"M" is for "Makes me sick." Read more.
P.S. Since certain Muslims haven't been reading posts carefully before commenting, I hope they won't respond to this one without noticing that there's a link to my source. So none of this "Ah, but you've added to your post to make it look like you had already answered what I said" nonsense.
Note: I prophesy that Ibn or Islam2009 will make the very errors I have already addressed.
I'm sure you'd have no qualms if they were taught "J is for Jesus, your Lord and Savior".
Are you concerned about the indoctrination of children with "hate" in general, or Muslim children in particular? If the former, why don't you campaign against video games that teach children to kill and enjoy every minute of it? Why don't you campaign against comic books wherein it is appropriate for superheroes to treat their villainous counterparts with violence, thereby giving children the green signal to fight against people they perceive to be oppressors? Why don't you campaign against wrestling shows that approves of beating the crap out of heels? Would you feel just as sick when children are taught that "H is Hell where all those who do not believe in Jesus as their Lord and Savior will burn for an eternity?"
BTW what is the source of this latest drivel of yours?
Wood:Note: This blog is called "Answering Muslims," not "Answering Any Random People Who Happen to Do the Sorts of Things Muslims Do," so don't give me the "But why aren't you complaining about so and so" silliness.
How convenient! You added the note to the original post following my comment so as to give the impression that I made my remark without properly reading your post.
Your comment was recorded at 2:23 AM. David's post was at 1:48 AM.
You should read things more carefully the first time. If you realize you made a mistake, don't just blame other people. You can delete your comments whenever you realize your mistake.
Let's see how honest you are Wood. Did you alter your post before after I made by opening comment?
Notice that I predicted that you would make the very errors you made.
What exactly is this "note" you're referring to? The note in my post says something quite different from what you've quoted.
Your original post was devoid of a link, Wood. You know it. It was after I asked you of it in my opening comment that you modified your post to include a note that provided the link as well as the condition that you will not be responding to my other questions since they don't agree with the motive of this site.
and what is wrong with teaching children that J is for Jihad? Either way they have to be taught Jihad, if it is in this fashion (which I don't particularly support) then why not?
My only objection to children or anyone else for that matter being taught Jihad is if they are taught the wrong understanding of the concept. Otherwise, every Muslim must be taught about Jihad.
Islamic childens learn about guns and jihad before the can read and the response is a rant about video games.
Here's a link on talak. The kind of questions being asked itself shows the total blindness to even basic commnsense.
LUCKNOW: Typing the word ‘talaq’ on an SMS which may not be “sent” or uttering the words ‘talaq’ thrice even under influence of alcohol or in a fit
of rage amounts to separation under the sharia.
Darul Uloom-Deoband recently issued a fatwa on three issues contrary to the common belief that the state of intoxication or anger or not communicating the decision of ‘talaq’ to the partner did not amount to divorce in Islam.
In a recent query from Bangladesh (dated December 28, 2008) it was asked: A person intending to give his wife one talaq, typed “I give one talaq to you.” in his cellphone SMS. But after thinking over, he changes his mind and does not send the SMS at all. Will this result in talaq?
According to the Dar-ul-Ifta, in the above condition, one Talaq will be deemed to have occurred, whether the SMS was sent or not.
In Fiqh term, SMS is a text which, if written by husband with the intention of Talaq, will be valid. In another question (dated January 3, 2009) a man asked Dar-Ul-Ifta that he said the word ‘talaq’ three times in anger during a fight with his wife though it was not his intention to give his wife talaq.
“A week after the incident we came to know that she was pregnant, we want to live together” the question asked. In its response, Dar-ul-Ifta ruled: “That since the divorce came in clear words thrice, the element of intention looses its legitimacy.” Another question is, if a husband is completely drunken and unconscious and beat his wife and he says talaq three times, will the marriage end? According to Dar-Ul-Ifta, talaq given after drinking in state of intoxication is valid in Hanafi sect. “Now, the husband can not marry her without Sharai halalah,” Dar-Ul-Ifta ruled.
As per the Sharia, according to Islamic scholars, Talaq should be given once at a time after a period of 30 days each.
This wipes off all possibilities of taking the drastic step in a fit of rage or under the influence of alcohol.
If a person changes his mind after uttering the word ‘talaq’ once or twice, he can always take his words back within the next 40 days (the Iddat period) of the last utterance and the marriage will stand intact.
Ibn is backe... in all his splendore... he even is saying what one shoulde post in this bloge... The simple fact of posting this topick is in itself an answer to muslims as they allways denie this things are happening (islam is pice; islam is picefull; islam is tolerant... bla bla bla...)...
The problem being presented is to show that islam, and the culture (???) that emerges from itt, is in its roats (agains what muslims say in the west...) intrinsicly inclined to violence; to the desire off cultural intolerance...
Those exemples you spoke Ibn (comics, videos, pictures) are comon in the west and in muslim countries... it has nothing to do with religious beliefs... so that's not eben the problemme...
Once again: the problem with the religious inductrination in muslims cultures is that it is giving them in schols (that does not happen in the west...) religious roots (that they'll never be hable to criticize racionaly and humanly because of the fear that same inductrinatio provides them...) to a specific cosmovision in which they will allways accept violence as "ok", specialy if it is based in religious aspects...
By the way: if you can provide any, ANY example of any, ANY text boock that presentes in western schols "H" for "hell", I'll make to you a public appologize...
Bassam then said thate is onlie objection of the teaching of Jihad was iff they were taught the wrong concept of it... well, I think that with the example of "G" for "gun" one is only one step apart from that... then, looking all around us, with all persons realizing that true muslims realy believe that, according with the Qur'an, Jihad as an exterior violent aspect of it, I bet you get worried all the time and are continuously tryieng to deny and correct those theachings... perahps you can say the surahs in the Qur'an and the Hadiths that teach violent and externel violence to others were based in teh corruption that Uthman made in the Qur'an...
u need to know that this site is all about answering muslims so why u camplain when david shows what muslims really do?
muhamamd taught his followers to hate so muslims .how can david be wrong when he just showed the mindset of muslims?
why changing the topic u wont make any difference.comics ,wrestling etc are important issues and there are many christians who already warned them.but when it comes to muslims ,they encourage everything when it comes to hate non-muslims .dont say iam wrong when u are the best example for this.
<< Note: I prophesy that Ibn or Islam2009 will make the very errors I have already addressed. >>
I have not the sligthest interest in this new post of yours, so your prophesy has not come to pass.
Please stop thinking that im only here just to pick on everything you say.
Islam2009 said: «I have not the sligthest interest in this new post of yours, so your prophesy has not come to pass»...
the simple fact you wrote what you wrote is a clear example that professor's Wood prophecy was true...
«Please stop thinking that im only here just to pick on everything you say»...
the simple fact you wrote what you wrote is a clear example that professor's Wood prophecy was true...
if both this statements from Islam2009 were true, he wouldn't even have spent time to write anything...
I'm a Muslim from المملكة المغربية (Marocco) but I'm tired of Islam2009's actions...
IBN SAID: "Your original post was devoid of a link, Wood. You know it. It was after I asked you of it in my opening comment that you modified your post to include a note that provided the link as well as the condition that you will not be responding to my other questions since they don't agree with the motive of this site."
So you've said that my original post had no link, and yet you've offered no proof of this. And you've said that a subsequent version of my post included a mysterious "note," and yet you've offered no proof of this. Bring forth your proof. The post that's up now is exactly what my post originally said.
ABDUL SAID: "I'm a Muslim from المملكة المغربية (Marocco) but I'm tired of Islam2009's actions..."
Welcome to the site, my friend. I look forward to reading your future comments.
It is not just that they are taught "A for Allah", "B for Bandook", "J for Jihad" etc - in the other video posted recently, we saw in a school function that that the kids are actually holding the guns and shouting armed Jihadi slogans etc
If this is what they do in kindergarten, wonder what they teach/do above kindergarten level.
Here is a video on the US university campuses. If this is the state in US, what will be obsession and level of indoctrination in Islamic nations?
Though Palestinians may have a case in the Israel-Palestine conflict, in an indirect way, the conflict has brought out clearly to full public view, the inherently deep seated religio-political obsessions, brainwashing, indoctrination, Islamist mindset, extremism, irrepairable vengefulness etc in the Islamic nations. As they say, true character comes out in an adversity.
Wood:So you've said that my original post had no link, and yet you've offered no proof of this. And you've said that a subsequent version of my post included a mysterious "note," and yet you've offered no proof of this. Bring forth your proof. The post that's up now is exactly what my post originally said.
God is my witnesses. It is a shame that you have to stoop this low in order to score a point against me.
Ibn said: "God is my witnesses. It is a shame that you have to stoop this low in order to score a point against me."
I notice that you used the singular for "God," and the plural for "witnesses." It seems you've embraced the Trinity.
I'm not sure what you mean by "scoring points." I wrote a post, and you started responding to it without reading it carefully. You're not making sense.
Wood:I notice that you used the singular for "God," and the plural for "witnesses." It seems you've embraced the Trinity.
That was obviously a slip of the pen. I would never embrace something as polytheistic as the Trinity.
Wood:I'm not sure what you mean by "scoring points." I wrote a post, and you started responding to it without reading it carefully. You're not making sense.
Following my comment, you altered your post, at least twice, to include a link and side notes. Given your lack of fear in God, your refusal to admit your alterations is not surprising.
>> I would never embrace something as polytheistic as the Trinity.
Monotheism, polytheism or for that matter trinity are all man-made words/terms. God did not use these terms. God revealed Himself in the scriptures and in Incarnation in Jesus. By following something other than the God as revealed in/by Abraham-Isaac-Jacob-Moses-David-Jesus and in God's Scriptures given and affirmed/reaffirmed over thousands of years, you are violating the first commandment of God. You seem to be relishing in false/artificial/simplistic rhetoric and terminology as if that would justify rejection of God’s redemption. It does not take much to see the isolated/singular false witness of Muhammad which goes against everything that is truly of God/Scriptures.
Post a Comment