4 ms·

While I don't disagree that his comment is inappropriate, this has nothing to do with radicals. It's simply http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia http://en.wikipe

by meritt 12y ago

While I don't disagree that his comment is inappropriate, this has nothing to do with radicals. It's simply http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia which is used for criminal law in a number of countries including Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

Alupis 12y ago
Sharia doesn't define kidnapping, 6+ years of imprisonment + torture and fake confessions. That is radical.
- stickfigure 12y ago
  This sounds similar to arguments that Nazism doesn't define the wholesale slaughter of jews. But if you take that philosophy to its logical conclusion, it's hard to see how you wouldn't end up there. That systems of law based on thoughtcrime tend to get violent should not be a surprise to anyone.
  - Alupis 12y ago
    Careful with your analogy - recall your history here, Nazism does not define "wholesale slaughter of jews", they were a political party. Majority of the Nazi party, military, and regime had no clue about the "wholesale slaughter of jews" until after the war. Most knew about the imprisonment, similar to the internment camps here in the US during the war, but the actual executions were kept very down-low. Of the ones that did know about the executions en mass, majority had issue with it, and famously some officers defected, some tried to assassinate Hitler, and some were themselves imprisoned for not cooperating and going along. The point is, just because there are a few who use their religion, affiliations, or power to drive forward an agenda, does not mean the entire mass thinks or feels the same way.
    - stickfigure 12y ago
      This point has been rehashed by historians pretty endlessly already, and the general consensus seems to be that while most Nazis may not have been directly aware of the full horror perpetrated by their regime, their culpability can be fairly compared to "will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" You don't have to scratch your head too hard wondering how an ideology based on hatred and persecution turned into genocide. Or why it keeps happening in the world today, just the names of the groups change. Systems of law based on thoughtcrime get ugly, since there's no way to prove thoughtcrime except torture, fear, and arbitrary violence. See: the Inquisition, any communist state in the 20th century, anywhere in the world that Sharia law is enforced.
- imaginenore 12y ago
  Sharia actually prescribes death (which is exactly what they are planning on doing with that developer) in the case of insulting Islam and/or "prophets". A direct quote from the Islamic website: "The scholars are unanimously agreed that a Muslim who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) becomes a kaafir and an apostate who is to be executed. This consensus was narrated by more than one of the scholars, such as Imaam Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad, al-Khattaabi and others. Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/13-16" http://islamqa.info/en/22809 http://islamqa.info/en/22809 You just got brainwashed by the Islam's PR department. Every time they do something violent in the name of their religion, they come out in droves and sing their "it's just a tiny minority of extremists" song.
lucio 12y ago
Honest question to the muslims here: 1. is this accurate? 2. is this "the law"? 3. is this "the law" of the State in Iran? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Freedom_of_thought.2C_conscience_and_religion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Freedom_of_thought.2C_co...

by meritt 12y ago

Alupis 12y ago

Sharia doesn't define kidnapping, 6+ years of imprisonment + torture and fake confessions. That is radical.

stickfigure 12y ago
This sounds similar to arguments that Nazism doesn't define the wholesale slaughter of jews. But if you take that philosophy to its logical conclusion, it's hard to see how you wouldn't end up there. That systems of law based on thoughtcrime tend to get violent should not be a surprise to anyone.
- Alupis 12y ago
  Careful with your analogy - recall your history here, Nazism does not define "wholesale slaughter of jews", they were a political party. Majority of the Nazi party, military, and regime had no clue about the "wholesale slaughter of jews" until after the war. Most knew about the imprisonment, similar to the internment camps here in the US during the war, but the actual executions were kept very down-low. Of the ones that did know about the executions en mass, majority had issue with it, and famously some officers defected, some tried to assassinate Hitler, and some were themselves imprisoned for not cooperating and going along. The point is, just because there are a few who use their religion, affiliations, or power to drive forward an agenda, does not mean the entire mass thinks or feels the same way.
  - stickfigure 12y ago
    This point has been rehashed by historians pretty endlessly already, and the general consensus seems to be that while most Nazis may not have been directly aware of the full horror perpetrated by their regime, their culpability can be fairly compared to "will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" You don't have to scratch your head too hard wondering how an ideology based on hatred and persecution turned into genocide. Or why it keeps happening in the world today, just the names of the groups change. Systems of law based on thoughtcrime get ugly, since there's no way to prove thoughtcrime except torture, fear, and arbitrary violence. See: the Inquisition, any communist state in the 20th century, anywhere in the world that Sharia law is enforced.
imaginenore 12y ago
Sharia actually prescribes death (which is exactly what they are planning on doing with that developer) in the case of insulting Islam and/or "prophets". A direct quote from the Islamic website: "The scholars are unanimously agreed that a Muslim who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) becomes a kaafir and an apostate who is to be executed. This consensus was narrated by more than one of the scholars, such as Imaam Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad, al-Khattaabi and others. Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/13-16" http://islamqa.info/en/22809 http://islamqa.info/en/22809 You just got brainwashed by the Islam's PR department. Every time they do something violent in the name of their religion, they come out in droves and sing their "it's just a tiny minority of extremists" song.

lucio 12y ago

Honest question to the muslims here: 1. is this accurate? 2. is this "the law"? 3. is this "the law" of the State in Iran? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Freedom_of_thought.2C_conscience_and_religion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Freedom_of_thought.2C_co...