Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
Excellent post picoico…
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
This is sooo stupid.. You idiots who think that the Prophet actually advocated the murder of apostates are a bunch of morons who should be stripped and beaten... You are implying that Prophet was a murderer?
And as for Hadeeth, most of the Hadeeth people just simply pull out of their arse. There are examples where the prophet was also compasionate and choose to forgive even those who tried to harm him in the past, even though they didnt accept Islam. Yet you people conveniently forget the compasion inherant in Islam for idiots like Mau di dou Maudoudi...
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
A few points here…
An apostate may simply speaking out against the very intolerance that you are advocating… Imagine what somone would think of your faith if they read this! From my understanding, you are trying to IMPOSE your belief that Islam is a PEACEFUL religion by KILLING the people who are aginst you…
Thats like saying “Im not a violent person, unless you call me a violent person, in which case im gonna beat the crap out of you!”
What sorta twisted logic is this? Not to mention the fact that these days its the Msulims getting there arse kicked and would have better chance of farting there way to the moon then imposing anything on anyone…
And why is it that your so called scholars have nothing better to do then passing out fatwas and death threats?
I mean ALL these Mullahs ever seem to do is disect Islam for any little reason to hate someone or to kill them.. Thats all they do, trying to find a reason to hate people!
The PARTY line is wrong.. Its a narrow minded dim wits understanding of Islam that advocates this as the Party line. Does anyone actually study the religion anymore to see if whether there is more to it then just this shallow view of the world? I mean, is this the word of GOD, or the Idiots guide to Islam…"?
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
Im guessing this is a misinterpretation or misunderstanding. How can god advocate death for someone who no longer believes in the religion?
What doesnt make any sense is how god with all his powers NEEDS us to execute other in his name?!?!?
Its irresponsible, its like having your kids punish themselves!
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
How on gods green earth did you become the friggin moderator? I mean, whats the criteria for becoming a moderator, anyone who can tell there arse from their elbow?
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
pakpatriot,
dont you see the difference between a apostate and a hypocrite there are several Quranic Ayats demanding that the Prophet(PBUH) deals harshly with the hypocrites.
Who decides which one is a apostate and which one is a hypocrite is another discussion
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
What intolerance? I’m not advocating the killing of those who wander-in-and-out of faith. I’m advocating those who hold an anti-Islam view, and adopt an agenda that is openly hostile (i.e. encourages ecomimic, cultural, and militeraistic conforontation or attacks on Muslims) as the people who need to be dealt with. This isn’t a matter of individual choice, but of politics.
I think Muslims should treat these kind of people exactly how westerners treat modern Jihadis.
Now what would people reading what I wrote think? If our global institutions actually worked, and we were gauranteed a degree of autonomy and security, then I would be the first to say that the midevil concept of offensive Jihad is perhaps uncalled for…but such is not the case. Here, I’m treating the concept as a cultural pheonomena that was dicated by the needs of the time, not a religious dictate taken directly from primary sources.
If someone reads that, knowing full well that their own nation does the SAME thing I think Muslim nations should do unless the ground rules change for all, then this person has no right to complain…
Nonsense. Islam is a religion that values peace. If other people are HOSTILE against us, then screw it…peace needs to be suspended. Other’s hostility and capacity to harm us should not be taken lightly. We’ve done that too often, and now look at us.
Here, I draw a distinction between political apostasy, i.e. those who leave Islam and become hostile against it, and those who wander out of Islam…the latter is for God to guide, and for us to encourage. That’s it.
No, it’s not. It’s like saying “I’m not at all a violent person, but if you threaten my family and way of life I’ll make sure you’re incapable of carrying out that threat by any means necessary”.
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
Well a hypocrite and an apostate arent nececarilly the same thing... An Apostate is someone who doesnt believe in Islam. A hypocrite is someone who says one thing but in reality believs in something else.
Now a person who become an apostate and speaks agaisnt Islam is not a hypocrit because he is speaking his mind. If he becomes an apostate and then says Islam is an AWESOME religion, then he is a hypocrit and deserves to be killed!
But then if he doesnt become an apostate but is still a hypocrit in one way or another, then he should still be punished or killed? It doesnt make sense...
Either Islam is against apostates or its against hypocrits... If its hypocrits then there are millions of Muslims who should be punished because they are hypocrits, but those apostates who arent should be left alone??
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
What I meant by the Quranic references to Hypocrites is
Those who pretend to be believers but in reality sow discord between them and harm the interests of islam
From what I understand from picoico's posts is
An apostate can leave islam if he wants and follow whatever religion he pleases as long as he does not actively work against the interest of islam.
But if he tries to leaves islam AND actively works against the interests of islam and attacks muslims in any way he is to be liquidated.
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
Well see here is the problem… What your saying is not what this discussion is about. The guppies are advocating DEATH to anyone who is percieved as an apostate regardless of whether he is hostile or not. An apostate need not harbor any ill feeling towards Islam. You would be better of trying to convince the other guppies to realize the how nonsensical this is. I mean, you talking off self defense, but these people are talking about murdering people who are only guilty of leaving Islam…
Secondly, a person who is against ISLAM but does not advocate violence, should they be attacked as well… There are millions of people who have very negative view regarding Islam, but should we be going around killing al those people aswell? Yes they could be printing negative things about Islam, but then Muslims arent exactly innocent of this charge themselves… Doesnt a Muslim that tolerates the negative propaganda towards other faiths perpetrated Muslims, but doesnt tolerate the same of other faiths towards Islam become a Hypocrit?
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
Well, fair enough, although like you said it comes down to who defines what an apostate/hypocrit is… Plus you have to define what is or isnt harmful to Islam…
But I dont think this is a logical approach to things in the modern world. You cant just go around “punishing” people that insult the sensitivites of Muslims. There are other ways to fight negative propaganda, besides falling into the trap of useing violence to silence those who speak ill of Islam. What for example did the murderer of that Director, (from Norway I think), accomplish by silencing him? It only forced people to see Islam as exactly what everyone has been suspecting.
“Liquidating” (love your choice in vocabulary:) ) your enemies might have worked in the middle ages, but not today.
But that is what some of these people are advocating, killing anyone who is against the faith. Its a stupid way to react and only makes you look worse.
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
Weather they like to admit it or not, I think they already do know. I mean, anyone can see how persecuting those who leave the faith will simply increase manifold the number of hypocrites among us (which is the bigger sin).
I would SYMPATHIZE with the sentiment (i.e. I could care less for them) ONLY if it can be shown that their opposition can somehow lead to harm against us Muslims (e.g. by acting as mouth pieces for Western Imeralism, or advocating stances that could lead to our persecution in the West, etc.). One doesn’t need to lift a finger to do harm now day, and one doesn’t have to say “kill them all” to secretly desire it and work to that end.
However, reasonably it may not be the best course of action. We’ve seen this with Rushide, where an obscure nobody becomes a hero overnight because of our hot headedness. Now this ass is invited to write for the NY Times…why? Because he’s a story teller who is “familiar” with Muslims? LOL, what kind of qualifications are those?
Yes, they do…
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
Speaking of people who advocate stances to that could lead to our persecution in the West… Does this mean that only those people who are apostates and try to create problems for us in the West whould be dealt with? Here in the West I tend to have bigger problem with non Apostates who like to blow things up and kill and make all kinds of provacative statements. And yet most people have no problem with these people since they are not apostates regardless of how much trouble we get due to their provocations.
I mean, I honestly dont rmember the last time an Apostate got me into trouble with the US Home Land Security people… 
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
So who is worse, the Apostate who gets us into trouble by projecting the wrong image of Islam, or terrorists such as Osama who also project a negative image of Islam and cause us trouble?
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
And final point, Islam has no problem with Apostates.
This killing of apostates in self defense doesnt apply to just appostates but anyone... So Islam doesnt have problem with Apostates per say, but only with people in general who attack you or the relgion in general, and even then it doesnt necesarilly advocate violence
So, in reality, Islam has no problem with Apostates but does have a problem with people who try to do you harm regardless of who they are, including your fellow Muslims... But this is nothing new, I mean, there is no one in the world who wouldnt feel justified in self defense, this is not something novel to Islam...
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
Are you calling islamic law or the prophet (PBUH) barbaric? (Nauz)
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
Spread of islam has nothing to do with Murtid.
Two diffrent situations.
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
This is a skewed version of history. Had it not been for a Muslim response by the sword, Islam would have been killed among the Arabs (at least temporarily) along with every last Muslim. Such was not our destiny, of course…so should we be apologetic to EXIST? I think not.
So those who dispute “they” can, with all due respect, screw off 
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
^^ the point was to exist as one big muslim nation or to believe in one God and do good in the world?
you are saying that it was absolutely necessary for the muslims to expand their empire from spain to india to africa and had they not done so they themselves would have been wiped off?
again...this justifies every other religion's/country's actions too.
however, keeping in sync with the topic, the whole issue of killing apostates is what i meant by saying that islam is spread by the sword.....if your religion is so true, why is there so much insecurity that u need to kill those that turn away from it.
again as explained by yourself, an apostate is only to be killed if he/she means some harm in some way to islam....but since this was not what the topic originally suggested, it did seem like islam pretty much needs to be spread by a sword.....
Re: Is Islamism a bankrupt ideology?
As a nation under God…from the earliest time, we were a nation that was never left alone and constantly harassed. I’m saying this no doubt influenced later Islamic regimes (from the fall of the Noble Caliphs onward)…
Such was the case with Byzantium and Persia. After that, Islamic rule had become Imperial, and so one can’t really say the expansion was strictly for religious reasons, or even for survival, although it sure as hell was the most secure point in our history.
I used to be concerned about this too…until I realized that ALL country’s do it anyway and will come up with their own justifications for why the do. If our options are to sit back and turn the other cheek (which is nonsense, imho) or to play the game and dominate (assuming there’s no middle ground except being servile to another power)…what would you suggest we do?
The Muslim powers during the middle ages were far from perfect, but I can’t fault them for their foreign policies as it was quite rational.
Point is, I don’t feel insecurity at all untill these guys turn coat. I mean, look at a country like Pakistan. You can find dozens of people who want nothing to do with religion and are silent about it…they really could care less…I say leave them be as they may turn around one day.