13 civilians - including women and children- slaughtered in Saudi -Arabia strikes

Well for example the media here seems to be covering the Saudi raids as if they are attacking Al Queda (and several posters in this thread seem to be buying that line) whereas Stratfor, for example, poses a much more complex reality.
https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/saudi-arabia-and-iran-compete-yemen

Not in this day and age. I would understand it back then in those days but society's different now.

Well for example the media here seems to be covering the Saudi raids as if they are attacking Al Queda (and several posters in this thread seem to be buying that line) whereas Stratfor, for example, poses a much more complex reality.
https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/saudi-arabia-and-iran-compete-yemen

My main point is that when a corrupt, wicked dictatorship and self-serving aristocracy like the Saudi government engages in war, it isn't very likely that they are doing it on the side of decent folk and democratic values. The other recent place where they intervened, Bahrein, is a case in point - the Saudis acted there to crush protests for greater democracy.

It's depressing to see such a government being cheered on by alleged socialists or left-leaning people on TSR, they should know better.

x.

It's in the Qur'an so you have to accept that in a country where Sharia law is implemented this is the punishment. Where is your evidence to show that this law is only to be implemented in the past but not now?

Surat An-Nūr (The Light)

24:2

The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.

Where is your evidence to show that this law is only to be implemented in the past but not now?

Personally I think this is going to spread terrorism to Saudi Arabia and see a regeneration of al Qaeda, which thrives in chaotic countries.

It's in the Qur'an so you have to accept that in a country where Sharia law is implemented this is the punishment. Where is your evidence to show that this law is only to be implemented in the past but not now?

Surat An-Nūr (The Light)

24:2

The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.

That's a darn fine comment, TCC. Duly gemmed.

I really hope it's the more sophisticated and nuanced adherents of Islam like you who will be its future. I have to believe that's the case because that seems to be the trajectory of all religions (despite the admitted slow progress); toward more tolerance, more understanding, less prejudice.

Understanding isn't evidence, stop taking my opinion as gospel. My reason for that statement was that's what pretty much every culture did in the old days, hence being understandable.

So you accept the punishments are valid but you just don't understand them is that what you're saying?

Where on earth did you get that from?

I understand why people in those days ​gave those punishments-doesn't mean I accept them.

You say people gave those punishments but it's in the Qur'an so that means God gave them. So what is the punishment for fornication in Islam in your view?

someone did hence the polite reminder this morning

No being gay my hatred of islam and those that choose to follow it is anything but irrational

However I'd like to know if you'd accuse a black person who hated the BNP and those that choose to follow them of being 'irrational'?

?
I'm mainly gay; well I identify as bisexual but I lean far more towards homosexuality than heterosexuality. I'm only romantically attracted to females.

Not in this day and age. I would understand it back then in those days but society's different now.





If there was a single explicit interpretation of Islamic statute, there wouldn't be any debate but there's a hell of a lot of debate and different schools of thought-which debunks your statement.

Again, what punishment is there for apostasy? Because I've searched for one and there isn't one anywhere in the Quran or reputable Hadiths. I've seen sayings regarding people at the time who under a guise accepted Islam for malicious and harmful purposes that threatened the community of Muslims but that doesn't apply to people in this day and age who harbour no malice towards Islam or Muslims and simply just don't agree. The main thing God stresses is that humans have free will-that is the choice to do whatever we want.

Insignificant TSR user? The whole point of debate is to discuss and share views and that's exactly what I'm doing. This is my opinion regardless of whether you like it and accept it, or not. I never said I was ever significant and resorting to petty insults like that isn't gaining you favour.

Your use of 'Western' a lot seems to suggest that Muslims are at odds with 'The West', and that you have some sort of agenda against it. I regard myself as a European through and through (born, raised, educated) and that has never conflicted with my religion. The media constantly tells me Islam is violent and destructive-do I take that to heart? No, because I am and know Muslims that are nothing like that. If I was in a Muslim country (which btw are sometimes much worse and much more hypocritical than 'The West') I know I most likely wouldn't be allowed to think freely for myself. It's a sad truth, and not one that I'm making up since I have been to plenty of Muslim countries. The Muslim world is weak because we don't allow this kind of critical freedom of thought anymore-remember the times of Avicenna? He criticised and speculated on issues such as metaphysics and went on to become a highly regarded philosopher, and that's when the Muslim world was at it's strongest. I never claimed or acted like I was a qualified scholar, I just gave my opinions. Also a point noting on, this glorious Muslim world you're speaking of? The Ottoman Empire ended at a time when it had turned it's back on tolerance and acceptance of other faiths, just saying.

I'm not challenging THE historical or 'correct' interpretation. I study Law and one of the first things I learned was that statutory interpretation is very subjective. What evidence do you have that your interpretation is the correct one? Have you taken context into account? People rarely do. If context was taken into account people would realise that many 'laws' are adaptable and not stuck in stone. Take Jihad for example. Back in the old days, Jihad was encouraged because there was actually an enemy for the Muslims (enemy as in legit wanted to kill them because of their beliefs), but 'Jihad' nowadays? Where's the enemy? Who wants these people dead? The innocent civilians and people they kill that have no idea why they're dying in such a brutal way? A saying can be plucked from the days of Mecca that explicitly says 'kill the enemy' but contextually, it just doesn't fit into our society. Contextually, it has no meaning for us in our modern day.

I never claimed Islam was okay with homosexuality. I claimed I am. I don't represent the entirety of Islam but thanks, I'm flattered. Mecca, where there's a corrupt monarchy? Egypt, the place where civil war raged across the country? Why would I go to ISOC if it's full of 'insignificant TSR users'? But you said there was no ambiguity in Sharia Law?

Well, you did tell me that TSR users are insignificant, so I guess I'll listen to your advice.

In islamic/sharia law the penalty for apostasy is death….mohammed himself said 'who ever changes his religion kill him'

In the west the media NEVER report on what islam is,does,teaches,causes and allows…never have I heard them report islam is violent, or misogynistic…BUT have heard them say 'islam is about peace and love' and 'islam respects females' but of course, we know misogyny isn't respect