Topic: Islamic Terrorism in the West ( Mega thread)

[AbdullahD]

What is it about Islam that makes people so violent and not just want to kill non-believers but actually try to?

Nothing. Let's face it, if Islam is the problem.. the world would be far far more violent.

I'd be asking what's is it with a person's social, economic and/or psychological state that makes them want to kill others.

[Jarnhamar]

I don't think you're facing the reality of what's going on in the middle east and much of Europe.

[AbdullahD]

I don't think you're facing the reality of what's going on in the middle east and much of Europe.

Why do you say this? My previous comment was not polite.

[mariomike]

My previous comment was not polite.

I thought it was polite.

[Jarnhamar]

Why do you say this? My previous comment was not polite.

Being a Muslim convert I think you're (understandably) biased towards Islam. I know it's insulting and I apologize for it but I've said it in the past that I think you've been exposed to a Scientology-lite version of Islam or see it through rose colored lenses. Where you see a few minor isolated incidents involving Islam I see constant example after example of attack after attack.  Culture clash after culture clash.

Of course Islam isn't the sole proprietor of evil actions around the world but to me it seems overwhelmingly and disproportionately at the center of it. All over the world. It happens so much that it's not even news worthy. An ambulance packed with explosives just took out 95 dead 158 injured in January, Kabul. Yawn.

The above story, another kid lured away by Jihad. He read about Islam and wanted to go kill people.  You just don't read about all these christian kids leaving their parents to goto murder people. People aren't going to bible camp planning to detonate bombs in Time Square.  Of course there are examples of Christian nut bars but again, very very disproportionate to what we're seeing in the news.  Canadian Jews aren't flying over to Israel and sawing the heads off Palestine prisoners. Wiccans aren't going to Scotland and burning people to death.  I won't even get into the crap show that's going in in European countries.

There's 58 pages here of Islamic terrorism in the west and 5 of non-Islamic terrorism. Notice it's not even X or Y terrorism, it's everyone else combined.
That is why I say what I say.

[jollyjacktar]

ER, IIRC, pointed out though if you were to go back in time to different periods, it was "this" group or "that" society who were running amok, hacking and slashing.

At this particular juncture, it seems as if some elements of Islam are off their rockers and running amok. 

Seeing as it's varied on who the retards of the moment are throughout history perhaps it's more of a species flaw that has been manipulated by con artists ready to act.  This week, it's Islam week.

 

[Jed]

ER, IIRC, pointed out though if you were to go back in time to different periods, it was "this" group or "that" society who were running amok, hacking and slashing.

At this particular juncture, it seems as if some elements of Islam are off their rockers and running amok. 

Seeing as it's varied on who the retards of the moment are throughout history perhaps it's more of a species flaw that has been manipulated by con artists ready to act.  This week, it's Islam week.

 

I would say your 'week' timeframe is a little skewed. A time span crossing 2 or three generations is probably more accurate.  I would pile on with Jarnhamar's opinion.

[jollyjacktar]

I would say your 'week' timeframe is a little skewed. A time span crossing 2 or three generations is probably more accurate.  I would pile on with Jarnhamar's opinion.

I was not being literal with "week".  But, seeing as you went "there", l think you'll find that three generations ago, it was Germany that we had issues with.  Not Islam.

https://isogg.org/wiki/How_long_is_a_generation%3F_Science_provides_an_answer

[George Wallace]

I was not being literal with "week".  But, seeing as you went "there", l think you'll find that three generations ago, it was Germany that we had issues with.  Not Islam.

And some still do.

I find it amazing that this Government seems to think that they can "rehabilitate" jihadists, and that they can make a meaningful contribution to our society; all the while still hunting down 80, 90 and 100 year old "Nazis" who may have come here and lived productive lives....only to be deported if found out.  This runs rather contrary to Justin's "A Canadian is a Canadian, is a Canadian" when you realize the there have been worse regimes than the Nazis when it comes to committing genocide.  Look a the Communist Regimes of Stalin and Mao, and the more recent acts of ISIS.  The Nazis pale in comparison. 

Disclaimer:  I am in no way defending what Hitler's Nazis did; just pointing out that there have been far worse since his demise.

[jollyjacktar]

And well before that too.  Genghis Kahn comes to mind.  He was so efficient at depopulation, l have read, that it changed the climate.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1350272/Genghis-Khan-killed-people-forests-grew-carbon-levels-dropped.html

I think it is fair to say that people have always been bad for and to one another.

I do agree that l believe the current GoC are RTFO if they think curing any Jihadi assholes who come home is possible.  I think that mineral therapy will be the only effective method of cure.

[dapaterson]

Religious leaders refuse to stop child marriage.  Girls as young as ten are being married off to much older men, but religious leaders are working to stop any efforts to change the law.

Whoops.  Wait a minute.  That's Christians in Kentucky...

https://insiderlouisville.com/metro/bipartisan-child-marriage-bill-faces-roadblock-from-conservative-family-foundation/

[AbdullahD]

Yes 58 pages or more if you count other threads on this site, no doubt many more.

But you have made an allegation which implies my interpretation and understanding of Islam is "watered down" or "modernized" and biased. Which makes me wonder how many of my replies to your query or the queries of others you have actually read. A lot of my replies center around evidence from scholars from hundreds of years ago or are extremely main stream in the Islamic world, ie followed by thousands and thousands of Muslims. Many of the scholars, who I reference have never EVER been accused of watering down or modernizing Islam.. yet you seem to feel they did by launching those allegations at me.

So i as always enjoy your critical eye, but it seems, as if the burden of proof for me is far higher then it is for you.. simply because you view me as a biased convert, with no real world exposure. So I admit No, I have not seen battle or blood, but I do not admit to being ignorant unless you care to show me where I have shown you that I am so. Then I will concede and leave it be and comment no more.

I argue that social, economic, monetary and psychological issues are what truly fuel radicalization and religion, politics and ideologies are simply the excuse that is used to whip up the masses to see red.

I blame Muslims for Muslim issues ie Isis the Taliban etc. I don't sit here and whine about who invaded those Muslim countries or tried over throw them or funded different interest groups. Which I could, but to me it is a moot point because everyone will answer for himself before God and should do so in this life too for the decisions they make. So of course I know we will argue in circles, but I for one, think the world needs it.. even if we never agree.. but let's just try to keep it cleaner. If you feel I truly am these things then display your proof or reasons and I'll counter and we either stop or move on.

You are a wise person and not afraid to be critical of things you think deserve it.. I just hope I can make you critical of these idiot Muslims who do these acts and not Islam. It's an uphill battle, with every disadvantage for me but I think you deserve me annoying you

Abdullah

Ps it was rude Mike ha ha lol

[Jed]

Yes 58 pages or more if you count other threads on this site, no doubt many more.

But you have made an allegation which implies my interpretation and understanding of Islam is "watered down" or "modernized" and biased. Which makes me wonder how many of my replies to your query or the queries of others you have actually read. A lot of my replies center around evidence from scholars from hundreds of years ago or are extremely main stream in the Islamic world, ie followed by thousands and thousands of Muslims. Many of the scholars, who I reference have never EVER been accused of watering down or modernizing Islam.. yet you seem to feel they did by launching those allegations at me.

So i as always enjoy your critical eye, but it seems, as if the burden of proof for me is far higher then it is for you.. simply because you view me as a biased convert, with no real world exposure. So I admit No, I have not seen battle or blood, but I do not admit to being ignorant unless you care to show me where I have shown you that I am so. Then I will concede and leave it be and comment no more.

I argue that social, economic, monetary and psychological issues are what truly fuel radicalization and religion, politics and ideologies are simply the excuse that is used to whip up the masses to see red.

I blame Muslims for Muslim issues ie Isis the Taliban etc. I don't sit here and whine about who invaded those Muslim countries or tried over throw them or funded different interest groups. Which I could, but to me it is a moot point because everyone will answer for himself before God and should do so in this life too for the decisions they make. So of course I know we will argue in circles, but I for one, think the world needs it.. even if we never agree.. but let's just try to keep it cleaner. If you feel I truly am these things then display your proof or reasons and I'll counter and we either stop or move on.

You are a wise person and not afraid to be critical of things you think deserve it.. I just hope I can make you critical of these idiot Muslims who do these acts and not Islam. It's an uphill battle, with every disadvantage for me but I think you deserve me annoying you

Abdullah

Ps it was rude Mike ha ha lol

I am critical of Islam but not in a harsh and condemning way, however I am very condemning of terrorist extremism which, to me in this day and age seems to be predominantly by muslims.

[Jarnhamar]

Yes 58 pages or more if you count other threads on this site, no doubt many more.

Exactly my point.

Believe me when I say I do consider and read your replies very closely and consider them from a couple different perspectives.

I don't think your understanding of Islam is watered down. I think you know a lot about Islam. Probably more than most converts AND 'from birth' Muslims. I'd be confident considering you an expert in scholarly Islam. 
There's a great video of Milo Yanopolous who visited Australia and was on a talk show with a Muslim woman who was going to put gay white Milo in his place about Islam. The only problem is she had no idea what the hell she was talking about and Milo contentiously corrected her and pointed out Muslim rules and laws that she had no idea about.  You on the other hand are well read and learned a lot about Islam, it would be interesting to see you and Milo debate. I think people take Religion and plug and play the aspects they like.

You've already admitted to approaching, learning  about and accepting Islam as a scholar. You like the scholar aspects of it I believe you said.  I think you were able to pick and choose what sounds good to you and what doesn't, literature wise. When I say Scientology-lite I simply mean you, as you say, haven't attended mosques where they're talking about murdering jews or infidels. You haven't been exposed to the fire and violence that so many seem to be exposed to. And it shows in your correspondence and attitude IMO.  But we know some people are the opposite. We see lots of stories of people finding Islam then deciding to make war against the west, leave home to murder people for ISIS or plan to blow up train stations.   

My personal belief is I think there is something particular about Islam that results in a more than average number of followers becoming violent and radical. I don't know what it is but I think there is more to it than just people with mental illness.

I accept that I'm quite biased against Islam and closed minded when it comes to religion (especially to Islam). I'm still allowed to be, so far. And I suspect were I not allowed to be critical of Islam I would find you in my corner defending me. 

Asking me for evidence of my reasons isn't important. What you should ask me for is evidence that youcould  give me that would change my mind (if any).
And I think at this point it would be none.   Just too many disproportionate examples to change my mind at this stage.


Question for you, do you still think Shari law would be a good thing to bring to Canada?


With regard to keeping things cleaner I understand it was insulting (sorry) but do believe I wasn't trying to make a jab at you or personal attack. I'm being candid with my beliefs and observations.

[Fishbone Jones]

A problem I see with this whole Islam vs Everyone else is this.

With other nations, religion, politics and ideologies are for the most part separate. We deal with these items as separate. There is some crossover, but essentially they are separate issues. We can make laws that have no religious connotations, we elect politicians (mostly) without looking at religion. Religious groups are allowed to put their spin on election issues but it is the will of the people that prevails. Our politics, in the main, are based on Christian values. Those values allow us to guide society with laws that involve right and wrong, rules of evidence, fair trials and meeting your accuser. We have evolved this system through the Magna Carta and rules of Common Law. Religion WAS and important part of our society only a few hundred years ago. We also burned people alive. The Spanish Inquisition was every bit as violent and damaging as ISIS. During the dark ages, the church held almost supreme control, even over the emperors. Politics and life was lived according to what the local priest said, because the only book available was the Bible and only the church could read it and as a god fearing individual, you did what the priest said because he took direction from the way he interpreted the Bible. What happened next was that King James decided everyone should be able to read the Bible, so he had it printed in English and made people learn to read. The church lost control, people became educated and civilisation prospered and passed beyond the absolute authority of the church and into the light of human conscience. We came to see religion as something that just made you, in your own mind, be a better person and something to provide succor in during times and trials of human faith and nature. The church, in practice, does not interfere with the making of laws or the governance of the people or the way people make their living. You are no longer required to 'donate' half your crop to the church, etc.

With Islam, there is no separation. The church is the state and the imams are the power behind the state. Religion is woven into every action, every thought and every decision made by an Islamist. And as with Christians earlier, your ISIS fighters, AQ, et al, follow what they are told to do because the imam tells them what the Koran says and they must follow. Hate is taught. Five times a day they are lectured by their imam. They grow up in a twenty mile area that they never leave and know little of the outside world. Times are tough and lean. When you grow up, being told five times a day that the faceless infidel from across the seas is coming to destroy you and your religion and way of life you head off for jihad. It just what you do, according to the Koran and imam. Religion IS politics. Religion IS lifestyle. Religion IS the law. Having said that, look at the majority of educated Islamists, in the west. For the most part, there was never a problem in Canada, or most of the western world because they are educated and can use their own minds and figure thing out themselves. They are still pious. They still worship within their doctrine, but they don't take the Koran as literal. Just like we no longer take the Bible as literal and slay everyone not of your faith or denomination. Islam appears to be running, existence wise about 700 years behind Christianity. They are currently going through the same thing we did around 700 years ago, when the church ran the world. As was then, more are becoming educated and reducing the imams and mosques influence on them. I see honour killings in Canada. I noticed something though. Might or might not just be me with crazy theories. Honour killings were not a common occurance here. Muslims that came to Canada had educations. Beyond the odd weird case, it didn't happen here. We started taking in people from villages and abject poverty, who'd never seen a tv or heard a radio and dropped them in Toronto or Montreal or Vancouver. They are terrified. And where do they go for comfort and safety? To the mosque. If you have an imam that teaches strictly by the word of the Koran, that person will remain as uneducated and following the rules of his religion to the hilt, because the imam said so. There is also the peer pressure. We now have hundreds of thousands of uneducated Islamic refugees and illegal immigrants. Police intelligence from Saskatchewan indicates a growth of illegal criminal gangs from amongst these groups. One summer of unabated illegal crossings and we have criminal migrant gangs, preying on their own and citizens of Canada. Because the Koran says it's OK to screw over the infidel. THAT is their law. And their law was written with divine intervention and therefore supersedes the laws of Canada or man.

As the Christians did, they will not solve this until the mosques and imams lose political control of the populous and they come firmly under the guidance of an elected government that is serious about taking power from the church. And that is something the west cannot do. We can help when they ask, but this is something the muslims need to do for themselves. It cannot, under any circumstance, be tied or tainted by anything that is not islamic. It is 100% on the modern muslims to sort out the problems of their brethren, educate them and get them into, at least, the 20th century.

OK, that was way too long. Sorry.

Just my  the way I see it.

[Kat Stevens]

One of the biggest problem with Islam, as opposed to the bigger Christian denominations, is that there is no “central authority” that hands down to the official policy. In Islam, any half baked loon can call himself a preacher, hang out a shingle, and start spewing his own interpretation of the book, complete with his own biases. It’s easy to convince the uneducated, or the just plain stupid, that your way is the only way, con men have done it for millennia.

[YZT580]

Well said, Recce guy.  That is as good an explanation as |I have read anywhere.

[Oldgateboatdriver]

With the exception of course of that Muslim terrorist to be who was an Engineering student at the masters level in Montreal, but decided to collude to blow a train in Ontario - then refuse to recognize the courts of Canada, stating Allah and the Koran as sole proper authorities over him. Oh! And the two brothers who turned out to be the Boston bombers, who were college level educated in North America. And these College students here in Quebec that dropped everything to go fight for ISIS.

Etc. Etc.

It's not limited to the uneducated masses here in North America for those who turn against us. It is, however, confined to people who, for one reason or another actually and sincerely believe - for sure, sure, sure, in a god and all the crap put out by their religion as actually true, unlike the real 95% of human beings that don't really believe it's true but go along at least superficially, just in case, and mostly because it is by now (after millennia of being fooled by the priestly caste) the socially accepted norm and they don't like to stand out or disappoint their parents and grand-parents.

[Kat Stevens]

Fair enough, I guess we could replace uneducated with gullible and foolish.

[Fishbone Jones]

I tried to allude to that above. Guess I missed. Anyway, as far as the Montreal engineer scenario. People want inclusion. They search around for someone that will accept them. The terrorist and activist imams, if contacted, will woo the person, fawn on him, make him part of the family, then start with the radicalization. So the engineer gets radicalized. Is he educated? Most assuredly, as an engineer. Perhaps though, not enough to see beyond his own vanity and insecurities and to accept being conned. There's tons of individual cases we cannot track or stop. However, those, in time, will become abhorrent and fringe if you can move the whole society towards civilization and it's rules. Right now, they are in what we used to call the middle age at the end of the dark ages, with all the same indoctrination and fealty and service to the church. And, as stated,the trouble in the main, is from tribal islamic culture. Not so much (but still appears) from westernized (for lack of a better word) islamists.

[AbdullahD]

See I find on the internet it is very easy to come off more educated then I truly am. A few times I actually had to consult friends of mine who are Islamic scholars and I have asked a few to proof read my postings here making sure I do not mis represent anything, I enjoy our discussion here because you and others make me think and force me to legitimize my beliefs in a way. Yet what we have here are just discussions I am not interested in debates.. I feel that these discussions you and I could have over coffee (or beer for you lol) and remain civil even while we disagree.. whereas with Milo and yes I have watched him and some of his stuff is amusing.. I find he likes to argue and debate (and I have a bad temper so it is probably not wise lol). Which are things I do not like to do, because it relies on a person's character and how well he can articulate a defense or launch an attack on the ball. Which I am weak at.

Now to the thick of it, it is very hard to defend against an enemy that is undefined and unidentified. So saying that religion or namely Islam has something "wrong" with it, but you are not sure what makes it tough to counter. But being a devils advocate and trying to put myself in your shoes as much as I Can, I would say and agree the Islamic World has something wrong with it. That thing being the teaching, appointment, education, tenure and credentials of people or persons put into position or places of influence in the Muslim community. Which really sucks to admit, but if we are looking for an issue maybe this is it. I still argue that the vast majority of Muslims are good, honest, hardworking chaps we would all love to have as our neighbour. Even the ignorant ones in places of power who unknowingly misguided people along a darker path are not inherently evil, but because they should have not been in that position to begin with evil has resulted and people were led to follow truly evil "preachers" by a person who would have never consciously done it. Then we have the truly insane, evil, pieces of work who should be put down faster then a rabid dog because of this issue.. and that issue speaks for itself, but to me that is an extremely small percent.. but coupled with other issues I think are the true reasons it results in what we have today.

I have also, since our last talks. Been watching and trying to stay aware of different emerging thoughts in the Islamic world and one, one that stands out for me and makes me happy. Is the one that a caliph (leader etc) is not actually an obligation for Muslims, it is a revival of an Islamic teaching from centuries ago when we had issues with Caliphs. A big group of scholars sat down to ponder the issue and decided essentially, I'm paraphrasing that if having an Islamic leader would cause a ton of issues, one is not needed in any way and that local leaders would suffice as long as they were just etc. I believe if you are interested Mufti Abu Layth has an hour or so talk regarding it, his talk is a simple primer on the subject.. but he laughs to much lol. Now as an add on to this subject and to touch on Recce's issues, which are also fair. A lot of Islamic scholars see the state and church as separate or at the very least they can be separate and it is not the end of world. Many instances in history show this, ie an Islamic caliph has non-Muslim specialists as the head of medicine or education etc and they have final say on those issues. (Sorry guys I am not sourcing as much as I should. We are buying our first home soon God willing and I'm sitting here thinking about places while I type this I will try to source it later). But I feel many Muslims are into protectionist policies, because that is the only way they feel they can protect Islam instead of letting Islam stand on its own two feet as a method for getting closer to God. So if Muslims essentially grow up and realize the more they try to protect and isolate Islam, the worse it seems to get and if they have Islam as the state religion and for the masses then if the masses truly want Islam then it will be reflected in their daily lives.. not forced on them by the government who, let's face it should not be trusted to dictate what you believe or how you believe. (This point of view has legitimate arguments against it, so if a Muslim doesn't agree he can be right and this belief is right too.. Which feeds your understanding me picking and choosing what I believe lol)

Now Kat I'll address what you said, you are right and wrong. We do not have a figurehead, for sure, so you are 100% right there. But the more I think on it, I think you are wrong too. See a few major sects of Islam have centers of power ie deobandi's their seat of power is darul uloom deoband, salafis have Saudi, eastern European Muslims tend to follow the rulings out of Russia's Islamic council etc etc etc. So I really do not know if your on to something or not.. or if you are more right then wrong. I am simply not that smart.

Now you asked me a question and bluntly so jarnhamar but can I answer with a question? You asked if i still think sharia should be in Canada..  well if you consider my views on different issues, would it be so bad? One of my obligations for it would be for it to have legally and democratically come to pass and only be enforced on Muslims. Since Islam is for Muslims. My vision of what sharia would be like in Canada assuming Muslims made up 51% of the population so they could legally pass it. Is let's say you are my neighbor and we decide to do a bbq, you have your beer, pork chops and we hit the beach in typical Canadian beach wear and guess what.. nothing happens. The police walk by, one of which is non-Muslim and he joins us for another beer.. and no one died... basically Canada would still be Canada. I'd still fight for your right to criticize Islam and have your own beliefs. Remember I believe breaking an Islamic injunction should not be punished in this life, but be sorted out in the next, so Muslims could break Islamic laws and they would not be dragged off kicking and screaming. The only real noticeable changes I could See, would be death for murderers and rapists.. Which is something many non-Muslims would support. You may also see a reduction in taxes ie no income tax, we would see an implementation of zakat without so many loopholes.. 2.5% of your inactive net worth is taxed.. ie second homes etc etc.. basically making ultra wealthy pay more tax lol I would also suspect you would enjoy the reduction in legal restrictions regarding firearms etc etc etc but remember this is my view and interpretation of Islam.. and this I see no issue with. But.. if a darker, more twisted view of Islam comes to power in Canada..  I may sadly lose my life fighting against it, but let's hope that never comes to pass.

I am happily living in Canada without Canadian law being as per the sharia, I can still live here and be a fully practicing Muslim happily and easily. My kids are safe here, my wife is happy, I don't have to worry about war, robberies or not coming home to my family. So I am more then happy with Canada (except maybe who our leader is and some of his idiotic decisions that will likely hurt our economy) and I have no desire to change anything here aside from maybe letting guys with Ar's take them hunting lol

But I suspect you knew all this
Abdullah

Ps God this was long

[daftandbarmy]

Meanwhile, we've probably never thanked the Muslims properly for saving Europe:

How Islam Saved Europe: A Reminder Of The History Of Islam In Relations To The European Dark Age and Renaissance
https://www.theodysseyonline.com/how-islam-saved-Europe

As for Africa, compare the ongoing antediluvian tragedy that is Sub-Saharan Africa with Northern Africa and, despite the obvious challenges in the northern part of the continent, you can see the relative benefits of Islamic missionary work over the centuries.

As always, the extremists tend to ruin it for everyone.

[Jarnhamar]

I still argue that the vast majority of Muslims are good, honest, hardworking chaps we would all love to have as our neighbour.

No disagreement here, I think many (most) might be too.   BUT, is what constitutes as being a Muslim subjective?

Maybe they might be like the hardcore practicing Muslim woman in the video debate with Milo I'm talking about. The hardcore Muslim who couldn't name half the rules of being a Muslim and had to have gay Milo teach her about Islam. Have you seen the video? Sounds like Trudeau trying to explain something when he doesn't have his ear piece in. I can find it for you if you'd like, it's embarrassing to watch though.

Maybe those good neighbors are good Muslim neighbors because they're not exposed to the full meal deal? The stuff people read and take on board that makes them want to kill infidels? I don't.  But I do think people may have a tendency to pick and choose what rules they like, what ones they don't, which they follow and so on. Just like how the protestant religion came to be eh?

Now you asked me a question and bluntly so jarnhamar but can I answer with a question? You asked if i still think sharia should be in Canada..  well if you consider my views on different issues, would it be so bad?

Sharia law in Canada? A separate law system for anyone who identifies as Muslim? Sounds great to me and considering how Imans can make up Islam rules on the fly it's not ripe for abuse at all.
-Traditionally, Islam has permitted marriage of girls below the age of 10, because Sharia considers practices of Muhammad as a basis for Islamic law. According to Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, the two Sunni hadiths, Muhammed married Aisha, his third wife when she was 6, and consummated the marriage when she reached the age of 9 or 10. Also
-Muslim women are not allowed to marry non-muslim men.
-The Quran also permits men to first admonish, then lightly tap or push and even beat her, if he suspects nushuz (disobedience, disloyalty, rebellion, ill conduct) in his wife
-Muslim woman can only have sex after her "nikah" – a proper marriage contract – with one Muslim man; sex is permitted to her only with her husband.[129][279][280] The woman's husband, may however, marry and have sex with more than one Muslim woman, as well as have sex with non-Muslim slaves

Good stuff.

Heck we could even look at changing our name to the Canadian-Caliphate maybe?   


But actually that's the perfect answer to accentuate my theory on the good neighbors you're talking about.  You want to take Shari law and and modify it, pick and choose various parts of it to follow and not to follow. Get rid of the whole misogynist stuff (despite you not thinking it's misogynist ). So it wouldn't be Sharia law but a watered down and modified version of it. Just like the Muslim woman in Australia was "Muslim" but a strange modified version of it.


On second thought here's the countries that practice different forms of Shiara law.  Think I'll pass.






 

[AbdullahD]

-Traditionally, Islam has permitted marriage of girls below the age of 10, because Sharia considers practices of Muhammad as a basis for Islamic law. According to Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, the two Sunni hadiths, Muhammed married Aisha, his third wife when she was 6, and consummated the marriage when she reached the age of 9 or 10. Also

http://www.discoveringislam.org/aisha_age.htm I'd go with 17-19 personally but pedophiles and pigs are just that. Sahih hadiths do not equal Islam, this is the same trap extremist preachers use. Sahih hadiths are just that sahih hadiths.. But haven't we gone over this before and how imam's make ignorant fatwas are because of this? I'll go with 19 and raping children is forbidden.. But ignorant pieces of.. will be sure to say I'm wrong because they like to.. But I have an army of Muftis who agree with me, so I'm fine believing it.

-Muslim women are not allowed to marry non-muslim men.

Come on man I have a daughter i am actually a modernist on this one.. okay I said it. But the modernist approach makes the most logical sense to me and Islam is a religion that is supposed to be modernized and coexist with the times. Not fight against them.
http://www.altmuslimah.com/2010/09/muslim_women_should_be_able_to_marry_non-muslim_men/

-The Quran also permits men to first admonish, then lightly tap or push and even beat her, if he suspects nushuz (disobedience, disloyalty, rebellion, ill conduct) in his wife

I swear i covered this before. My Google-fu is weak today and I can't find where I did it.. But here is a quick link.. it's forbidden.
http://www.islamawareness.net/Wife/beating1.html

-Muslim woman can only have sex after her "nikah" – a proper marriage contract – with one Muslim man; sex is permitted to her only with her husband.[129][279][280] The woman's husband, may however, marry and have sex with more than one Muslim woman, as well as have sex with non-Muslim slaves

Haven't we covered this issue too? Or well these issues
Polygamy..  http://answering-christianity.com/polygamy.htm ok so there is an argument in addition to my previous ones I have given.. But a major reason  polyandry is not allowed is because of the children's lineage.. so in today's age with genetic testing etc.. couldn't polyandry be allowed since no ayat of Quran forbids It? Hmm... yea this argument works really well for Muslim men who do not realize Islam restricts polygamy not encourage it. Again Islam is supposed to be used in conjunction with common sense and logic, which makes these talks great because I have to try and use both lol.

Slavery.. Umar ra forbid it.. and he is one of the righteously guided caliphs so it is a no go.
A link to add on to my early stuff https://abuaminaelias.com/what-does-islam-teach-about-slavery/

There is no sex allowed in islam before nikah neither for men or women. Also I swear i have said that the Islamic sharia is meant to adapt with the times and that does not mean it is watered down. Very few things in Islam do not change ie the 5 pillars, but a lot of it can be modernized and changed for the times and not affect Islam so it is not us picking and choosing what we want to follow. It is us following the sharia that makes sense in this day and age, a sharia that is just as potent as the one from 1500 years ago..

I personally think Muslims who are completely exposed to everything make the best neighbors, because they will be educated regarding their religion and be able to refute claims the extremists make.

As always I am constantly learning and evolving my beliefs to try and get the most correct, educated views for the world we live in, in this day and age. Also please do show me where I do not believe misogynistic stuff is misogynistic I would really wish to review that position.

Abdullah

[Jarnhamar]

Haven't we covered this issue too? Or well these issues

Yes we have, which is why I'm glad you answered this way again.

Let's forget that the whole premise of Shaira law being based off Mohammad "doing it so it's okay" (and without touching on the weird sexual stuff). 

Where the example I gave above of the Muslim woman not being able to articulate what it even was to be a Muslim you're the opposite and have modernized views on old laws, your own inturputations and inturputations of other people's inturputations.. Picking and choosing what sounds nice. Shaira law is so open to inturputation now that there's no standard.  Would your views of the perfect Shaira law even be able to be considered Shaira law anymore?

Look at the map above of the countries that follow it. Nice places to live? You live in a Canada and love Canada but you want to bring a law from those countries here?  It doesn't make sense. You want to make up your own law to fit your own views of what you think your religion is or should be. It's fantasy, the same way me wanting a Robert Heinlein civilian-citizen society is.


Do you have enough faith in Islam to send your children to an Islamic school in one of those middle eastern countries? Take after John Lett?

  Also I swear i have said that the Islamic sharia is meant to adapt with the times and that does not mean it is watered down. Very few things in Islam do not change ie the 5 pillars, but a lot of it can be modernized

You inturput that it's supposed to adapt with the times, but that's not happening very much is it?


Why are there so many violent Islamic extremists compared to everyone else?
https://army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,123793.0.html