Dawood...
still waiting for your specific responses to Kactuz and my own specific charges against Mohammed.

1/ Toture
2/ Murder and Genocide
3/ Terrorism (raiding)
4/ Sexual abuse of a child and captive women.

I had a 9 yr old girl at my little table yesterday in Church (collecting payments for family camp), she was with mum and dad, and it blew my mind that a man MY AGE (57) could be sexually involved with such a child.. IN ANY CULTURE.. Irrespective of cultural practices, that has to be one of the most predatorial, pernicious,evil, and self gratifying acts of sin on the face of the earth.

Yes this man, is portrayed to the world as The most wonderful example of anyone to follow:

THIS...man (seeKactuzLinkabove)

<A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and abuse him.

So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her.

A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) was informed about it.>

There you go...from the hadith of Islam -"MURDERER" !

How DARE they say "peace be upon him".. rather may the wrath of God Almighty be upon this act for eternity. It was for THIS...that Christ died.. his and our sin.

a) 'weak' hadith ?
b) Is there an 'underlying wisdom' ?
c) Did you KNOW this about him before you committed your life to him ?
e) If you DID know it...would u have reservations ?
f) Have you resolved your cognitive dissonance by changing your beliefs about what is 'right' and wrong, in order to justify this murder ?
g) your BELOVED prophet ?

Does anyone wonder why we attack his character and contrast his with that of Christ ? seriously ?
Is it fair claiming this is 'my religion is better than yours'ism ?

pagan numbat (used in the sense of someone who follows a false god rather than as a general slur although that is tempting) do you really think that the way you and other christains are giving your warnings about the muslim threat that you will taken seriously by anybody who is not already in agreement with you?

Your own posts are for the most part vile obsenities filled with name calling and little substance. You and other christains remain quiet and fail to correct coach when he gets it undisputably wrong in his posts (Islam is wrong because of "fasting" being one of the more recent classics) - why doesn't one of you suggest he go away and actually read the Bible so he knows what is in it?

Christains in this site duck for cover in relation to the barbarity of your Old Testament hiding behind "completion in the New" or not judging God, happily declare that all christains who've done the wrong thing are or were not real christains while endlessly attacking muslims over the actions over Mohammed and extremist muslims.

You (as a group) are morally outraged that muslims "might" seek to influence the political process in Australia whilst supporting organised christain involvement in the same political process.

Your protests have the look of a turf war over who gets to control the lives of the rest of us, one which fundamentalist christainity has a big start in both by numbers and existing representation in Australian politics.

Start contributing balanced posts which show some of the "love of christ", which address failings in the christain church and the barbarity of the Old Testament and I might treat what you have to say more seriously.

In the mean time you for the most part remain biased crackpots with little interest in the well being of Australia but rather an obsessive focus on the power base of your own faith at the expense of this country,concepts like fair play and common decency.

R0bert

Redneck,
As for what people wear, a swastika is more a confronting political statement than a demonstration of personal faith. The banning of headscarves won't improve the situation, it's more an assertion of authority and another way of creating another oppressed group within a society. To me it would be yet another personal freedom taken away. These things tend to fade with time. When was the last time you saw a European widow dressed in black?
Besides, if they didn't dress differently, how could we tell the good people from the bad people? There are probably lots more "plainclothes Muslims" out there that we can't easily identify. Perhaps we could pass a law to make them all wear, let's say, a yellow star on an armband - just for identification purposes of course. Then we could round them all up easily whenever we needed to. Worked a treat last time.

As far as racial vilification goes, I didn't dodge anything. I have never heard my parents disparage any other racial group. They came here for a new beginning and that's how they lived their lives. I'm not claiming to be different from "everybody else" - just different from you.
From most of your 340+ posts I think you have a problem with Muslims and tolerance generally.
I bet you're a John Laws fan, a tabloid junkie, probably anti-abortion but pro death penalty, against saying "sorry" to the aboriginals but proud on Anzac day, a One Nation/League of Rights follower, a bit of a loner, frequently angry and have trouble making friends.
You're not part of the solution but part of the problem

My reasons for converting to Islam are simple: Islam is not what you and others want to make of it. You are as bad as the extremists within Islam and walk hand in hand regarding the misrepresentation of our religion.

But you could at least have quoted the whole hadith and other information instead of being intellectually dishonest and making it appear that Muhammad condoned the crime, when there is no evidence of it. It goes on to state that the Prophet gathered the people ("He assembled the people") and called on the guilty man to stand up and testify ("I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up"), then proceeded to state that "Oh bear witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood."

Which we later find out is because the slave-woman the man killed was his own partner, and she had no other family present but the 2 young children she sired who could claim retaliation (as in, that the man, their father, should be killed). Islamic Law gives the family of the murdered the right of seeking the killer's death, or monetary compensation. As there was no other family of the deceased of a mature age to deal with this issue, he was telling the community around him not to take matters in to their own hands and observe the law (as in not to retaliate - why else he state that to everyone who had gathered?). As well as simply giving a pronouncement on the case, that there was, in fact, no retaliation possible. It also does not tell us what happened to the man afterwards, so it is nothing but conjecture to say anything regarding that.

Not to mention that it also mentions that the guilty man was trembling and nervous - why would that be, I wonder...?

Of course, feel free to twist everything as much as you like to show that I am using "al-taqiyya" or trying to cover the 'truth', and so on. It's expected.

Dawood...you are quite correct and I have to conceed factual error in my last post. Apologies for that.

I misconstrued the use of the personal pronoun 'he'. I don't withdraw the charges though, I absolutely affirm them, in particular and in this case factually correct is the murder of Ka'ab bin Al Ashraf for the same reasons "Mocking Mohammed". He himself did not carry out this murder, but he authorized and arranged it. As guilty as if he had himself thrust the dagger. That this was clearly murder, and not an 'execution' is evident by the circumstances. There was no hearing, just a 'who will get rid of' cry from the guilty party.

Dawood... I still ask you those questions a) to g) in my last post, and you can re-direct the basis for them to the murder of Kaab rather than this woman and add the torture of captives and dismembering of criminals.

You say "Islam" is not what we make it out to be... I disagree, we claim that it was invented and shaped by a man who was a murderer and other things. Yet is described in such glowing terms in Islamic literature as though he was a spotless saint without blemish.....

So, I affirm that "Islam" is exactly what we make it out to be. That you, a man of reasonable intelligence would follow it simply amazes me, and probably just accept the propoganda of a group which is founded on fear and terror that the Christian scriptures are 'nothing like the originals'.

I maintain Buddhism is 'exactly' what we make it out to be.. nothing like Islam, it is the idea of attaining "freedom from suffering" through meditation etc.. not a difficult subject.

You cannot separate 'Islam' from its founder, same with Christ and The Faith.

Robert, yes, we are a weak and biased lot. Not many among us are noble, as per the scriptures. But let our weakness point to His greatness, we are nothing. He is everything.
"Shall that which is made ask its maker 'why have you made me thus'" ?

Coach,

Religions are ideologies, beliefs and methods of practice. You can say that one suits you better than the others. To claim that a religion is ‘fraud’ because it doesn’t agree with the way you worship is at best childish.

Islamic theology is a simple story board: God send the commandments to the chosen people to spread his teachings (ie the Hebrews/ Jews). When they deviated God send Jesus (pbuh) to refocus them on spirituality and meaning practice. When they rejected Jesus God asked him to spread the message directly to mankind. When people worshipped Jesus God send Mohamed (pbuh) to refocus on the old eternal message of monotheism and salvation. Plane and simple.
God have no representation or representatives and your savior is your faith, intent and deeds. The road to salvation is the struggle to be a better person and add value to your family, society and enrich their lives. To be good and respectful to nature and animals (‘for they are nations like us’). Heaven is for all good being men & women. Obviously you never read the Quran.

The Trinity is the only conflicting theology with all other teachings of monotheism (ie Judaism and Islam). Islam is actually the common ground for Judaism and Christianity and not the opposite.

If you are that desperate for debate start at you own backyard: Ask yourself where did Jesus divinity come from and why did the Holy Spirit became divine only 56 years later (ie 381AD)? Where did the communion (blood & wine) come from (Check Osiris communion) ? Why Christmas is on the 25th December? Where is the Gospel of Barnabos and why was it excluded even though only Barnabos Gospel was written during Jesus ‘s time? Where is the tri-headed God come from? What happened to anybody who questioned the Trinity (including Pope Honorius 648AD)?
As I said, I accept your faith even though it does not make sense to me and I don’t judge you. You judge me & my faith.

Dawood,

Insightful postings as usual, keep it up.

Peace,