Goddess

Yes, it's an interesting choice of hero. He's a radical Islamist. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-48132710

Seems pretty human.

From the Hamas Charter: 'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' (Preamble) 'Palestine is an Islamic land... Since this is the case, the Liberation of Palestine is an individual duty for every Moslem wherever he may be.' (Article 13) '[Peace] initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement... Those conferences are no more than a means to appoint the infidels as arbitrators in the lands of Islam... There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.' (Article 13) 'The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.' (Article 7) 'The HAMAS regards itself the spearhead and the vanguard of the circle of struggle against World Zionism... Islamic groups all over the Arab world should also do the same, since they are best equipped for their future role in the fight against the warmongering Jews.' (Article 32)

Conspiracy theories? The Obama's seem like a good family.

Yes. Obama seems more interested in making sure his family is educated. Not sure what your problem is with how they dress.....

Good thing you're talking about Americans and Jews. If you were talking about Muslims, there's a couple people here that would have your a$$ in a racist label so fast.....

Not ALL Jews!!!!

Not ALL Americans!!!!

You still seem to be saying that God is God because he kills and allows others to kill for him. So hard to get a straight answer from you.

Then what are you saying? It seems to say exactly: If God didn't kill or allow someone to kill, he wouldn't be a God at all. How is that not saying real Gods kill and allow others to kill for them?

God is only God because he kills and allows others to kill? Is that what you're saying here?

Now that you mention it, I bet Angela Merkel's shaking is caused by the Turkiye 2400MHz microwave weapon!! OMG!!! Bam Bam!!

If you were following the thread, I pointed out that the Islamic Supreme Council states: ....which would give individual Muslims the choice of whether they want to kill the apostate or not. Let's let this Muslim speak for himself.

General safety is not what's being discussed, and you know it. We're talking about why ex-Muslims - apostates in your judgement - are not safe outside of Muslim-controlled countries. Yes, I've heard this same argument presented to explain why hijabs and burkas are a "choice". I'm an apostate from my own religion and while they do not prescribe literal death for me (I'm actually 100% confident they will not literally kill me, unlike Muslim apostates, so I don't hire bodyguards), they do shun you like you're dead. They tell people that that is my "choice" as well. So you're saying they're not safe anywhere, or........??? I dont' know where you got that I am against Islamic countries having government. Our difference, I would suggest, is what kind of government is best and I of course feel a secular government is best for humans, not one based on stone-age religious thinking. It appears to me that you are doing a fair amount of lying here yourself. Definitely deflecting and obfuscating. I can see why this religion needs so many Western apologists.

LOL Do they know they're safe? Why does Hirsi Ali have bodyguards? According to you, she should be safe in the Netherlands or the US, yes? A lot of them are not safe. Those are the ones we're talking about. The question of course, which you seem to be avoiding, is: Why are they not safe in countries not governed by Sharia? Yes, I agree killing apostates is murder. You are the one who claimed it's a punishment of Sharia and that some vague "government" entity has the authority to perform the killings. Which I have pointed out to you is false.

This is not the case. If it were, then apostates of Islam, women, Jews, and gay people would be safe in countries that are not governed by Sharia law. But they are not safe.

This is not the case. Those under death fatwas are not just needing to protect them from the government - they are protecting themselves from the average Muslim who believes it's their duty to kill the aposate. Also, which "government" is authorized to perform the executions?

Conversely, if it's written by Islamics, it's Islamic, as well as influenced mostly by Islam, etc. We all have our perspectives. Even though you have been sort of weasel-wording around about the "death to apostates" thing, it's clear that you DO agree with it. From your interpretation of Islam - WHO is authorized to perform the killings? If it comes from a fatwa - as in cases like Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh, etc - it appears that any Muslim who wants to can perform the killing in any country, and with no regard to the country's own laws. Would this be correct?

Then why are there fatwas issued calling for the deaths of specific people deemed apostates of Islam? A fatwa is a legal pronouncement in Islam, which is a fixed precedence in accordance with Islamic law. My understanding is that fatwas are optional for individual Muslims to respect or not -thus making murdering apostates of Islam an option for any Muslim who wishes to act upon it. This is why those who have left Islam often need bodyguards and why so many fear for their lives after leaving the religion and why many pretend to still believe when they really do not. So when you say there is "no earthly punishment for apostasy in Islam" - you are either grossly misinformed or deliberately lying.

So are you one of the ones who would actually kill an apostate or blasphemer as commanded, or are you one of the ones who would not do the actual killing but would be happy if someone else did it? Would you film it on your phone for later viewing? I ask because of your reaction to Hirsi Ali's name being mentioned.

What good is forgiveness when your hands have been chopped off or your wife was shot in the head for having a strand of hair come loose from her hijab?

There's several here who argue that Muslims in general do not believe or follow the Quran's admonitions.

If Christians around the world were bombing and stabbing and driving vans into crowds of Muslims and screaming "Jesus is the greatest!" while they do it, you can't tell me that you and Dia and MH wouldn't be "assuming" a religious motive.

To an extent I agree with you. Except that there really is no Islamic authority. There is no one (as in the number 1, for clarity) authority telling Muslims Yes, kill apostates or No, don't kill them. There is no one authority telling Muslims Yes, beat your wife into submission, or No, don't beat them at all. There is no one authority telling Muslims Yes, all women must be in burkas, or No, women do not have to be in burkas. Individual Muslims are free to make these choices for themselves, and there are no consequences within the religion for choosing the worst interpretations possible. So, to avoid criticizing Individual Muslims, we go by what is practiced mainstream. I have never denied that individual Muslims can and do choose more tolerant interpretations of Islam. But those individual Muslims do not represent the majority, nor do they represent what is taught in the mainstream. Arguments here are frequently because some are arguing whether an Islamic teaching is mainstream in the group as a whole or whether it's just mainstream in certain countries. Some like to go back and forth between whether a teaching is accepted in just one country or whether it's accepted in other countries - it depends which one supports their particular argument at the time. For instance: JW's believe in shunning. That is the official doctrine. I know for a fact that some INDIVIDUAL j-dubs will secretly associate with relatives who are supposed to be shunned. But if I were to argue that JW's dont' believe in shunning because a minority rebel against the doctrine or if I said that most of them ignore the doctrine - I would be being deceitful. It is a mainstream teaching in the JW religion. And whether individual JW's follow it or not, or believe it or not - is irrelevant. To argue that other religions shun or that it started 2000 years ago amongst sheep herders in Mesopotamia - also irrelevant. Islam seems to want to skate by on the "We don't have an official doctrine on that so you can't call us on it." So when some argue that what mainstream Islam teaches is best illustrated by what the majority Muslim countries do......there is logic to that, whether you care to admit it or not. And what mainstream Islam practices is reflected in what the majority of individuals in the religion believe and practice or are willing to tolerateand "look the other way" on from their fellow believers. Individuals - the ones who reject the extremism in the faith and the ones who merely tolerate it and look away and the ones who choose to interpret extremely. All of them - what they do individually matters because what these individual Muslims believe - they bring with them when they immigrate - the same as every other human being. Muslims are not exceptional in that regard.

i said I wasn't going to respond to your insults and name-calling. Twist and warp whatever I say - that's your apologist MO. Pretty sad that the only way you can defend the religion is by twisting what is said about it. I'm pretty sure you know how utterly ridiculous you're getting, but you've already dug the hole so deep you pretty much have to stay there now just to save face.