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq, etc).

Serbia was in the 1990s, the rest really is clutching at straws, the NATO armies in Afghanistan are secular forces there for political reasons, now most forces has withdrawn out of Afghanistan and as for the rest, that laughable, not official forces are of the west are there, maybe theres a few block ops. but you cant claim widespread persecution over them, you're trying to make out theres a bunch of Crusaders running around Pakistan and yemen?

As do I, though I do believe it was too little, too late. Also, a lot of things were questionable, such as imposing an arms embargo so that the Bosnians couldn't defend themselves, the Dutch essentially standing around in an area that was supposed to be under the protection of the UN watching while the Serbs slaughtered the Bosnians, not putting sufficient troops on the ground all the while promising the Bosnians that they are safe (if the Dutch excuse is that there weren't enough people to realistically prevent the slaughter of the Bosnians), not even returning the weapons to the Bosnians in that UN protected area so they could defend themselves, trading Bosnians with the Serbs in return for Dutch hostages (and these Bosnians were later killed), not approving of air strikes until after the massacre (and getting the forms mixed up), etc.

Here we go, if we ignore the "plight" of muslims its then reason for them to be angry and hate us, but if we go charging in "to the rescue" we're then "Invading a Muslim land" and its reason for them to be angry. Your obviously little more than an Islamist propagandist judging from your posts, so whatever action we choose, you'll demonise us for it.

Makes me laugh, arent we supposed to leave you to it?, isnt the west the "world police" sticking its nose in where it doesnt belong?, Isnt it wrong for the west to sell weapons to dirty wars in non-western lands, but then suddenly, as it suits, we're then the "bad guys" for not doing the stuff we get condenmned for if we do, do it?

You make it up as you go along, basically, the west is "the great satan" no matter what it does.

 

[LoveBeingAMuslimah]

Right. You could be guilty of war crimes though. Terrorism may have a permeable definition, but it does exist.

This seems unfair. If a government bombs a hospital, it's not terrorism. But if 10 random people get together to bomb another hospital (and they happen to be from a particular religion), it is terrorism. It just doesn't make any sense.

Besides, who decided that governments cannot commit terrorism?

Here's an exercise for you, and I'm interested in seeing your opinion-

a) A bunch of thugs, for religious and political reasons, attack and murder hundreds of unarmed shoppers in a shopping centre. Terrorism or not? If not, what is it?

b) A squadron of bombers drop bombs on factories of an opposing nation during a declared war. The workers were warned beforehand in leaflet and by radio. Some workers are killed. Terrorism or not? If not, what is it?

Like I said, I don't like using the word terrorism because it is so vague. It is also loaded and used inconsistently. I generally use it to point out how flawed the application of the term is.

In any case, my morals and ethics are defined by God's laws (i.e. Islaam). Therefore, any intentional targeting of non-combatant women and children is prohibited.

I understand Muslim minorities in some countries have it hard. I appreciate that point. My church has even sent aid in the past.

Christians are persecuting Muslims in Pakistan? Yemen? Iraq? How so? Please keep in mind that military operations carried out by a government is not something done in the Name of Christ, and the participants could be from any or no religion at all. It really doesn't qualify as a Christian thing. Especially in this age of the separation of church and state (a great thing)

Drone strikes, drone strikes, war (including the rapes that took place, the scandal at Abu Ghraib, the usage of depleted uranium which has increased cancer rates by 200%, increased miscarriages, severe birth defects, and who knows what the other long-term effects are) respectively.

As for the participants, they are predominantly Christian. A large chunk of the supporters of these participants tend to be staunch Christians who often repeat the prayer, "God bless our troops." That's a religious component.

Are you seriously saying that country that enters into a war is doing it in the name of their predominant religion?

You're the one who, on this thread, mentioned the "Christian" west.

Secondly, the same is done to Muslims who attack non-Muslims. The religion (or the fact that they are an adherant) is almost always mentioned even if it was not their motive. And even if it was their motive, why is it mentioned but not the actual Islaamic ruling? Why is the same not done for Christians or Jews or whoever else?

This is why I can't help but comment on the double standards and hyperbole, not to mention the flawed logic of your posts.

Double standards is calling one act terrorism but when the same/similar thing is done by a non-Muslim/a government, it is not called terrorism all the while saying you support equality and human rights.

God's religion is Judeo-Christianity. Islam is unnecessary. Whatever Islam has- we've had for centuries before. That's why people are flocking to our churches now. The mission field is landing on our soil and applying for asylum. God is good to them.

God's revelations to Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them) were also part of God's religion, obviously. But then their followers perverted the message into what it is today (whether it's denying God's subsequent Messenger(s) or associating partners with God). So what Islaam has today that neither Judaism nor Christianity have is the same, crystal clear message that was revealed initially. Plus, the same God that revealed the Torah and the Injeel also said that the religion has been perfected for us (therefore, there is no need for future messengers since what we have now is sufficient until the Day of Judgement). He did not say that following any of the previous revelations.

I have. Most of them don't think the way you do. The young males and females who have been raised in this country and are attending universities with lefty professors are the only ones having a gripe about these issues, and just like you, they're dreadfully biased. They just want a cause to believe in. When I was in university, it was capitalism that was the bad guy. Now it's whatever Noam Chomsky says it is.

I'm not biased. I'm just stating facts as they are; I call it like I see it.

Anyways, I'd be genuinely surprised if those are their actual feelings. Even the most sinful & detached Muslims are usually sympathetic to the plight of Muslims. Let's say someone's politics are not at all influenced by religion, usually those Muslims (by name) are still against the foreign policy. It is rare that you will find a "right-wing" Muslim in terms of foreign policies. But I guess it can happen. I don't think I've met such a Muslim yet (at least not from their apparent words). The closest thing I can think of is Muslims voting for Bush in '00 but that was due to Al Gore's VP being a strong supporter of Israel.

The real refugee Muslims I know pretty much take the side of the country that is caring for them and leaving them in peace to pursue their religion and whatever else makes them happy. No religious police, no Imams telling them what to do. They love it.

They love being spied upon, being more at risk for being labeled a terrorist, and being treated differently by the government even though we're all supposedly equal in rights?

Yeah, I bet if I shared that with them they'd probably laugh.

Huh, laughing at what the Prophet said. They don't sound very Muslim-like.

Thank God His old religion has instruments in music. What a grumpy and dreary thing some Muslims have tried to make their religion into.

So your definition of fun begins and ends with music? There are many ways to have fun. Just because some people cannot imagine fun without drinking alcohol doesn't mean it does not exist out of it. Similarly, just because some people cannot imagine fun without music does not mean that fun cannot be had without it.

I have lots of fun, thank you very much. And in permissible ways. No, there isn't any intoxication, adultery/fornication, gossiping (backbiting/slandering), etc. involved in the permissible type of fun which may make it unappealing to some. But it is appealing to me.

...but they're all made, designed and lining the pockets of the West and Israel.

Even if that's true, what does that have to do with those immigrants?

Meanwhile:

The best your lot can do is: this.

An Iranian family pointed that out to me- just before their baptisms.

Iran.....my lot? Definitely not.

Here is the type of good that "my lot" can do when properly following Islaam:

He recently passed away on August 15th of this year, may Allaah have mercy on him and grant him the highest level of Paradise. He was also a physician and was a propagator of Islaam.

In addition to 11 million people accepting Islaam through this man's hands, building 5,000+ mosques, 9,500 wells, and sponsoring 15,000 orphans, he also built 124 hospitals, 860 schools, 200+ training centers for women, 200 Islaamic centers, and who knows what else.

May Allaah accept his worship and good deeds.

People just like peace, safety and prosperity. Their political views vary in my experience. One Afghan guy I know is very devout, but loves living here and says practicing the religion is better here as well.

I still stand by what I said regarding those Afghans that you speak of being more nationalistic than religious and/or being supporters of the Northern Alliance. I could be wrong but that's my conclusion based on your description of them. In any case, may Allaah guide them.

Yeah, when everybody is losing their cause, they beg for the West and America to help. They complain when they don't get what they want. Then if the US does help, they make up all this propaganda and lies that they are imperialists and the Great Satan etc. Hypocrites man.

1.) I have a strong feeling that the Muslims will be victorious against Bashar and his stooges with or without the help of any non-Muslims. God-willing this victory will be soon.

2.) Hypocrites? I think hypocrisy is giving false information about there being WMD in Iraq to garner public support for war but when there are confirmed reports of chemical weapons being used in Syria, nothing is done. I think hypocrisy is going on and on about how much of a murderous & ruthless dictator Saddam was in order to go into Iraq but not going in when Bashar al Assad has done so much damage to the people of Syria in the span of 3 years (and all the years before the Syrian rebels began fighting to this degree).

3.) Obama said that using chemical weapons was the red line. Hello? Red line anybody? A lot of people DON'T want American support, they just want to expose the hypocrisy/weak positions of certain people.

4.) If it was guaranteed that any foreign nations intervening in the war would be in and out & they wouldn't leave any other trace of their intervention, then I'd be for it. No trying to kill any rebel groups, no trying to prop up a puppet as the new leader, etc.

5.) Again, I'm actually relieved that Allaah is forcing us to turn to Him. It's taking trusting Him completely to a whole new level. And it's also increasing the level of brotherhood amongst the Muslims in Syria because they see Muslims from all over the world coming in to help them. Allaah truly does what is best for His believing slaves, of this I have no doubt.

My colleague in Sweden says there are so many candidates for baptism from Islamic refugees that they will soon have to use firehoses. He's joking about the mode of course, but it's a nice problem to have.

I'm not overly concerned. Guidance only belongs to Allaah. None can guide whom Allaah misguides and no one can misguide whom Allaah guides. And then, of course, there are a few other factors to consider. Muslims, regardless of piety level, tend to have a firm belief in Islaam and our concept of the Oneness of God. Our religion makes much more sense to us than Christianity. So while there may be a few apostates (either to Christianity or whatever faith (or atheism)), it is not very common. Plus, immigrant/minority communities tend to form closer bonds in an already tight-knit community. So they are a minority religion as well as minorities through their ethnic background.

May Allaah allow all those who call themselves Muslims to live and die upon Islaam. Ameen.

I think that complaint is baseless. Muslims pretty much get everything they ask for in my country. They even get public pools segregated at special times just for Muslims. If you say anything against them or their religion, you will get taken to court (but if you say anything against Jesus, nothing will happen) In the US, there seems to be almost a litany of complaints about Muslim favoritism.

It's worth posting this article again (the article from my initial post on this thread):

New York's top court highlights the meaninglessness and menace of the term 'terrorism' | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | theguardian.com

This alone disproves your theory.

The fact of the matter is, to me, it looks like a subversive tactic. Use our laws of freedom of expression and their counterbalance (vilification laws) against us and then take them away when "Islam rules the world" (which it won't. No Medieval religion will ever take hold in an educated populace)

1.) We do, indeed, believe that Islaam will stretch from the East to the West. It is a prophecy of the Messenger of Allaah. But that's where it ends. No big conspiracy theory.

2.) Who is "us" and "our"? Because they are not just yours, they're mine and other Muslim citizens' too.

Have you spoken against them?

I have mentioned on these forums that I have no need to apologize for others' actions when I had absolutely no hand in them. If a Muslim drinks alcohol, I'm not going to apologize for it. It's their sin, not mine. If a Muslim commits unlawful murder, I'm not going to apologize for it. It's their sin, not mine.

As mentioned before, intentionally targeting non-combatant women and children is prohibited in Islaam. I will leave it at that.

That's three. But I think if I were you, I would honestly leave.

1.) "Stay silent and don't criticize" is one, "leave" is the other.

2.) Thanks for your advice, but you're not me. I will do what I consider best for myself.

Another topic, but could be interesting.

Pertinent to our discussion is that Islaam is the only religion that offers moral & practical guidelines in war. Islaam offers the middle path.

I've seen those before. They don't seem to add up in real life though. No one of other religions want to live under Islam. No one today would choose it. No one really trusts Islam to control its radicals, and no one I think sees many Islamic countries as stable or safe from radical takeover. Secondly, I don't see lines of people trying to get into Islamic countries. No Jews or Christians are lining up to get citizenship in Saudi A or Iran for example. Instead, I see long, long lines of Jews, Christians and the "wrong kind" of Muslims trying to get out.

1.) Both of those links contain quotes from non-Muslims. To the best of my knowledge, Islaam is the only faith that, when ruled by, has allowed people of other faiths to prosper.

2.) There aren't any Islaamic countries.

3.) It is incredibly difficult to attain citizenship in Saudi Arabia for non-Saudis. It's a terrible rule which I wish would be done away with.

 

[wn123455]

This seems unfair. If a government bombs a hospital, it's not terrorism. But if 10 random people get together to bomb another hospital (and they happen to be from a particular religion), it is terrorism. It just doesn't make any sense.

Besides, who decided that governments cannot commit terrorism?

Like I said, I don't like using the word terrorism because it is so vague. It is also loaded and used inconsistently. I generally use it to point out how flawed the application of the term is.

In any case, my morals and ethics are defined by God's laws (i.e. Islaam). Therefore, any intentional targeting of non-combatant women and children is prohibited.

Drone strikes, drone strikes, war (including the rapes that took place, the scandal at Abu Ghraib, the usage of depleted uranium which has increased cancer rates by 200%, increased miscarriages, severe birth defects, and who knows what the other long-term effects are) respectively.

As for the participants, they are predominantly Christian. A large chunk of the supporters of these participants tend to be staunch Christians who often repeat the prayer, "God bless our troops." That's a religious component.

You're the one who, on this thread, mentioned the "Christian" west.

Secondly, the same is done to Muslims who attack non-Muslims. The religion (or the fact that they are an adherant) is almost always mentioned even if it was not their motive. And even if it was their motive, why is it mentioned but not the actual Islaamic ruling? Why is the same not done for Christians or Jews or whoever else?

Double standards is calling one act terrorism but when the same/similar thing is done by a non-Muslim/a government, it is not called terrorism all the while saying you support equality and human rights.

God's revelations to Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them) were also part of God's religion, obviously. But then their followers perverted the message into what it is today (whether it's denying God's subsequent Messenger(s) or associating partners with God). So what Islaam has today that neither Judaism nor Christianity have is the same, crystal clear message that was revealed initially. Plus, the same God that revealed the Torah and the Injeel also said that the religion has been perfected for us (therefore, there is no need for future messengers since what we have now is sufficient until the Day of Judgement). He did not say that following any of the previous revelations.


I'm not biased. I'm just stating facts as they are; I call it like I see it.

Anyways, I'd be genuinely surprised if those are their actual feelings. Even the most sinful & detached Muslims are usually sympathetic to the plight of Muslims. Let's say someone's politics are not at all influenced by religion, usually those Muslims (by name) are still against the foreign policy. It is rare that you will find a "right-wing" Muslim in terms of foreign policies. But I guess it can happen. I don't think I've met such a Muslim yet (at least not from their apparent words). The closest thing I can think of is Muslims voting for Bush in '00 but that was due to Al Gore's VP being a strong supporter of Israel.

They love being spied upon, being more at risk for being labeled a terrorist, and being treated differently by the government even though we're all supposedly equal in rights?


Huh, laughing at what the Prophet said. They don't sound very Muslim-like.

So your definition of fun begins and ends with music? There are many ways to have fun. Just because some people cannot imagine fun without drinking alcohol doesn't mean it does not exist out of it. Similarly, just because some people cannot imagine fun without music does not mean that fun cannot be had without it.

I have lots of fun, thank you very much. And in permissible ways. No, there isn't any intoxication, adultery/fornication, gossiping (backbiting/slandering), etc. involved in the permissible type of fun which may make it unappealing to some. But it is appealing to me.

Even if that's true, what does that have to do with those immigrants?

Iran.....my lot? Definitely not.

Here is the type of good that "my lot" can do when properly following Islaam:

He recently passed away on August 15th of this year, may Allaah have mercy on him and grant him the highest level of Paradise. He was also a physician and was a propagator of Islaam.

In addition to 11 million people accepting Islaam through this man's hands, building 5,000+ mosques, 9,500 wells, and sponsoring 15,000 orphans, he also built 124 hospitals, 860 schools, 200+ training centers for women, 200 Islaamic centers, and who knows what else.

May Allaah accept his worship and good deeds.


I still stand by what I said regarding those Afghans that you speak of being more nationalistic than religious and/or being supporters of the Northern Alliance. I could be wrong but that's my conclusion based on your description of them. In any case, may Allaah guide them.


1.) I have a strong feeling that the Muslims will be victorious against Bashar and his stooges with or without the help of any non-Muslims. God-willing this victory will be soon.

2.) Hypocrites? I think hypocrisy is giving false information about there being WMD in Iraq to garner public support for war but when there are confirmed reports of chemical weapons being used in Syria, nothing is done. I think hypocrisy is going on and on about how much of a murderous & ruthless dictator Saddam was in order to go into Iraq but not going in when Bashar al Assad has done so much damage to the people of Syria in the span of 3 years (and all the years before the Syrian rebels began fighting to this degree).

3.) Obama said that using chemical weapons was the red line. Hello? Red line anybody? A lot of people DON'T want American support, they just want to expose the hypocrisy/weak positions of certain people.

4.) If it was guaranteed that any foreign nations intervening in the war would be in and out & they wouldn't leave any other trace of their intervention, then I'd be for it. No trying to kill any rebel groups, no trying to prop up a puppet as the new leader, etc.

5.) Again, I'm actually relieved that Allaah is forcing us to turn to Him. It's taking trusting Him completely to a whole new level. And it's also increasing the level of brotherhood amongst the Muslims in Syria because they see Muslims from all over the world coming in to help them. Allaah truly does what is best for His believing slaves, of this I have no doubt.


I'm not overly concerned. Guidance only belongs to Allaah. None can guide whom Allaah misguides and no one can misguide whom Allaah guides. And then, of course, there are a few other factors to consider. Muslims, regardless of piety level, tend to have a firm belief in Islaam and our concept of the Oneness of God. Our religion makes much more sense to us than Christianity. So while there may be a few apostates (either to Christianity or whatever faith (or atheism)), it is not very common. Plus, immigrant/minority communities tend to form closer bonds in an already tight-knit community. So they are a minority religion as well as minorities through their ethnic background.

May Allaah allow all those who call themselves Muslims to live and die upon Islaam. Ameen.


It's worth posting this article again (the article from my initial post on this thread):

New York's top court highlights the meaninglessness and menace of the term 'terrorism' | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | theguardian.com

This alone disproves your theory.

1.) We do, indeed, believe that Islaam will stretch from the East to the West. It is a prophecy of the Messenger of Allaah. But that's where it ends. No big conspiracy theory.

2.) Who is "us" and "our"? Because they are not just yours, they're mine and other Muslim citizens' too.

I have mentioned on these forums that I have no need to apologize for others' actions when I had absolutely no hand in them. If a Muslim drinks alcohol, I'm not going to apologize for it. It's their sin, not mine. If a Muslim commits unlawful murder, I'm not going to apologize for it. It's their sin, not mine.

As mentioned before, intentionally targeting non-combatant women and children is prohibited in Islaam. I will leave it at that.

1.) "Stay silent and don't criticize" is one, "leave" is the other.

2.) Thanks for your advice, but you're not me. I will do what I consider best for myself.

Pertinent to our discussion is that Islaam is the only religion that offers moral & practical guidelines in war. Islaam offers the middle path.

1.) Both of those links contain quotes from non-Muslims. To the best of my knowledge, Islaam is the only faith that, when ruled by, has allowed people of other faiths to prosper.

2.) There aren't any Islaamic countries.

3.) It is incredibly difficult to attain citizenship in Saudi Arabia for non-Saudis. It's a terrible rule which I wish would be done away with.

Then why do so many indonesian muslims cry terrorism when a West Papua separatist group launches attacks on islamists? Many indonesian muslims don't see the occupation of West Papua as terrorism but whenever a West Papua separatist group launches attacks on islamists the indonesian muslims cry terrorism.

 

[Deacon Don]

Well, you have before you some good opportunities to tell us about
why you think Islam has been hijacked etc. Don't surrender the good
reputation you are gaining by falling into ad homs etc. Use it for
good! Your own advice- Keep Calm and Say Alhamdulillah.

It hasn't been hijacked, at least not by the violent practitioners of
that "religion of peace". Mohammad is their esteemed example and
he was a murderer, forced people to convert or die and had sex with
a 9 year old girl.

 

[Lollerskates]

Muslims naturally insist that Islam is a peaceful and tolerant religion.

Can anyone think of an Islamic country that gives it's citizens the same freedom and opportunity to practice Judaism and Christianity as Muslims enjoy in Western "Christian" nations?

Is this a fair test of whether a religion is peaceful and tolerant?

I don't think its about that in terms of freedom. The Muslim countries have hurdles to get over before they even think about different groups executing freedoms of expression. The Western nations have been exploiting their lands for goods and resources for thousands of years. The "Muslim" nations are literally fighting to get the remnant of Western influence out of their land, to demolish the central banking system of hegemony that has existed for a long time. Remember this goes even beyond Rome. All of this "Jihad" business is the active protest arm of Islam. Islam (depending on the persons) is peaceful, but there is also heavy political trauma that plagues the area.

When the West stops trying to force Islamic nations to live like they live, I would bet Islamic nations would stop trying to "put a Jihad" on the West. They are not the usual victims like slaves, Native Americans, etc. - they are putting up a serious fight. So, they are being labeled as violent and dangerous. Some nations don't want democracy (even though the West is not a democracy: most of the West is a democratic/constitutional republic.)

 

[Lollerskates]

Dp

 

[Andres88]

MOD HAT ON
​

Please refrain from insulting and personally attacking other people. Remember the rules.
​

Flaming and Harassment
● Do not insult, belittle, mock, goad, personally attack, threaten, harass, or use derogatory nicknames in reference to other members or groups of members. Address the context of the post, not the poster.
● If you are flamed, do not respond in-kind. Alert staff to the situation by utilizing the report button. Do not report another member out of spite.
● Do not state or imply that another member or group of members who have identified themselves as Christian are not Christian.
● Do not make another member's experience on this site miserable. This includes, making false accusations or persistently attacking them in the open forums.
● Respect another member's request to cease personal contact.

Be respectful with one another.
​

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[kenzo0]

11 million accept Islam... don't ever think you can leave Islam..
5.700 majids built... winds of change Tahiti polynisians protest islam, mosque, want muslims out of country - YouTube
after they know who Islam is... in England:

in Birmingham,UK..

in Moscow:

in Nederland..

in Germany..

I will give you the coolest one from Austrian Freedom Party leader Heinz Christian Strache..
HC-Rap 2010: HC goes "Wiener Blut" - Herr Häupl, Jetzt ist SCHLUSS MIT LUSTIG! ;-) - HC Strache - YouTube

He recently passed away on August 15th of this year, may Allaah have mercy on him and grant him the highest level of Paradise. He was also a physician and was a propagator of Islaam.

the highest level of Paradise has how many houri, Love being Muslimah? is he will become 30 again and will grant 100x of man strength..no offence.

May Allaah accept his worship and good deeds.

in Islam, the prayer from non_muslims for mulims are not accepted by Allah.. and likewise
When I was a muslimah, I've taught if my parents pass away and never convert to Islam, my prayer for them to get forgiven from Allah going to waste, for Allah would not accept it. the only way I should do is, bring my parents receive Islam too..
But in my religion, which Islam claimed..has a corrupt scripture, my Almighty God never choosy on prayer.. so, I pray to my beloved God to forgive this man and give him right place..
don't worry, my GOD is good and full of mercy

1.) I have a strong feeling that the Muslims will be victorious against Bashar and his stooges with or without the help of any non-Muslims. God-willing this victory will be soon.

don't worry, sist.. whenever you see the "black flag" from Khorasan, its mean the victory for your religion will coming soon

I'm not overly concerned. Guidance only belongs to Allaah. None can guide whom Allaah misguides and no one can misguide whom Allaah guides. And then, of course, there are a few other factors to consider. Muslims, regardless of piety level, tend to have a firm belief in Islaam and our concept of the Oneness of God. Our religion makes much more sense to us than Christianity. So while there may be a few apostates (either to Christianity or whatever faith (or atheism)), it is not very common. Plus, immigrant/minority communities tend to form closer bonds in an already tight-knit community. So they are a minority religion as well as minorities through their ethnic background.

its like...Adam, Moses, Noah, etc were muslims before Islam exist in the world..
its like...a permit to take kafir as friend when you're weak position, and kill them when you're strong and they refuse to embrace Islam..
its like..a permit for a muslim man to polygamy..

its like...punishment/stoning for women who had being raped...

yeah...all these things are good in your sight...and these was why, this book published..

just intermezzo...
go and continue



God bless

 

[kenzo0]

If you knew anything about the UK as it is today, you'd know its actually more dangerous for a Muslim to convert to Christianity than it is for Christians to convert to Islam, in a supposedly "Christian" country.

You've got gangs of Muslims who think they can violently enforce sharia in the areas they live

and you've got Muslims free to preach there faith.

As for the increase in aggression against Muslims ,thats come around as a backlash at the way Muslims have been acting, but as usually its been twisted out to try and make out the Muslims are the backlash.

Like when the EDL came around, they tried to make out Muslim extremism was a backlash against the EDL, when the timeline of events, the facts show (and yes, the facts, what actually happened) show the EDL was the backlash against Islamic extremists!!!

We're not touting superiority, we're debunking the attidute amongst many muslims who are deluded to acually think they get it worse in the west than minorities get in Islamic lands.

Its the audacity that you muslims shout about how badly you are treated in the west, but wherever Islams in control, its much much worse for non-Muslims living there

Its you lot doing the touting, about how bad you get it, while mainly turning a blind eye or acting flippant about how you lot treat others.

you've got Muslimah on here, who if you read what she says obviously has no problems with the restrictions Islam enforces upon non-Muslims and actually thinks its moral and wants that world to be a reality, while at the same time moaning about how Muslims are treated in the west, all while laughable calling us the hypocrites, yet as much as I dont like Islam, I dont want any laws that restrict Islam, which means my position is not hypocritical, as I wouldnt support a law lets say, that punishes people for leaving Christianity, but shes more than happy to support laws that restrict us in Muslim lands, which means she doesnt care about pesonal freedom of others, but then condemns the way Muslims are treated and cant in anyway see the hypocrisy in that.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7787192/

 

[kenzo0]

Then why do so many indonesian muslims cry terrorism when a West Papua separatist group launches attacks on islamists? Many indonesian muslims don't see the occupation of West Papua as terrorism but whenever a West Papua separatist group launches attacks on islamists the indonesian muslims cry terrorism.

just like what All_England_Skies describe..

 

[ContraMundum]

Such a long post...

This seems unfair. If a government bombs a hospital, it's not terrorism. But if 10 random people get together to bomb another hospital (and they happen to be from a particular religion), it is terrorism. It just doesn't make any sense.

Besides, who decided that governments cannot commit terrorism?

Makes sense to me. Think about accountability, identity, punishability, and authority. That's government.

Like I said, I don't like using the word terrorism because it is so vague. It is also loaded and used inconsistently. I generally use it to point out how flawed the application of the term is.

I think deep down you just wish we could excuse Muslim terrorism. I bet if the shoe was on the other foot you would use the term.

I don't understand how you can honestly categorize the two examples I gave as more or less the same thing. To me this looks like deliberate obfuscation of the term terrorism.

In any case, my morals and ethics are defined by God's laws (i.e. Islaam). Therefore, any intentional targeting of non-combatant women and children is prohibited.

Really?

Why is it that those who seem to target non-combatants are so often doing it in the Name of Islam?

Is it a case of a failure for Islam to change hearts? That's just a thought..

Secondly, the same is done to Muslims who attack non-Muslims. The religion (or the fact that they are an adherant) is almost always mentioned even if it was not their motive. And even if it was their motive, why is it mentioned but not the actual Islaamic ruling? Why is the same not done for Christians or Jews or whoever else?

Sometimes in Islam, leaders claim to make a ruling to target civilians etc. Think Osama Bin-Laden, Abu Bakir etc.

God's revelations to Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them) were also part of God's religion, obviously. But then their followers perverted the message into what it is today (whether it's denying God's subsequent Messenger(s) or associating partners with God). So what Islaam has today that neither Judaism nor Christianity have is the same, crystal clear message that was revealed initially. Plus, the same God that revealed the Torah and the Injeel also said that the religion has been perfected for us (therefore, there is no need for future messengers since what we have now is sufficient until the Day of Judgement). He did not say that following any of the previous revelations.

That's just your faith. I say the Bible is perfect, complete, clear and Mohammed is unnecessary. Furthermore, the Islamic polemic to say that the message of God has been perverted is just baloney. It's never been proven, it's just the tactic. Your belief system needs both Judaism and Christianity to be flawed to justify its own existence. Judaism doesn't need any support to exist. Christianity needs an orthodox Judaism to justify its existence. Islam needs both of the other religions to be "wrong" or it is a waste of time. Hence, the Muslim (failing) apologetic to prove the others wrong. But logically, even if Judaism is flawed, and therefore Christianity, that wouldn't mean Islam was right. Simple logic.

I'm not biased. I'm just stating facts as they are; I call it like I see it.

Everyone on this forum thinks you are remarkably biased.

..and the constant appeal to the fallacy of relevance is getting old too.

They love being spied upon, being more at risk for being labeled a terrorist, and being treated differently by the government even though we're all supposedly equal in rights?

I don't think it happens to the extent that you imagine. Sorry. Just no proof.

So your definition of fun begins and ends with music?

I didn't say that. Stop putting words in my mouth.

I still stand by what I said regarding those Afghans that you speak of being more nationalistic than religious and/or being supporters of the Northern Alliance. I could be wrong but that's my conclusion based on your description of them. In any case, may Allaah guide them.

Nice to see you admit to infallibility. A big step forward in this discussion as far as I'm concerned.

1.) I have a strong feeling that the Muslims will be victorious against Bashar and his stooges with or without the help of any non-Muslims. God-willing this victory will be soon.

Too late. Foreigners have been sending aid for months now. Can't do it without our help.

2.) Hypocrites? I think hypocrisy is giving false information about there being WMD in Iraq to garner public support for war but when there are confirmed reports of chemical weapons being used in Syria, nothing is done. I think hypocrisy is going on and on about how much of a murderous & ruthless dictator Saddam was in order to go into Iraq but not going in when Bashar al Assad has done so much damage to the people of Syria in the span of 3 years (and all the years before the Syrian rebels began fighting to this degree).

These things are being acted upon. Syria is losing its chemical capacity, Saddam is done for, and the WMD/Iraq thing- it will be along time before people trust that kind of scam again. Bush lost his job and the party its authority and credibility over it.

4.) If it was guaranteed that any foreign nations intervening in the war would be in and out & they wouldn't leave any other trace of their intervention, then I'd be for it. No trying to kill any rebel groups, no trying to prop up a puppet as the new leader, etc.

IOW, send your soldiers, die for my cause, but then leave without so much as a thank you. Umm.....I could say something, but I will refrain.

5.) Again, I'm actually relieved that Allaah is forcing us to turn to Him. It's taking trusting Him completely to a whole new level.

I've waited years for a Muslim to admit that God is punishing them.

It's worth posting this article again (the article from my initial post on this thread):

New York's top court highlights the meaninglessness and menace of the term 'terrorism' | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | theguardian.com

This alone disproves your theory.

I don't see how it disproves anything. It's merely one editorial take on the matter. I don't agree with it.

1.) We do, indeed, believe that Islaam will stretch from the East to the West. It is a prophecy of the Messenger of Allaah. But that's where it ends. No big conspiracy theory.

If Mohammed prophecied it, then surely it won't happen. Never got anything right before.

As mentioned before, intentionally targeting non-combatant women and children is prohibited in Islaam. I will leave it at that.

OK. Noted. Why is it that very devout Muslims have such a hard time following that command? Serious question- what is the Islamic answer?

1.) "Stay silent and don't criticize" is one, "leave" is the other.

I think you made a typo in the earlier post then.

Pertinent to our discussion is that Islaam is the only religion that offers moral & practical guidelines in war. Islaam offers the middle path.

Sometimes the truth is not in the middle path, but in the other paths. Just a thought.

1.) Both of those links contain quotes from non-Muslims. To the best of my knowledge, Islaam is the only faith that, when ruled by, has allowed people of other faiths to prosper.

I don't think you are listening to the cries of those who beg to differ, even in our day. Other religions do not "prosper" in Islamic countries. They never have, they never will. They are tolerated- to a point- and that's about it.

2.) There aren't any Islaamic countries.

There seems to be a lot of countries with the words "Islamic Republic of..." in their title.

3.) It is incredibly difficult to attain citizenship in Saudi Arabia for non-Saudis. It's a terrible rule which I wish would be done away with.

Marrying a Saudi not an option? (If you don't mind sharing your husband).

 

[LoveBeingAMuslimah]

Makes sense to me. Think about accountability, identity, punishability, and authority. That's government.

And they still can commit acts of terrorism.

I think deep down you just wish we could excuse Muslim terrorism. I bet if the shoe was on the other foot you would use the term.

No, it seems that you're the one who wishes that governments would not be guilty of terrorism. Oh wait, it doesn't just seem, you said it yourself.

Really?

Why is it that those who seem to target non-combatants are so often doing it in the Name of Islam?

Why don't you ask them? And what do they say, exactly? That they kill non-combatant women and children because of Islaam? I strongly doubt that.

Is it a case of a failure for Islam to change hearts? That's just a thought..

Lol, this line of argument is not going to work out well for you. Why are Christians so violent nowadays? Is it a case of a failure for Christianity to change hearts?

Sometimes in Islam, leaders claim to make a ruling to target civilians etc. Think Osama Bin-Laden, Abu Bakir etc.

I'm sorry, what did Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) say?

That's just your faith.
[snipped]

And that's just your faith.

In any case, I have researched Islaam enough to know that it's the truth. I can't come to any other conclusion. I'm not trying to convert you. Guidance only belongs to Allaah.

Everyone on this forum thinks you are remarkably biased.

Oh, you polled everyone?

And everyone else is not biased? You're not biased? I'm sorry, I guess I must've been dreaming when I read your basically full-fledged support of Israel or you insistence that terrorism is done almost exclusively by Muslims (and the government cannot do it).

I don't think it happens to the extent that you imagine. Sorry. Just no proof.

Go to your nearest airport and tell me how often those who wear clothes that are typically associated with Muslims, have beards, have turbans (even Sikhs), or have Muslim-sounding names are searched "randomly". And compare that to those who do not have any of those above traits (or not more than one or two) and how often they're searched randomly.

Tell us how many times a non-Muslim is told to get off a plane because they're making others feel uncomfortable due to their religion/a simple prayer/their religious garments.

Tell us how often non-Muslim student clubs are monitored by the government. How often are they checked to see if they pray or not? Their religiosity?

Tell us how angry non-Muslims were prior to the NSA leaks about Muslims being illegally listened to. And compare that to the anger that they felt once they found out that it wasn't just Muslim citizens, it was THEM as well (though it's still mainly Muslims who are targeted).

Tell us how many churches or synagogues have been infiltrated with government spies.

Tell us how often a person is jailed for 16 years due to translating material that the US didn't like.

Tell us how often police training includes videos of Christians/Jews/Hindus/atheists/etc killing Muslims (or anyone else).

Nice to see you admit to infallibility. A big step forward in this discussion as far as I'm concerned.

I take it you meant fallibility. I never once claimed to be infallible. Ever.

And I didn't say I was absolutely wrong in what I said. I said I could be wrong.

Too late. Foreigners have been sending aid for months now. Can't do it without our help.

Clearly I meant those going in militarily. I am not oblivious to the food, clothes, etc. that some non-Muslims have sent. And I ask Allaah to guide those non-Muslims to Islaam. Plus, I said "with or without"

Muslim foreigners are the one going in to help their fellow Muslims. And like it or not, the sense of brotherhood has increased in Syria. It is Muslim lives, Syrian and "foreigner", that comprise the bulk of the 100,000+ dead.

These things are being acted upon. Syria is losing its chemical capacity, Saddam is done for, and the WMD/Iraq thing- it will be along time before people trust that kind of scam again. Bush lost his job and the party its authority and credibility over it.

What???? I don't. Just. What? He lost his job? NO, he was voted for again.

So, nope, it's hypocrisy through and through.

 

[LoveBeingAMuslimah]

IOW, send your soldiers, die for my cause, but then leave without so much as a thank you. Umm.....I could say something, but I will refrain.

Now you're the one putting words in my mouth. Who said no thanks will be given? But don't put yet another puppet leader up in the Muslim nations.

Regardless of the final decision, this has added ammunition to the argument that the West is hypocritical.

I've waited years for a Muslim to admit that God is punishing them.

1.) .......I don't know how you got that from what I said. I believe the Syrians are blessed. Actually, here's a link that contains narrations of the Prophet regarding Greater Syria:

Immam al-Albani (english): Virtues of Al-Shaam

and here's a video mentioning some of the virtues of Greater Syria as well:

[youtube]jBNyQF0FbYA[/youtube]


2.) When Allaah loves a people, He tests them. And the ones given the hardest trials are the Prophets, then the next pious, then the next, and so on.

3.) Whether a punishment or a test, it is somehow good for the believer:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, "There is nothing that befalls a believer, not even a thorn that pricks him, but Allah will record one good deed for him and will remove one bad deed from him." [Saheeh Muslim]

He also said,

"Trials will continue to befall the believing man and woman, with regard to themselves, their children and their wealth, until they meet Allah with no sin on them." [at-Tirmidhi, classed as saheeh by al-Albaani)

as well as,

"Strange is the affair of the Mu'min (the believer), verily all his affairs are good for him. If something pleasing befalls him he thanks (Allaah) and it becomes better for him. And if something harmful befalls him he is patient (Saabir) and it becomes better for him. And this is only for the Mu'min." [Saheeh Muslim]

The key is responding to the calamity (whether punishment or test) with patience and using that to turn to Allaah.

I don't see how it disproves anything. It's merely one editorial take on the matter. I don't agree with it.

It's based on facts.You still have not been able to show how those facts are false.

And Muslims who have been treated differently (read: worse) by the government don't agree with you.

If Mohammed prophecied it, then surely it won't happen. Never got anything right before.

The Prophecies of Muhammad - The Religion of Islam

OK. Noted. Why is it that very devout Muslims have such a hard time following that command? Serious question- what is the Islamic answer?

Well, first of all, we're taught in Islaam that every son of Adam sins and the best of those who sin are those who repent. So being a very devout Muslim does not make one infallible. Not even the past Prophets were infallible in terms of this world, so why would we assume that anyone is better than the best men to have graced this Earth? Also, maybe they don't know the ruling (i.e. they're devout Muslims but they don't have a lot of Islaamic knowledge). Or maybe they have come to the conclusion that the teaching of "an eye for an eye" means that they can do the exact same thing to the enemy even if that particular thing goes against Islaam.

Secondly, it's not necessarily an Islaamic answer, but I think I can supply some sort of an answer.

When a person is backed into a corner and the enemy is torturing, raping, oppressing, and killing those closest to him/her, oftentimes that person will feel helpless. They see the enemy kill infants ruthlessly, they see their wives, sisters, daughters, mothers raped in front of them, they see people burned alive, and they see the enemy laughing while they do all of this. They feel distraught and anger.

So then I think, from a psychological standpoint, they want the enemy to feel the same pain as they do. So they do. And what angers them further is that their retaliation is pointed at, not what caused it. It's like when someone starts shoving & beating someone up and the victim decides to give the same thing to the perpetrator. But instead of noticing when the first person was beating the victim up, the world only notices the victim retaliating.

It doesn't mean it's ok Islaamically because we should not be like our enemies and leave our values and principles. We should rise above that even though it seems like the enemy will always have the "upper hand" because the enemy has no problem doing immoral things. We should not stoop to the level of those who are immoral. It's much, much easier said than done, but that's what it boils down to.

Thirdly, it's not very common that they intentionally target non-combatant women and children. It HAS happened, but it's not common.

But Allaah knows best.

Sometimes the truth is not in the middle path, but in the other paths. Just a thought.

Islaam is the truth.

I don't think you are listening to the cries of those who beg to differ, even in our day. Other religions do not "prosper" in Islamic countries. They never have, they never will. They are tolerated- to a point- and that's about it.

And you're not listening to what those people the link quoted. They prospered in a way that people of other religions never have in other lands ruled by another religion.

There seems to be a lot of countries with the words "Islamic Republic of..." in their title.

And? That doesn't make them Islaamic.

Marrying a Saudi not an option? (If you don't mind sharing your husband).

Saudis don't like to marry out of their culture. Plus, it's still incredibly difficult. I believe that even if one is married to a Saudi, the government can still decide to not approve of you as a citizen. Not sure.

 

[ContraMundum]

Lol, this line of argument is not going to work out well for you. Why are Christians so violent nowadays? Is it a case of a failure for Christianity to change hearts?

Christians are violent?

Do you know what a Christian is? Answer: it's not someone born in a Christian country or someone who went to church once or twice. It's not even someone who goes every week, or is a clergyman, or a Pope, or whatever. It's someone who has a changed heart by the infilling of the Holy Spirit, given by their profession of faith and repentance. I've never met a violent Christian. The change of heart comes first.

I'm sorry, what did Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) say?

I meant Abu Hamsa.

Oh, you polled everyone?

No, we all PM each other. I'm just tellin; ya.

And everyone else is not biased? You're not biased? I'm sorry, I guess I must've been dreaming when I read your basically full-fledged support of Israel or you insistence that terrorism is done almost exclusively by Muslims (and the government cannot do it).

Never said that.

Go to your nearest airport and tell me how often those who wear clothes that are typically associated with Muslims, have beards, have turbans (even Sikhs), or have Muslim-sounding names are searched "randomly". And compare that to those who do not have any of those above traits (or not more than one or two) and how often they're searched randomly.

Tell us how many times a non-Muslim is told to get off a plane because they're making others feel uncomfortable due to their religion/a simple prayer/their religious garments.

Tell us how often non-Muslim student clubs are monitored by the government. How often are they checked to see if they pray or not? Their religiosity?

Tell us how angry non-Muslims were prior to the NSA leaks about Muslims being illegally listened to. And compare that to the anger that they felt once they found out that it wasn't just Muslim citizens, it was THEM as well (though it's still mainly Muslims who are targeted).

Tell us how many churches or synagogues have been infiltrated with government spies.

Tell us how often a person is jailed for 16 years due to translating material that the US didn't like.

Tell us how often police training includes videos of Christians/Jews/Hindus/atheists/etc killing Muslims (or anyone else).

I've never seen any of this.

 

[ContraMundum]

The Prophecies of Muhammad - The Religion of Islam

I read that before I posted. Hence, I posted that Mohammed never got anything right. Most of those are explainable by common sense, mere human conjecture etc. In fact I wasn't impressed at all.

Put it this way- compared to real prophets like Ezekiel, Isaiah, Joel, John and most of all Jesus, he's really not a prophet at all.

Well, first of all, we're taught in Islaam that every son of Adam sins and the best of those who sin are those who repent. So being a very devout Muslim does not make one infallible. Not even the past Prophets were infallible in terms of this world, so why would we assume that anyone is better than the best men to have graced this Earth? Also, maybe they don't know the ruling (i.e. they're devout Muslims but they don't have a lot of Islaamic knowledge). Or maybe they have come to the conclusion that the teaching of "an eye for an eye" means that they can do the exact same thing to the enemy even if that particular thing goes against Islaam.

OK. That's a reasoned answer.

It doesn't mean it's ok Islaamically because we should not be like our enemies and leave our values and principles. We should rise above that even though it seems like the enemy will always have the "upper hand" because the enemy has no problem doing immoral things. We should not stoop to the level of those who are immoral. It's much, much easier said than done, but that's what it boils down to.

Too bad Muslims don't live like that- it's a very Christian ethic there.

Thirdly, it's not very common that they intentionally target non-combatant women and children. It HAS happened, but it's not common.

I think it's very common from Muslims. Almost every week we see it.

And you're not listening to what those people the link quoted. They prospered in a way that people of other religions never have in other lands ruled by another religion.

Most of those quotes are either ancient or out of context. Ask today. Look at the countries people are trying to leave.

Can I build a church in Saudi Arabia? If not, how can my religion "prosper"?

Saudis don't like to marry out of their culture. Plus, it's still incredibly difficult. I believe that even if one is married to a Saudi, the government can still decide to not approve of you as a citizen. Not sure.

Give it a try. Leave the evil West. Stop using and enjoying all the benefits of Western freedom and democracy. Go to some Muslim country. You won't look so hypocritical there.

I'd love to see you critique a Muslim government isf you lived in one of their countries. How long would you live in freedom, or live at all?

 

[Deacon Don]

Christians are violent?

Do you know what a Christian is? Answer: it's not someone born in
a Christian country or someone who went to church once or twice.
It's not even someone who goes every week, or is a clergyman, or
a Pope, or whatever. It's someone who has a changed heart by the
infilling of the Holy Spirit, given by their profession of faith and
repentance. I've never met a violent Christian. The change of heart
comes first.

This!

Here are a few examples of the difference between Christianity and
that "religion of peace".

Jesus was the way to Salvation. Mohammad wasn't.
Jesus didn't approve of violence. Mohammad did.
Jesus didn't force someone to convert or die. Mohammad did.
Jesus never took what wasn't His. Mohammad did.
Jesus loved children but didn't have sex with them. Mohammad did.

 

[Arthra]

This!

Here are a few examples of the difference between Christianity and
that "religion of peace".

Jesus was the way to Salvation. Mohammad wasn't.
Jesus didn't approve of violence. Mohammad did.
Jesus didn't force someone to convert or die. Mohammad did.
Jesus never took what wasn't His. Mohammad did.
Jesus loved children but didn't have sex with them. Mohammad did.

Deacon Don...

You've compiled a list of some of prejudices that have accumulated over centuries.. and are also simplistic in my view.

To me the difference is that Jesus did not have a community. He was more on His own with a small number of disciples so His teachings dealt with a personal morality and ethic. The revelations to Prophet Muhammad dealt with guidance for a community so were more concerned with laws and practices.

A community encircled and attacked had recourse to defend itself and so interdicting supply routes and distributing seized wealth and so on were part of the bargain.

Your last remark I find particularly offensive and unfair.

See:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7762597-6/#post63838412

 

[Supreme]

I read that before I posted. Hence, I posted that Mohammed never got anything right. Most of those are explainable by common sense, mere human conjecture etc. In fact I wasn't impressed at all.

Put it this way- compared to real prophets like Ezekiel, Isaiah, Joel, John and most of all Jesus, he's really not a prophet at all.



OK. That's a reasoned answer.



Too bad Muslims don't live like that- it's a very Christian ethic there.



I think it's very common from Muslims. Almost every week we see it.



Most of those quotes are either ancient or out of context. Ask today. Look at the countries people are trying to leave.

Can I build a church in Saudi Arabia? If not, how can my religion "prosper"?



Give it a try. Leave the evil West. Stop using and enjoying all the benefits of Western freedom and democracy. Go to some Muslim country. You won't look so hypocritical there.

I'd love to see you critique a Muslim government isf you lived in one of their countries. How long would you live in freedom, or live at all?

Most Muslims in the West would hate to live in Saudi Arabia or Iran or even Pakistan. Despite the high religiosity of those countries, they have so many problems, and their governments are so oppressive with no regard for human rights.