But again, I make no excuses for our mistakes, I am just saying things get messy when you jump into bed with folks outside of your circles.

Sure. And all I’m saying is that it doesn’ t have to be that way.

Either way, it does not change the point in the slightest.

Not at the moment. But in 25 years, most of this will be died down.

How do- mosques deal with Imams in that sort of situation, I am sure you do not just fiore them, are they like judges once there it is hard to get rid of them? My question is based on even if bin Salman does change a great deal in the following years, how long will these existing Imams linger?

Depends who’s paying their salaries. If they’re being paid from overseas and bin Salman cuts off the money, not long.

All of their neighbors have rejected them, the only reason Muslim Nations show them any support at this point is they are killing the hated Jews.

The terrorists arent’ a nation. And this is why they also advocate for the overthrow of what they consider to be corrupt M.E. rulers (which is pretty much all of them.)

No, that is the only real point, Palestinians started a war with the Jews with the only intent to take their land and if possible kill every jew currently drawing breath, they lost that war, do you not believe losing a war you started must have some consequences?

Obviously there are consequences. That said, the Israelis could have all the security they want and still treat them with some modicum of dignity. They choose not to.

This is an issue of human rights, and in the West, we generally agree that even criminals should be treated with some modicum of dignity. Even in matters of war, we agreed to the Geneva Convention that governed our behavior towards POW’s. If the Israelis decide that they have to occupy the West Bank and Gaza for their own security, that’s fine with me. Certainly it can be said that the Palestinians have invited that occupation by their belligerent actions.

That said, you can choose to treat an occupied territory and its people humanely, or not. The Israeli’s do not, and it cannot be argued that they do.

My point is everyone is giving the muslims a free pass on their bounty system because Muslims killing Jews is considered normal, and you dodged my question, how would a similar bounty to kill Muslims be received by Muslims, the world, and the UN?

I’m not giving them a free pass. I think that any “bounty” system is abhorrent, and I would like to think that all governing bodies would think so as well.

But all those same groups never condemn Muslims for having their bounty?

I never heard of any “bounty” system, so I can’t comment on what groups have or have not done.

I’d have to disagree. Understanding is a rational function. Sympathizing is an emotional reaction. Two entirely different things, in my view.

No0t really, look at the American Black Lives Matter group, they have millions of supporters and top level politicians showing them support and not a single claim they make about cops hunting Black people is true.

Not seeing how we’re disagreeing there.

If Muslims feel oppressed, then according to the Quran they are supposed to fight using “any stratagem of war” are they not?

No. A masjid in Tucson has a good page on this:

Where did I ever use the word Government? I clearly said societies, you know, the people.

I thought I used the term “legal”, implying a court system, implying government.

And Government can also sanctions these be havios by turning a blind eye to them right? You did not see a team of Government representatives rush in and stop any of these things now did you? As I said, I have thousands of examples if you need them, the fact is beheadings and stonings etc do happen, no matter if they are directly sanctioned by the government?

My original contention was that the GOVERNMENTS, outside of Arabia, no longer practice stonings and beheadings. That is a fact that anyone can Google. They are still LEGAL in some of these countries, but the judges no longer levy these punishments.

From there, you;re speculating…..what? That in an ungoverned region of one of these countries (in Pakistan south of Afghanistan, for example, there is very little government presence, if any) that is still ruled basically by tribal councils, that these penalties could be levied and executed by a tribal elder? Sure, it’s possible. In general, with Iran kind of being an exception, these countries quite often have provinces where the people care more about the tribal government than the real one. That’s neither unusual nor surprising; and in the absence of government, who knows?

And who believes anything Iran has to say? But them telling judged to “refrain” from imposing stoning sentences is not the same thing as banning them now is it?

So, you’re now speculating that the government looked the other way? Well, anything’s possible. Your point?

Again, you seem to bending over backwards to not admit honor killings are in fact part of Muslim society, why?

No. I am insisting on a distinction you appear unwilling to make, that being the difference between a SOCIETAL practice and the TEACHINGS OF THE RELIGION.

You are attacking me for things I never said why exactly? I never said just the Quran was causing all the evil, it is certainly one element but what have I mentioned the most? I have pointed out the Imams have I not? Why do you have to be dishonest about my points?

Nothing dishonest about it. You;re falling into what is to me a very familiar pattern of somebody who comes with a loaded rhetorical gun wanting to verbally shoot ’em some Muzzlims.

At the center of this rhetorical gun is the insistence that the reason some Muslims do heinous acts must be because the religion teaches that the heinous act is acceptable.

That’s simply not true.

Yes, there are some very horrible things in the Bible, but we don’t have anyone preaching those things and we do not have millions of Christians acting on those teachings blowing up school busses and crashing planes into buildings killing thousands of people now do we?

Imagine, if you will, that in the period between Constantine and the Reformation, the Church had school buses and airplanes to use against nonChristians.

Would there have been much difference?

Point here is that Christianity went from a period of religious purity to a religion of war and oppression (a period which lasted 1300 years, btw) back to religious purity. Islam is following the same path, only we’re in the war and oppression stage now. The good news is that it’s probably not going to take 1300 years to get it fixed.

So the point is not what the Quran teaches Kady, the only thing that matters is how people are practicing Islam. And for a great number of them, they are doing very bad things.

If that reasoning existed in the Middle Ages, Christianity would not exist today. Christianity emerged from its mess largely because Wycliffe flipped off the Pope and translated the Bible. For the first time, the people could read Scripture for themselves, and it didn’t take them too long before they realized that some of their religions leadership was full of shit.

So, this is why literacy in the Muslim world is so important today, literacy is about at the 60% level, up from absurdly low just a generation before. With literacy comes the ability to read for yourself. And as soon as you can read for yourself, you’re no longer dependent on some cleric reading to you and telling you what it means.

I asked you some questions on how you viewed some things like honor killings and you went into protection made as if admitting there is such a thing as honor killings was somehow hurting you on a personal level.

Not at all. The fact is that honor killings are a feature of tribal society, not just Islam. They occur in the Sikh communities, the Hindu communities, and in Southeast Asia. What “hurts me on a personal level” is people who fail to acknowledge the breadth of this heinous practice and try to represent it as an Islamic religious practice.

It is not permitted in Islam, period. It;s murder.

I am sorry the truth has upset you

Oh, please. Truth never upsets me.

especially when you claimed it was more likely the guy learned to behead women from American television, that was just ridiculous.

It;s not ridiculous at all. It’s just that you hadn’t considered it, realized that yea, the guy was in Pakistan for 17 of his 56 years, and pull some “well, that was common practice in Pakistan back then” BS out of your hat. :-)

It proves it is still part of the culture, my original point.

As long as you leave the word “Islamic” out of that, we have no quarrel.

No it is not a fact.

I;m sorry, but it is. If you have a degree in Islamic jurisprudence, I;ll defer, but not otherwise.

Honor killings are not permitted in the religion of Islam. Period.

other cultures have abandoned it but for some reason it has lingered with Muslims, why I have no clue, this is why I was looking to you for some insight but all you have done is pretend it was never a part of Muslim society and we both know that is a foolish claim.

I said nothing of the sort. I have been very consistent in saying (a) that it is not an acceptable RELIGIOUS practice under Islam. It is murder. The question as to (b) why SOME Muslims continue to hold to it and believe it is an acceptable religious practice is an entirely different question that as a born American I am not qualified to answer. I suspect it’s because of some combination of factors such as (c ) the relative isolation of some communities, (d) the lack of education on the part of some of the rural clerics, (e) the lack of communications facilities in a medieval-styled society, (f) the traditional lack of literacy, and then there’s of course (g) where they wanted to do the killing anyway, knew it was wrong, and just used religion for cover.

Data Driven Econophile. Muslim, USA born. Been “woke” 2x: 1st, when I realized the world isn’t fair; 2nd, when I realized the “woke” people are full of shit.

Data Driven Econophile. Muslim, USA born. Been “woke” 2x: 1st, when I realized the world isn’t fair; 2nd, when I realized the “woke” people are full of shit.