odsoc,

it seems you are an Islamist.

Scholars or not, the posts here refer to the Qur'an and Hadiths - The Qur'an states:

"Righteous women are therefore obedient, ... And those you fear may be rebellious (nushuz) admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them."[The Qur'an, 4:34. (Arberry's translation)]

"Had I ordered anybody to prostrate before any one, I would have ordered women to prostrate before their husbands on account of men's rights over the women ordained by Allah."[Hadith No. 70.]



odsoc you say about christian 'respect' etc - the highest trait of a christian is love, and a christian loves a woman, christain or Islamic, more than he loves an Islamist, in that he will shout out against the Islamist when he advocates beating her, rather than respect the man who beats her - it is clear you are an Islamist if you don't get this.

It is the trait of an Islamofacist to advocate tolerance of Islam's intolerance!!

The author says that Islamic law uses beheading, stoning for adultury, the sutting of of hands, etc - it is clear such is not consistent with Australian law - if the author treuly belives it can co-exist, i suggest he paractice it in Austrlaian society, and see how swift Austrlai's law moves against him. he can't go around doing those things - what an absolute idiot the author is.

..........................................................

For those of you liberalists on this forum who laughed when i stated that Islamists have a hold on Europe, I refer you to the posted link.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19468_Europe_is_Shuffling_into_Darkness&only

""The governments of Europe have been tricked into believing that criticism of a belief is the same thing as criticism of a race. And so it is becoming increasingly difficult and dangerous to criticise a growing and powerful ideology within our midst. It may soon, in addition, be made illegal

To All

I stand by my previous post. The author is presenting a "half pregnant" position.

What a rort. And you have all fallen for it.

Cheers
Kay

It takes two. For adultery. When the Islamists condemn the male party to the same fate as the woman I might just begin to think Sharia Law as being anything other than a continuom of medieaval thinking.

So sad Germaine et al are takng tea with the Queen.

Not rising to the big challenge of ensuring, at the very least, education/choice about birth control for women, denied an education, literacy and beholden to the then parish priest and now Mullah

To Mr Odsoc.

I have lived through a period of history when legions of educated and supposedly intelligent academics promoted Communism as the answer to all the world's problems. The fact that most Communist countries were giant prison camps surrounded by barbed wire and watchtowers to prevent their own people from fleeing it's dominion did not phase the academic world at all.

Today Islam has become the flavour of the month to those people who never tire of attacking their own society in order to make some sort of fashion statement. Once again, the pseudo intellectuals are going into bat for a social system which is not only an affront to western values, but which has been a catastrophe for it's own brain washed adherents.

Jamila Hussein has claimed that Islamic Law and Australian Law are compatable, because they are not so different. That is a half truth. And a half truth told as a full truth is a complete lie. There may be some convergenence in the two laws, but there is also fundamental diferences which make the two incompatable. The days when academics could present lies as facts are over. The Internet has become a tool for ordinary people to find the truth and fling it back into the faces of the anti Western propagandists.

Dear ODSOC
what I find amazing is how those sympathetic to the beating of women as 'discipline' react when this is pointed out. They speak 'tenderly' about a position which can only have originated in the pit of hell.

They then attack those who scrutinize and bring to light the evils of Islam, by suggesting that they 'should' be like this and like that.

Jesus saved his most savage criticism for those who HAD THE INTELLECT to know the falsehood of their position, yet refused to acknowledge it. They chose a falsehood over truth, simply because of arrogance, pride and self interest.

Matthew 23
13"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.[c]

15"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.

This can and should be applied to the teaching of Islam, and any other teaching which purports to represent God (but perverts the Word) to mankind.

Any teaching about God which diverts people from knowing Christ as Lord and Savior is not 'of' God.

Any teaching which panders to the lusts of the flesh (4 wives, child marraige.. taking war booty..beating up women) is not of God.

Can I make it any clearer ? Dont come back to me with "but Christians are supposed to...." or "My understanding of Christian witness is...." because all that shows is your understanding is wrong. Please update it.

We are called to be 'light' and regarding the need to expose Islam to the light of Gods Word... I will do so without compromise and without fear.

The difference between us who criticize and those like the Author who sympathize, is that we are not living in fear of a system of intellectual and emotional oppression.

"For me, to live is Christ"

BD, you appear to have missed the bit where those savage criticism's by Jesus were directed at people of his own faith who misrepresented that faith.

I'm not aware of any new testament example where he focussed his attention on teachers of clearly different religions and blasted them for their wrongdoing.

Rather his most savage attacks were against those who outwardly shared his faith. Something you might like to consider.

I agree with the position of not wanting any formal recognition of shariah law in australia and I don't believe that the author is asking for such. Nor do I want your religion to restrict my freedoms either. Muslims should be free to live by their beliefs as long as those beliefs do not contravene Australian law just as fundy christains, athiests, agnostics, buddists, hindu's etc should enjoy the same freedom. As I said earlier if the law is unnecessary then remove it, if it is necessary then apply it to all.

Much would be gained by religious types placing more emphasis on their own lives rather than how others live - muslims not liking bikini clad women, fundies not liking topless women or women with head coverings in public places, coach not liking people who drive hot cars or 8 seater vans etc. Wear what you like and get over it.

R0bert