Print

[w2kj]

Consider this:

Theologically, no. Because his allegiance is to Allah.

Scripturally, no. Because his allegiance is to the five pillars of Islam and the Quran (Koran).  

Geographically, no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially, no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.

Politically, no. Because he must submit to the mullah (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America, the great Satan.

Domestically, no, because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34).

Religiously, no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)

Intellectually, no, because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically, no, because Islam, Mohammed Quran's, and the Quran do not allow
freedom of religion and ___expression.

Democracy and Islam cannot CO - exist.  Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

Spiritually, no, because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as our heavenly father, nor is he ever called Love in the Quran's 99 excellent names. Therefore after much study and deliberation....perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL Muslims in this country.

They obviously cannot be both good Muslims and good Americans. Call it what you wish...it's still the truth. If you find yourself intellectually in agreement with the above, perhaps you will share this with your friends. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country.

Pass it on. The war is bigger than we know.

 Remember (This cult is growing among the ethnic groups faster than wildfire) in 20 years or less there will be enough American citizens of the Muslim faith to elect the President of the USA.

[lordvader129]

many of those are based on misconceptions of the muslim faith

theologically, a christian cant be a good american either, beause his allegiance should be to god, not a government of men

scripturally, same thing

geographically, muslims have no more "allegiance" to mecca than christians has to jeruselem or bethlehem

politcially, this is not muslim teaching, only a handful of radical muslims believe this (much liek the kk want to exterminate blacks in the name of god)

domestically, in this case you might have half a point, muslims are required to marry as many women as they can support financially, as far as beating, its legal in some states (alabama and arkansas for example) and christians and jews are instructed by the bible to put their son to death if he should disobey them

religiously, and christians believe there are how many ways to get to heaven? just one, being christian, and same goes for jews, i dont know how this applies to being american though, there is no "american" religion

intellectually, ive never met a muslim who believed the bible to be "corrupt" muslims recognize jesus as a prophet and most recognize christians and jews as brothers in their faith (all three religions share the same roots) besides, the constitution isnt based on "biblical" principles, if it was we wouldnt have freedom of religion among other things

philosophically, the bible doesnt allow much freedom either



and as far a muslim president, i feel it will pose the same "conflict of interest" our first catholic president had (which was none BTW)


to quote muhammad,

QUOTE

All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over a white — except by piety and good action.

[CattyKid]

Hmm...
What IS a patriot, might I ask?
One who follows the orders of the President to a T?  One who does what THEY think is right for America?
Because I guarantee you that if you go talk to a member of the KKK or someone who wants to overthrow the American government they would tell you THEY are a patriot.
And I can also guarantee you that if you talk to some soldiers in Iraw/Afghanistan/at home THEY will tell you that they are patriots.

So... I guess the definition of patriot is a little subjective, is it not?


A patriot is a true hero to some, yet a scathing racist to others... is he not?

[PhatIrishBastard]

QUOTE(w2kj @ Jun 13 2006, 09:37 PM)

Consider this:

Theologically, no. Because his allegiance is to Allah.

Scripturally, no. Because his allegiance is to the five pillars of Islam and the Quran (Koran).  

Geographically, no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially, no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.

Politically, no. Because he must submit to the mullah (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America, the great Satan.

Domestically, no, because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34).

Religiously, no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)

Intellectually, no, because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically, no, because Islam, Mohammed Quran's, and the Quran do not allow
freedom of religion and ___expression.

Democracy and Islam cannot CO - exist.  Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

Spiritually, no, because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as our heavenly father, nor is he ever called Love in the Quran's 99 excellent names. Therefore after much study and deliberation....perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL Muslims in this country.

They obviously cannot be both good Muslims and good Americans. Call it what you wish...it's still the truth. If you find yourself intellectually in agreement with the above, perhaps you will share this with your friends. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country.

Pass it on. The war is bigger than we know.

 Remember (This cult is growing among the ethnic groups faster than wildfire) in 20 years or less there will be enough American citizens of the Muslim faith to elect the President of the USA.

What muslim country has attacked america?

JAPAN?

How about Germany, Italy Britian, France, and Spain. Russia (by proxy), the countries we have been at war with.

All Gentile nations.

[jha'dhur]

QUOTE

All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over a white — except by piety and good action.

BOGUS

The God of Israel made his covenant with the seed of judah(mulatto/asiatics=shemites) as well as Ishmael (afro/shemites).

Nowhere are the gentile races mentioned.

[lordvader129]

QUOTE(jha'dhur @ Jun 14 2006, 03:09 PM)

BOGUS

The God of Israel made his covenant with the seed of judah(mulatto/asiatics=shemites) as well as Ishmael (afro/shemites).

Nowhere are the gentile races mentioned.

what does that have to do with what muhammad said? you just like to argue, dont you?

[jha'dhur]

QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Jun 14 2006, 05:40 PM)

what does that have to do with what muhammad said? you just like to argue, dont you?

No I just dont believe you. And it is contradictory to christianity.

 

[damam]

@w2kj  -  couldnt much of that be sed/muslim/7th day adventist/ and still apply?  Oh crap, we gotta stop the 7th day advantist's
Hold on I gotta grab my gun  . . .

. . . . ok back now

QUOTE(jha'dhur @ Jun 14 2006, 08:09 AM)

BOGUS

The God of Israel made his covenant with the seed of judah(mulatto/asiatics=shemites) as well as Ishmael (afro/shemites).

not exactly right

QUOTE(Genesis 17:19-20)

"Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac. I will establish My covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I will bless him and make him fruitful and multiply him exceedingly; he shall be the father of twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation."

 

notice the lack of a covenant mentioned with Ishmael.  

There are other quotes in the bible which suggest that g-d does not view Ishmael as a real son of Abraham as well Genesis 22:2

QUOTE(Genesis 22:2)

Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac  , whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about."

there was no covanent with ishmael

well, Im off to go kill me some 7th day advantist's  

[jha'dhur]

QUOTE(damam @ Jun 15 2006, 10:56 AM)

notice the lack of a covenant mentioned with Ishmael.  

There are other quotes in the bible which suggest that g-d does not view Ishmael as a real son of Abraham as well Genesis 22:2
 
there was no covanent with ishmael

Now you are playing word defintiion games.


But, notice the lack of Japeth.

QUOTE

24 Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised,
25 and his son Ishmael was thirteen;
26 Abraham and his son Ishmael were both circumcised on that same day.
27 And every male in Abraham's household, including those born in his household or bought from a foreigner, was circumcised with him.

Once again, semantics.

[damam]

who's playing semantics and word games?  

You want to start inserting words that arent there fine:  

QUOTE

And every male in Abraham's household, including those born in his household or bought from a foreigner, was circumcised with him.

where does it say the descendants of Japeth were not there in the household as well?

I am not reading any "and behold the lord sayeth kick out the white dudes and leave them uncircumsized"

[BCfosheezy]

I'm circumsized who wants pics?

On a serious note, why does any of this matter? This is the same as the white/vs black racism. This is hate based on religion. How about we all realize that whoever our religion tells us is God put the people we choose to dislike here as well? We may not like the things they do and we may not agree with them but to think that God cannot destroy the people that he created that go against him is foolish. If you believe that he wants you to do these deeds for him as a testament to your faith/loyalty you are an extremist and you're trying avoid the narrow path to heaven and you're attempting to make your own path. No matter who our God is we believe he our decisions we make during our times of trial is how we will be judged. Does your God really want you to take the lives of evildoers or does he reserve that right on judgement day? If you're doing these things to gain your God's favor does he not also NOT favor those who go against him? Then by the same way he judges you on your good deeds he judges them on their bad deeds. So why is it your duty to judge/destroy those who you think go against your God? It's not. It's Blasphemous to believe you are to judge/punish wrongdoers. This is what this whole Christian vs. Muslim thing is about. When it comes right down to it we've got to figure out how to co-exist peacefully. We have to realize that no matter what religion or race we are all brothers and sisters and were put here to coexist, not hate and kill. How about we start trying to get in the narrow passage rather than trying to make our own?

[lordvader129]

QUOTE(jha'dhur @ Jun 15 2006, 07:22 AM)

No I just dont believe you. And it is contradictory to christianity.

 

well if you dont believe me read muhammad's farewell sermon here
http://en.wikipedia....Farewell_Sermon

and how does that contradict christianity?

QUOTE

All mankind is from Adam and Eve

sounds christian to me

QUOTE

an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over a white

love thy neighbor anyone?

QUOTE

except by piety and good action.

anyone who says "holier-than-thou attitudes arent christian never met a fundementalist, lol

[jha'dhur]

QUOTE(damam @ Jun 15 2006, 11:49 AM)

who's playing semantics and word games?  

You want to start inserting words that arent there fine:  
 
where does it say the descendants of Japeth were not there in the household as well?

I am not reading any "and behold the lord sayeth kick out the white dudes and leave them uncircumsized"

If you are going to tell the story and claim to be a follower of the words then tell the "truth"

They arent mentioned much from Ark until time of christ.

And having been to the great pyramid and seen the drawings of the pharoah, (made by the ancient peoples of the region) I find it highly contradictory that Charton Heston could have passed for the son of a Pharoah..

Why are you so fascinated with Saul/Paul. Why was he to be the beacon to the uncircumsised gentiles.

Why is the story of an asian-like woman moving to France (to live amongst foreigners) with her christ's son so ridiculous.

I guess she flew over on the Concord.

[afruff23]

As a Muslim, I am not very surprised at these stereotypes.

-Allah is God. We do not believe Jesus as God(only as a prophet). We do not believe in the Holy Trinity. We believe in one and only one God(Allah).

-The 5 pillars are good. One says there is one God and Muhammad is his messenger. Two says to pray. Three says to give to the poor. Four says to go to Hajj pilgrimmage to Mecca(if one is able to). Five says to fast during the month of Ramadan. How does this prevent one from being a patriot?

-The political part has nothing to do with Islam as a religion. Those are radicals. Iran(my native country) has a good reason to not like the US since they interfere so much in their politics in the past as a previous poster said. The so-called annihilation of Israel means that the state of Israel should have never existed in the first place. How would you like if somebody came and threw you out of your home?

-The beating of the women is not that simple. The women has to be given several warnings, and even when she is hit, it should be a non injury-sustaining blow(i.e. light slap).Taken from here:

"[4:34] The men are made responsible for the women, and GOD has endowed them with certain qualities, and made them the bread earners. The righteous women will cheerfully accept this arrangement, since it is GOD's commandment, and honor their husbands during their absence. If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then (you may use negative incentives like) deserting them in bed, then you may (as a last alternative) beat them. If they obey you, you are not permitted to transgress against them. GOD is Most High, Supreme.

At first glance this verse may appear as if promoting physical abuse of women. But when reading 4:34 carefully one realizes that it actually prohibits abuse and beating of women by using the best psychological approach. "

These supposed women-beaters do not follow the Qur'an corectly. They resort to violence quickly. As someone who gre up in a Muslim family(where my parents argue constantly), I can say nobody in my family has hit their spouse.

-Don't all religions say that people should follow them? This is a very weak argument.

-No part of the Constitution(to my knowledge) contradicts Islamic beliefs.

-Umm...there is freedom of religion even in the most strict coutnries(such as Iran). I've been to synagogues in Iran and Churches. Freedom of expression is existent in a true Islamic state(i.e. not any current ones), as long as it does not depict any holy figures(i.e. prophets or Allah) or any obscene materials(i.e. nudity).

-Iran is a so-called democracy(even though I don't believe so). A true Islamic governemnt would not be democratic, since it would follow the Qur'an. In this aspect you are right; Islam cannot coexist with a democracy. By Islamic beleif, democracy is not right. Islamic law is kept in place to prevent people from doing wrong things(take Roe v. Wade, abortion is legal; a public policy decision whcih would only happen in a democracy; by Islamic law abortion is illegal since it is the killing of innocent humans).

-Allah is never referred to as a father because that implies Allah has a son, whcih is not true under Islam. Two names are "al-rahman' and "al-rahim" which means "most gracious, msot merciful". There are many other names that refer to Allah in a loving manner. Again, Allah is the one and only God (no holy trinity).

-Islam is the fastest growing religion. Shouldn't that count for smething? You most often see people convert to Islam, rather than the other way around. This point is weak however, since majority rule is not always right.

[damam]

QUOTE(afruff23 @ Jun 15 2006, 08:14 AM)

-The beating of the women is not that simple. The women has to be given several warnings, and even when she is hit, it should be a non injury-sustaining blow(i.e. light slap).Taken from here:

"[4:34] The men are made responsible for the women, and GOD has endowed them with certain qualities, and made them the bread earners. The righteous women will cheerfully accept this arrangement, since it is GOD's commandment, and honor their husbands during their absence. If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then (you may use negative incentives like) deserting them in bed, then you may (as a last alternative) beat them. If they obey you, you are not permitted to transgress against them. GOD is Most High, Supreme.

At first glance this verse may appear as if promoting physical abuse of women. But when reading 4:34 carefully one realizes that it actually prohibits abuse and beating of women by using the best psychological approach. "

These supposed women-beaters do not follow the Qur'an corectly. They resort to violence quickly. As someone who gre up in a Muslim family(where my parents argue constantly), I can say nobody in my family has hit their spouse.

all i can say is wow . . .
first, I am glad that none of the husbands in your family has hit there wives.
but you are still defending it to a degree saying there are instances where it is appropiate.  I cant believe anyone would defend something that supports marital abuse of any type.
"They resort to violence quickly." <- as opposed to what?  In due time?  As a last alternative?
A husband should NEVER  resort to violence. EVER!!!!

QUOTE(afruff23 @ Jun 15 2006, 08:14 AM)

-Umm...there is freedom of religion even in the most strict coutnries(such as Iran). I've been to synagogues in Iran and Churches. Freedom of expression is existent in a true Islamic state(i.e. not any current ones), as long as it does not depict any holy figures(i.e. prophets or Allah) or any obscene materials(i.e. nudity).

kind of . . . but certainly not to the extent that most Americans imply from the words "Freedom of Religion".  Dont believe me, ask the bahai's or evangelicals.  
WIKI: Status of religious freedom in Iran