Now no doubt, at this point you’ll start harking on about voilence being not unique to Islam. Your already used your favourite red herring the IRA, and no doubt with a little prompting you'll cherry pick a few abortion clinic bombings in the US and perhaps even stoop to citing GW Bush's having had God tell him to go to war.But you –IF YOU ARE FAIRDINKUM-- you will not find in any other modern religion which inspires/condones such daily acts of violence as we see in/from Islam. Not just a few isolated bad acts, by few people professing to be Muslims--but systemic fault.

But, heck, I don't blame you entirely --I blame Dr Pavlov --its his fault that everytime you hear the word Islam mentioned in criticsm you start to growl & salivate.

Now you're getting it Pericles...slowly. No I wouldn't accept a banking system that constitutionally allowed for the supply of drugs to children. The thing is - while it may happen it actually isn't sanctioned as ethical by our banks. And we call our banks to account for corruption, mis-represntation and laundering etc. Can you not see the difference?
Lots of heads are rolling off shoulders around the world in all sorts of conflicts - but sharia law actually sanctions this as a legal punishment - the head of a woman removed within the past 12 months in Saudi for the alleged crime of 'witchcraft'. If there are other legal systems that sanction this also - I would also oppose them.
Siding with one side of a conflict is not the same argument at all Pericles. The ethical premise behind not investing in non-Muslim weapons and defence is that they are all the presumed infidel enemy. That's not even weighing up a conflict but a predetermined ethical premise about the status of non-Muslims.
You are also overlooking completely the mis-represntation of 'no interest' when this is veiled as fees, rental or profit - the same cost of banking (if not more as some argue) is not making this financial product 'more ethical'. It's simply a sham.

>>No I wouldn't accept a banking system that constitutionally allowed for the supply of drugs to children. The thing is - while it may happen it actually isn't sanctioned as ethical by our banks.<<

Except for all those strong psychoactive drugs that Big Pharmaceutical supply to young children. Some people think that Big Pharmaceutical's business is quite unethical and might consider Western finance 'contaminated' by association.

I think Big Pharmaceutical do far more good than harm and I don't consider it an unethical investment. But how many Western financial institutions finance Big Tobacco? They're all contaminated.

>>And we call our banks to account for corruption, mis-represntation and laundering etc.<

Do you really think that APRA and ASIC are just going to turn a blind eye to Islamic banks getting up to mischief? Australian financial institutions are bound by Australian corporate and financial law. If they breach those laws they are liable for prosecution regardless of which code of ethics guides their investment policies.

>>the head of a woman removed within the past 12 months in Saudi for the alleged crime of 'witchcraft'. If there are other legal systems that sanction this also - I would also oppose them.<<

Is execution by beheading really any more barbaric than execution by other methods? Is it OK for the state to kill criminals by lethal injection but not by beheading? Which methods of execution are morally acceptable and why? Which are not and why?

>>You are also overlooking completely the mis-represntation of 'no interest' when this is veiled as fees, rental or profit - the same cost of banking (if not more as some argue) is not making this financial product 'more ethical'.<<

If there is full disclosure of all fees costs, fees, charges etc. (whether they're called 'interest' or not) I can't really see any problem. If there are hidden costs then it might be a 'sham' requiring the attention of the courts but it's more likely to just be the same sort of virtuous practice that our ethical Western financial institutes get up to: burying all the costs in print so fine you need an electron microscope to read it. Completely legal but still slightly dodgy.

The devil is in the details.

Cheers,

Tony

@Tony,

<<Is execution by beheading really any more barbaric than execution by other methods...>

Good ol' one-eyed Tony. He can always be relied on to miss the point.
Did you have a geeza at what she was charged with, Tony?

If you have not got the message by now, you never will.
Islam is not about joining with us it is about establishing a parallel
society, increasing its size until they reach the point where they can
give the same ultimatum to us that they have given to many others;

Become Moslem, migrate or die !