Sharia law and American values

[RobertUrbanek]

Is Sharia law compatible with American values? If not, would you turn away immigrants who have stated their goal is to impose Sharia law in the U.S.?

[100%atheist]

Is Sharia law compatible with American values? If not, would you turn away immigrants who have stated their goal is to impose Sharia law in the U.S.?

American values? I don't know no american values. Would you enlighten me on the values that are the same for ALL americans?

The Bill of Rights. Is there even a Muslim nation with freedom of religion as we know it?

Sharia Law is completely antithetical to Western ideas of basic human rights, and is basically gender apartheid. If immigrants don't like it here they can always move.

And how exactly, assuming that the Amendments are the American values, these values worked for slaves? If slaves don't like that they are slaves then they can be tortured? Good values.

Values vary between social classes. Also, on average, modern Japanese values are significantly more advanced than average American values.

Sharia law is a religious law and, along with Christian law, Jews law, Khtulu law, etc, it must not substitute any law of a developed country. I don't see any reason to single out Sharia law.

[East of Eden]

Is Sharia law compatible with American values? If not, would you turn away immigrants who have stated their goal is to impose Sharia law in the U.S.?

American values? I don't know no american values. Would you enlighten me on the values that are the same for ALL americans?

The Bill of Rights. Is there even a Muslim nation with freedom of religion as we know it?

Sharia Law is completely antithetical to Western ideas of basic human rights, and is basically gender apartheid. If immigrants don't like it here they can always move.

And how exactly, assuming that the Amendments are the American values, these values worked for slaves? If slaves don't like that they are slaves then they can be tortured? Good values.

That was against the Amendments but was corrected. You know, slaves were seen as some see unborn children today, not really people.

Values vary between social classes. Also, on average, modern Japanese values are significantly more advanced than average American values.

Like the Rape of Nanking? That was even worse than Sharia Law.

Sharia law is a religious law and, along with Christian law, Jews law, Khtulu law, etc, it must not substitute any law of a developed country. I don't see any reason to single out Sharia law.

I don't know what 'Christian Law' you refer to, unless our basic system of Western human rights, but Sharia law is being imposed on people worldwide. Do you think gays should be stoned and women treated like second class citizena?

[100%atheist]

That was against the Amendments but was corrected. You know, slaves were seen as some see unborn children today, not really people.

So, perferfect American values that were, according to you, expressed in the Bill of Rights did not prevent slavery. This simply tells me that either the American values are not very persistent or that they aren't in the Bill of Rights.

Values vary between social classes. Also, on average, modern Japanese values are significantly more advanced than average American values.

Like the Rape of Nanking? That was even worse than Sharia Law.

MODERN means modern.

Sharia law is a religious law and, along with Christian law, Jews law, Khtulu law, etc, it must not substitute any law of a developed country. I don't see any reason to single out Sharia law.

I don't know what 'Christian Law' you refer to, unless our basic system of Western human rights,

Haven't you read the Bible? Specifically, I mean Deuteronomy. It is the book of Christian law ... however 'forgoten' by most Christians (perhaps for good).... and there are no Human Rights anywhere in the Bible.

but Sharia law is being imposed on people worldwide.

And so the law of the Christian God.

Do you think gays should be stoned and women treated like second class citizena?

No, I don't think so even though this is a Christian law.

[East of Eden]

So, perferfect American values that were, according to you, expressed in the Bill of Rights did not prevent slavery. This simply tells me that either the American values are not very persistent or that they aren't in the Bill of Rights.

I never said perfect, but they are a heck of a lot better than Sharia Law. The courts misinterpreted those rights, just as Roe v. Wade was an unjust misinterpretation.

MODERN means modern.

Which began in the 16th century, which encompasses WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_history

Explaining the Japanese crimes of WWII, Jiro Tokuyama, managing director of a Japanese research institute, said in Newsweek: "Wheras Western religions are based on beliefs in an everlasting, absolute God, the Japanese.....did not perceive the presence of such a permanent being. Instead they believed that what is right changes with the times and changing situations."

Ideas have consequences.

Haven't you read the Bible? Specifically, I mean Deuteronomy. It is the book of Christian law ... however 'forgoten' by most Christians (perhaps for good).... and there are no Human Rights anywhere in the Bible.

Uh, Christianity began with Jesus Christ, do you know when Deuteronomy was written? If I was a bronze age member of the theocracy of Israel you might have a point.

And so the law of the Christian God.

Cite?

No, I don't think so even though this is a Christian law.

Cite? Jesus stopped the stoning of the woman caught in adultery, you must be thinking of Islam.

[Wyvern]

I never said perfect, but they are a heck of a lot better than Sharia Law. The courts misinterpreted those rights, just as Roe v. Wade was an unjust misinterpretation.

Strange how in the very next section you say ideas have consequences but you fail to see the consequences of the idea of taking away the right of a person to control their own body. Under your idea that one does not have the right to control ones own body, exactly who does? In modern times this idea has led to mass sterilizations of "undesirables".

MODERN means modern.

Which began in the 16th century, which encompasses WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_history

Playing word games I see, since you bothered to look it up I'm sure you saw that we are no longer in the modern era of history. Do you think we can find any atrocities committed by christians in the modern era?

Explaining the Japanese crimes of WWII, Jiro Tokuyama, managing director of a Japanese research institute, said in Newsweek: "Wheras Western religions are based on beliefs in an everlasting, absolute God, the Japanese.....did not perceive the presence of such a permanent being. Instead they believed that what is right changes with the times and changing situations."

Ideas have consequences.

Yes they do, look at the atrocities committed by the very christian Germans during the same time period.

[East of Eden]

I never said perfect, but they are a heck of a lot better than Sharia Law. The courts misinterpreted those rights, just as Roe v. Wade was an unjust misinterpretation.

Strange how in the very next section you say ideas have consequences but you fail to see the consequences of the idea of taking away the right of a person to control their own body. Under your idea that one does not have the right to control ones own body, exactly who does?

It isn't her own body, it often has a different gender and blood type. You sound like the pro-slavery crown who thought they could do what they want with their own 'property'.

In modern times this idea has led to mass sterilizations of "undesirables".

One of the early pro-abortion people, Margaret Sanger, was for this.

Playing word games I see, since you bothered to look it up I'm sure you saw that we are no longer in the modern era of history.

Oh, the modern era is cut off when its convenient for you, huh?

Do you think we can find any atrocities committed by christians in the modern era?

Not nearly as many as atheist atrocities.

Yes they do, look at the atrocities committed by the very christian Germans during the same time period.

What idea of Jesus Christ motivated Hitler? Actually, according to Albert Einstein the church was the segment of German society that most opposed Hitler, much more than the media or academia. Hitler's final plan was to go after Christians.

[GiddyUp]

Not nearly as many as atheist atrocities.

If an atheist has to answer for, say, Stalin's crimes because he was an atheist, then you have to answer for Osama Bin Laden's crimes because he was a theist. Don't try and pin a crime committed by someone on someone or something else just because they share one of the lowest common denominators. Theism isn't responsible for Hitler even though he was one, atheism isn't responsible for Stalin in the same way either.

If you really want to compare atheist vs theist atrocities then be my guest.

Edit: Hitler didn't mind Christianity, as long as it was his kind of Christianity. People many times point to German occupied Poland as how the the Nazis hounded Christian priests, but the Nazis persecuted the intelligentsia! Hitler was an aspiring architecht, yet Polish architechts suffered proportionally more than Polish Catholic priests did. So does this mean that Hitler, who actually loved architecture, hated architecture more than Christianity?

Can't anyone see how simplistic are the conclusions drawn from insufficient data? Yet it goes on and on.

[East of Eden]

Not nearly as many as atheist atrocities.

If an atheist has to answer for, say, Stalin's crimes because he was an atheist,

I don't think that, I only bring it up in the face of grossly exagerated wrongs of Christianity done by people going against Christ's teachings, as if it somehow discredits Christianity.

then you have to answer for Osama Bin Laden's crimes because he was a theist.

No I don't, I'm not a Muslim.

Don't try and pin a crime committed by someone on someone or something else just because they share one of the lowest common denominators. Theism isn't responsible for Hitler even though he was one, atheism isn't responsible for Stalin in the same way either.

If you really want to compare atheist vs theist atrocities then be my guest.

I don't think you'd like it.

Edit: Hitler didn't mind Christianity, as long as it was his kind of Christianity.

Which wsn't Christianity at all. The pope specifically rejected Hitler's 'Christian Positivism'.

People many times point to German occupied Poland as how the the Nazis hounded Christian priests, but the Nazis persecuted the intelligentsia! Hitler was an aspiring architecht, yet Polish architechts suffered proportionally more than Polish Catholic priests did. So does this mean that Hitler, who actually loved architecture, hated architecture more than Christianity?

Can't anyone see how simplistic are the conclusions drawn from insufficient data? Yet it goes on and on.

Yes, it does. We just saw the silly claim here that Hitler was a Christian.

[GiddyUp]

[quote="East of Eden]
I don't think that, I only bring it up in the face of grossly exagerated wrongs of Christianity done by people going against Christ's teachings, as if it somehow discredits Christianity.[/quote]

That's a good point: only ever I see someone bringing up somekind of "atheist death-toll" when the argument never applies anyway. And I agree that one can't put the deaths caused by theists on all theists' shoulders, nor can one do so with Christian caused deaths either, and as equally as theism cannot be held responsible for deaths caused by theists it is similarly fallacious to say the same about atheism and Stalin, yes?

No I don't, I'm not a Muslim.

And I doubt anyone here is a Stalinist or a totalitarian etc either.

I don't think you'd like it.

Well, as I said just above it would be fallacious, but I'd like to hear the how the amounts compare. I'm sure you can't argue that the WW1, WW2, 30-Years War, Taiping Rebellion, The Muslim Expansion, The Crusades, the various Roman Expansions and subsequent enslavements, colonialism, the slave trade, the peculiarly Christian form of racial slavery in the US, the Aztec massacre culture, the massacres of American natives in the hands of the qonquistadores weren't all conflicts started and waged primarily by theists. I wonder about the death toll of all the aforementioned.

And of course the number would not include all the famines that occured in theist run countries and colonies that could have been avoided or at least helped. And the construction projects while the "Christian" countries were industrializing.

Which wsn't Christianity at all. The pope specifically rejected Hitler's 'Christian Positivism'.

I'm "positive" there are, and have been, many forms of Christianity that are so unlike eachother that the proponents could kill each other. I don't know your flavour of faith, but I'm sure you know that some Christian Church considers you a heretic. If you are a Roman Catholic, then there's people on this very board who would say you worship nothing but the whore of Babylon.

But Hitler was more of a Protestant anyway.

Yes, it does. We just saw the silly claim here that Hitler was a Christian.

I guess we can go back to you what you said earlier:

I don't think that, I only bring it up in the face of grossly exagerated wrongs of Christianity done by people going against Christ's teachings, as if it somehow discredits Christianity.

So how exactly would, say Hitler's Christianity be discredited if he only did things that went against Christs' teachings? Surely you, and everyone, has done against them in the past, in the present in the future? Didn't Christ say that a hateful thought is the same as murder, a lustful thought the same as adultery? That there is only sin, and among them one is no greater than the other? All are just crimes against God and as such all are as easily forgiven, and all can just as easily damn you for eternity?

Fun Fact: According to the census the Catholic Church does, Hitler is a member of the Roman Catholic Faith: He never renounced his faith, nor was he ever ex-communicated. So there you go.

[Wyvern]

It isn't her own body, it often has a different gender and blood type. You sound like the pro-slavery crown who thought they could do what they want with their own 'property'.

I will ask again since you ignored it, if a person does not have the right to control their own body, who does? Please explain how advocating a persons right to control their body can be interpreted as being pro slavery?

In modern times this idea has led to mass sterilizations of "undesirables".

One of the early pro-abortion people, Margaret Sanger, was for this.

You say this while completely ignoring the fact that it was not atheists carrying out this policy but theists doing so. And of course why not do so, if your religion tells you to deny one persons right to control their bodies it makes it very easy to deny that right to anyone doesn't it.

Playing word games I see, since you bothered to look it up I'm sure you saw that we are no longer in the modern era of history.

Oh, the modern era is cut off when its convenient for you, huh?

Actually I took the cutoff dates from the very same article you used, is it my fault you didn't bother to read the article fully? Strange how you bother to look up an article in order to play a word game on another member but cry foul when it is turned on you.

Do you think we can find any atrocities committed by christians in the modern era?

Not nearly as many as atheist atrocities.

Are you really going to sit there and say from the 16th century there have been more atrocities carried out by atheists because their belief in no god solely called for it over that committed by theists because their belief in god called for it.

Yes they do, look at the atrocities committed by the very christian Germans during the same time period.

What idea of Jesus Christ motivated Hitler? Actually, according to Albert Einstein the church was the segment of German society that most opposed Hitler, much more than the media or academia. Hitler's final plan was to go after Christians.

Wow I guess it must be the evil MSM that keeps saying Hitlers final solution was about going after Jews. Or is this just another of your opinions with no evidence to back it up.