Sharia law vs. Christian law

by Charlatan Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:07 am

First topic message reminder :

This is what divides the world. Only in north and south america is this topic not really important, but the rest of the world fights tooth and nail over this. If we could find a happy medium, then there would be nearly global peace! So off we go to find the meeting point...

I find that abrahamic laws are pretty societal. If we take away from them, well we could lose out with divorce or whatever that is, and in the opinion of world peace it is pretty hard to make people worship god. Other than that it must remain, but could we add to it for these countries? I wouldn't be surprised if in London some happy go lucky bomber targets markets or something, so we need to 'get sharia law in' to 'keep it out.' If there are enough sharia law places then there will be no world terror, i figure - well not in these proportions.

What do we know about sharia law? Does it say you must kill? Does it say you must steal? Does it upset society? It does none of these things, so what is wrong with it??? People are fighting in north africa and he middle east, with concern coming from europe and eastern asia. The muslims have spread far and wide, and where they are impoverished they will not sell out on religion to the abrahamic laws only. The best thing to do is get more information on how to give the people this. It happens in iran and saudi arabia at least. Maybe a thing to consider would be why are the poor so willing to fight for what they believe in?

The poor often have little to do with luxury. The more luxury you have the less you fight! You see this in america too, at least, where the republicans are usually the poorer people an are also very religious. Could it be that money breeds sin? Surely not... right?

If we were to look at this from a psychological stand point, we would observe that poor people have less to be happy with, but, have the time to spend with family, strangely. For some reason they have a happy family typically when in the rural areas. Would it be that demolishing all churches would satisfy this need for peace? I hope not, let's get back to the psyche? If the person who has less loves more, then maybe there should be more wealth distribution. This will occupy the minds of all these rural people and then they would be happier, distanced from their loved ones. I understand also that families in the middle class have a lot of love, but time spent with them is less compared to the rural people. What is it about being impoverished that makes people think their lives are not worth anything, and the lives of others are also not worth anything?

Maybe what is needed is a lot of love? Imagine a radio station that is tuned to gospel music all day long? This simple luxury could be what is missing in the lives of the rural people. I know in my country south africa they go madd for gospel in the rural areas, so why not try that in other muslim areas? Al jazeer is still in business, so they must support local stuff. Imagine a muslim radio station that plays muslim worship songs all day long. Think how important the music is to people that go to concerts and watch mtv, buy cds and go to night clubs or trendy restaurants to listen to music? Music must be the way to get to these people and relax and soothe them...

So is it a case of sharia vs. abrahamic laws? Is it that simple, or are the people not exposed to enough of their desire to feel with god at all times? I guarantee you that feeling as if god is with them more they will relax more, dance more, feel better.

But now it is a politcal thing! The west wants to 'domesticate' the east. The problem with that is that there is already a identity that exists out there in the outback, and that it wants to remain there. I am sure with some gospel music there would be great strides forwards.

by bambu Fri Mar 30, 2012 10:48 pm

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-05-17/muslim-group-wants-sharia-law-in-australia/2717096

Muslim group wants sharia law in Australia

May 17, 2011 21:49:00

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils wants Muslims to be able to marry, divorce and conduct financial transactions under the principles of sharia law.

In a submission to the Federal Parliament's Committee on Multicultural Affairs, the Federation has asked for the change.

It argues that all Australians would benefit if Islamic laws were adopted as mainstream legislation.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/sharia-law-at-work-in-australia/story-fn59niix-1226097889992

Sharia law at work in Australia

SHARIA law has become a shadow legal system within Australia, endorsing polygamous and underage marriages that are outlawed under the Marriage Act.

A system of "legal pluralism" based on sharia law "abounds" in Australia, according to new research by legal academics Ann Black and Kerrie Sadiq.

They have found that Australian Muslims have long been complying with the shadow system of religious law as well as mainstream law.

But in family law, not all Muslims were registering their marriages and some were relying on religious ceremonies to validate unions that breached the Marriage Act.

....... marriages", in which a man takes multiple wives, and marriages where one party is under the lawful marriage age.

Their research, which will be published on Monday in the University of NSW Law Journal, says that the wider community has been "oblivious to the legal pluralism that abounds in this country".

#####

They just do as they please, and the 'cultural Marxists' in govt 'let' them.

by oftenwrong Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:02 pm

RockOnBrother wrote:
oftenwrong wrote:
It was not until 1924 that general agreement was reached on the currently accepted version of the Koran.

I don’t know how true that is.....

Then here's a text which may help you to decide how true it is, RoB ....

http://www.quran.org.uk/articles/ieb_quran_elmasry.htm

by bambu Sat Mar 31, 2012 1:25 am

"You can never stop Isslam, you will never ever stop it."

12m 20sec along.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHnQtyT064M

60 Minutes EDL and Oz

'But here in Britain a large number of Muslims make no secret of the fact that an Islamic state is their ultimate goal'

'No multiculturalism in Islam'.

#####

There should be no multiculturalism in the 'Christian' West either.

by polyglide Sat Mar 31, 2012 11:22 am

Which just goes to show what a right old mess we humans, of whatever calling or leanings, have made of the potential at or finger tips.

by polyglide Sat Mar 31, 2012 11:23 am

Which just goes to show what a right old mess we humans, of whatever calling or leanings, have made of the potential at or finger tips.

by Shirina Sat Mar 31, 2012 11:24 am

polyglide wrote:Which just goes to show what a right old mess we humans, of whatever calling or leanings, have made of the potential at or finger tips.

It is a bit of a waste, isn't it. We always seem to focus on the wrong things ... money, power, consumerism, social climbing, etc. There's so much more to life than that.

by oftenwrong Sat Mar 31, 2012 1:57 pm

"There's so much more to life...."

Indeed there is. Political debate in England right now centres upon whether we should pay 20% tax on a HOT sausage Roll, or wait until it gets cold and pay no tax.

Serious business.

by trevorw2539 Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:56 pm

oftenwrong wrote:
RockOnBrother wrote:
oftenwrong wrote:
It was not until 1924 that general agreement was reached on the currently accepted version of the Koran.

I don’t know how true that is.....

Then here's a text which may help you to decide how true it is, RoB ....

http://www.quran.org.uk/articles/ieb_quran_elmasry.htm

Interesting article but from a Radical Moslem.

Mohamed Elmasry is a respected Moslem in Canada, but like most Moslems, prone to exaggeration in his claims for Arab history,etc. and manipulation of facts. He is also a radical. He claimed on TV that Israeli youths age 18 and up are legitimate targets because 'they are not innocents'. He had to apologise and promise not to do it again. He has not kept that promise. He supports verbally Hammas. Iran etc.

But then Christianity is not immune from exaggeration:)

by oftenwrong Sat Mar 31, 2012 5:28 pm

There are a number of people worldwide who support Hamas.

"Hamas devotes much of its estimated $70 million annual budget to an extensive social services network. Indeed, the extensive social and political work done by Hamas--and its reputation among Palestinians as averse to corruption--partly explain its defeat of the Fatah old guard in the 2006 legislative vote. Hamas funds schools, orphanages, mosques, healthcare clinics, soup kitchens, and sports leagues. "Approximately 90 percent of its work is in social, welfare, cultural, and educational activities," writes the Israeli scholar Reuven Paz. The Palestinian Authority often fails to provide such services, and Hamas' efforts in this area--as well as a reputation for honesty, in contrast to the many Fatah officials accused of corruption--help to explain the broad popularity it summoned to defeat Fatah in the PA's recent elections."

http://www.cfr.org/israel/hamas/p8968#p6

by ROB Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:59 pm

oftenwrong wrote:
RockOnBrother wrote:
oftenwrong wrote:
It was not until 1924 that general agreement was reached on the currently accepted version of the Koran.
I don’t know how true that is.....
Then here's a text which may help you to decide how true it is, RoB ....

http://www.quran.org.uk/articles/ieb_quran_elmasry.htm

Thank you for the article, OW. Insofar as I can discern, there is nothing in the article that addresses a 1924 general agreement on the currently accepted version of the Qur’an.

However, this is interesting:

“… as the Koran states that the free choice of faith is a God- given human quality which must be respected” (part 2).

“The Koran taught the early Muslims the true meaning of (and how to exercise) tolerance, love, mercy, justice, peace… equality…” (part 4, paragraph 2).

“For example, no other religion makes it a duty for its adherents to tolerate and respect the faith of everyone else, whatever their belief” (part 4, paragraph 7).

What is the Koran? A view from within. Professor Mohamed Elmasry. Retrieved 31 March 2012 from http://www.quran.org.uk/articles/ieb_quran_elmasry.htm

Quite a contrast to the Australian “Muslim” in the videos. Also a contrast to Professor Mohamed Elmasry’s statements as testified to by Trevor.

by ROB Sat Mar 31, 2012 7:02 pm

oftenwrong wrote:
There are a number of people worldwide who support Hamas.

There are a number of people worldwide who support extermination of Jews and annihilation of Israel.

by oftenwrong Sat Mar 31, 2012 7:40 pm

There are a number of American Citizens who support the Prime Minister of Israel in defiance of The President of the United States.

Isn't that Treason?

by Shirina Sat Mar 31, 2012 7:46 pm

Isn't that Treason?

Not really. Treason would only apply if a person was collaborating with a known enemy of the USA, and Israel is not an enemy. Now, if a person were violating laws, either civil or military, by, say, spying for Israel, treason might apply. Simply cheering for another nation isn't considered treason. As far as I know, there are no sedition laws currently in effect.

by trevorw2539 Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:04 pm

by oftenwrong Today at 5:28 pm

There are a number of people worldwide who support Hamas.

I don't. I support with a great deal of respect the work they do among the population. I suspect, though can't prove, that the 'neutrals' who support them, actually feel as I do. I don't like the military aspect. And I add, neither do I like the Israeli intransigence.

I would have more respect for the man if he didn't make claims for Arab influence on our present day world. Undoubtedly they did have an effect and our present world is better for it. But some of the claims he makes in other works are simply do not stand up.
The Koran is a mishmash of Biblical stories, adapted for the Koran, and 'myths' taken from the Bible, which took them from earlier myths. But then, as I understand it from a Muslim adherent, the world was 'created' Muslim and has been from the very beginning.

But then, what do I know.

Moderator. If you feel I've overstepped the mark with my last paragraph please feel free to delete. I don't want to give offense to anyone.

by ROB Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:29 pm

oftenwrong wrote:
There are a number of American Citizens who support the Prime Minister of Israel in defiance of The President of the United States.

Isn't that Treason?

There are a number of American citizens who support the non-negotiable external and internal security of Israel in agreement with President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama Jr.

That’s morality.

by bambu Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:43 am

Shirina wrote:
Isn't that Treason?
Not really. Treason would only apply if a person was collaborating with a known enemy of the USA, and Israel is not an enemy. Now, if a person were violating laws, either civil or military, by, say, spying for Israel, treason might apply. Simply cheering for another nation isn't considered treason. As far as I know, there are no sedition laws currently in effect.

It is in the court of public opinion in some places;

Don't want to sing the national song?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQBlnwrffAg

Don't want to cheer and singalong with the "bagpipes, tin whistle, and violin"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SW5cECZx8k0

Don't want to sing the national anthem?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOdi7VLtYMs

Wanna wave foreign flags and cheer against any national teams?
Good luck, if the patriots find out...'cast out' you could easily be. [probably not a good idea to put a foreign flag in your shop window during the Soccer World Cup for example.]
In USA, UK, or anywhere else.

by ROB Mon Apr 02, 2012 9:35 pm

oftenwrong wrote:
Isn't that Treason?

Shirina wrote:
Simply cheering for another nation isn't considered treason.

bambu wrote:
It is in the court of public opinion in some places; [/color]

My name is John Q. Public; thus, I am a jury member of the Court of Public Opinion. I vote “not guilty.” The jury’s deadlocked at best.

bambu wrote:
Wanna wave foreign flags and cheer against any national teams?
Good luck, if the patriots find out...'cast out' you could easily be. [probably not a good idea to put a foreign flag in your shop window during the Soccer World Cup for example.]
In USA, UK, or anywhere else.

It’s not a good idea to march en masse on a Texas street while waving a certain foreign flag, either. That happened a few years back during the W. Bush-era immigration law row. In Houston and Dallas, huge crowds marched through downtown streets waving Mexican flags and shouting “Viva La Raza!”

Didn’t sit too well with Texans. Individuals of different ethnicities and different political parties that were bound only by their precious Texas citizenship voiced extreme displeasure at the sight and sound.

IF one wants to march in Texas, it’s a good idea to wave a Lone Stars over one’s head and shout “Remember the Alamo!” while doing so.

by oftenwrong Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:12 pm

If everyone around you simultaneously slips on a banana skin - Don't laugh!

by bambu Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:44 pm

RockOnBrother wrote:
bambu wrote:
Shirina wrote:

Isn't that Treason?
Simply cheering for another nation isn't considered treason.
It is in the court of public opinion in some places; [/color]

My name is John Q. Public; thus, I am a jury member of the Court of Public Opinion. I vote “not guilty.” The jury’s deadlocked at best.

bambu wrote:
Wanna wave foreign flags and cheer against any national teams?
Good luck, if the patriots find out...'cast out' you could easily be. [probably not a good idea to put a foreign flag in your shop window during the Soccer World Cup for example.]
In USA, UK, or anywhere else.

It’s not a good idea to march en masse on a Texas street while waving a certain foreign flag, either. That happened a few years back during the W. Bush-era immigration law row. In Houston and Dallas, huge crowds marched through downtown streets waving Mexican flags and shouting “Viva La Raza!”

Didn’t sit too well with Texans. Individuals of different ethnicities and different political parties that were bound only by their precious Texas citizenship voiced extreme displeasure at the sight and sound.

IF one wants to march in Texas, it’s a good idea to wave a Lone Stars over one’s head and shout “Remember the Alamo!” while doing so.

Crikey!
Many in America, seemingly from the Left, will tell you in US forums, that Mexico/ans once owned the South West and the "La Reconquista" of those states is all just fine and dandy, just Mexico/ans taking back their stolen lands.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5Ite9iqOi8&feature=related

'Americans Stole Our Land' - AZ Senator Reads Shocking Letter from Teacher

by ROB Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:19 am

RockOnBrother wrote:
It’s not a good idea to march en masse on a Texas street while waving a certain foreign flag, either. That happened a few years back during the W. Bush-era immigration law row. In Houston and Dallas, huge crowds marched through downtown streets waving Mexican flags and shouting “Viva La Raza!”

Didn’t sit too well with Texans. Individuals of different ethnicities and different political parties that were bound only by their precious Texas citizenship voiced extreme displeasure at the sight and sound.

IF one wants to march in Texas, it’s a good idea to wave a Lone Stars over one’s head and shout “Remember the Alamo!” while doing so.

bambu wrote:
Crikey!
That would make you a racist, bigot and xenophobe according to the majority in America, Left-Democrats, from what I can see, judging by all the 'immigration reform' disciples I meet in US forums.

Nope. That would make me a Texan.

bambu wrote:
They'll tell you, as they do me in the forum [containing 'exiles' from the NYT forums that were closed]...escapefromelba... 'Immigration' ...that Mexico/ans once owned the South West and the "La Reconquista" of those states is all just fine and dandy, just Mexico/ans taking back their stolen lands.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5Ite9iqOi8&feature=related

'Americans Stole Our Land' - AZ Senator Reads Shocking Letter from Teacher

We kicked Santa Anna’s butt in 1836, and if we ever find any more foreign troops waving that foreign flag over the Great Sovereign State of Texas, it will be butt-kicking time again.

So states a Texan. No worries.

by bambu Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:01 am

RockOnBrother wrote:
bambu wrote:
RockOnBrother wrote:
It’s not a good idea to march en masse on a Texas street while waving a certain foreign flag, either. That happened a few years back during the W. Bush-era immigration law row. In Houston and Dallas, huge crowds marched through downtown streets waving Mexican flags and shouting “Viva La Raza!”

Didn’t sit too well with Texans. Individuals of different ethnicities and different political parties that were bound only by their precious Texas citizenship voiced extreme displeasure at the sight and sound.

IF one wants to march in Texas, it’s a good idea to wave a Lone Stars over one’s head and shout “Remember the Alamo!” while doing so.
Crikey!
That would make you a racist, bigot and xenophobe according to the majority in America, Left-Democrats, from what I can see, judging by all the 'immigration reform' disciples I meet in US forums.

Nope. That would make me a Texan.

bambu wrote:
They'll tell you, as they do me in the forum [containing 'exiles' from the NYT forums that were closed]...escapefromelba... 'Immigration' ...that Mexico/ans once owned the South West and the "La Reconquista" of those states is all just fine and dandy, just Mexico/ans taking back their stolen lands.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5Ite9iqOi8&feature=related

'Americans Stole Our Land' - AZ Senator Reads Shocking Letter from Teacher

We kicked Santa Anna’s butt in 1836, and if we ever find any more foreign troops waving that foreign flag over the Great Sovereign State of Texas, it will be butt-kicking time again.

So states a Texan. No worries.

This time they're not sending troops...they're just taking over peacefully, appeased and worshipped by the Left it sure seems to be.
Their leaders have even said it publicly, no fear.

http://www.americanpatrol.com/CCIR/MolinaObledoCCIR.html

....... ........ Los Angeles City Council "They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over. . We are here to stay."

Excelsior- The national newspaper of Mexico "The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."

Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General We are practicing "La Reconquista" in California."

#####

Texas is also falling to the takeover.
One only has to look in the schools.

The 8th graders in that school in the link above that their teacher sent the letter about...lol..........ilk will no doubt be arriving in Texas schools soon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ikOZ0HJOSM

Texas School Suspends Student for Removing Mexican Flag on cinco de mayo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-r0-WIYzUA

by Shirina Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:18 am

Many in America, seemingly from the Left, will tell you in US forums, that Mexico/ans once owned the South West and the "La Reconquista" of those states is all just fine and dandy, just Mexico/ans taking back their stolen lands.

The Mexicans got their land the same way the Americans did ... by right of conquest. Do you think the Aztecs spoke Spanish before the Conquistadors arrived?

Excelsior- The national newspaper of Mexico "The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."

This newspaper is just being stupid ... a lot of misguided patriotic zeal. Do you really think that tens of millions of Mexicans fled their home country and crossed into the US legally or illegally -- just so they could return the southwestern US states back to the very same country they tried so hard to leave? Does that REALLY make sense to you? Mexico is in chaos. It is impoverished. It is corrupt. The Mexican-Americans have no desire for their states to fall under the jurisdiction of the Mexican government just so they can screw them up just like they have screwed up Mexico.

And look what happened the last time states tried to separate from the US. Does "Sherman's March" mean anything to you?

You're falling for Mexican propaganda.

by ROB Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:07 am

Shirina wrote:
Mexico is in chaos. It is impoverished. It is corrupt.

A true story.

A good while back, I met a fellow in grad school whose name I cannot remember. I’ll call him Stan. American USV medical schools were “all booked up”, so he attended a Mexican med school, in a small town the name of which I also cannot remember.

Along with a native Mexican roommate, he rented a second story apartment within walking distance of the campus. One morning, the American student got into a row with the Mexican student. Nothing physical, but angry words were exchanged.

The American then left to attend classes.

During an afternoon break, he walked back to the apartment to find his belongings scattered on the street in front of the apartment’s balcony. He walked upstairs and entered the apartment, where his Mexican roommate, who had arrived minutes before, told him that he, the roommate, had tossed the American’s stuff over the balcony.

The American called the police. When the police arrived, they took a report and arrested the American.

The American student’s crime? Calling the police on El Padrone’s son. You just don’t accuse El Padrone’s son of violating any law in El Padrone’s town.

The American was jailed. He was allowed a phone call, which he used to call his parents in the United States.

The American student’s parents immediately went to the Mexican town, bribe money at the ready, only to find that their son had been transferred to another jail just before their arrival. It took the parents six months and thousands of bribe dollars to finally catch up with their son. Of course, they had to bribe their son’s current jailers to get him released into their custody.

Against Mexican police orders, the three fled Mexico in a hurry.

That’s Mexico awhile back. It’s exponentially worse today.

Just thought of this.

Australia is blessed to have no land borders with corrupt countries. If Aussies choose, they can confine their out-of-country travels to their cross-Tasman Sea neighbors.

I thank God for the existence of The Land Down Under.

I also thank God, literally, for Canada, a great blessing in humble clothing. While Mexico has been not so covertly and vainly plotting to retake what was never theirs to own in the first place, Canada has been aiding the UK, Oz, and NZ to hold the fort from September 1939 to December 1941, joining these nations and Johnny-come-lately America in defeating Nazism, fascism, and Japanese imperialism, and, since WWII, sending Canadian troops throughout the world to spread peace and democracy.

by bambu Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:32 am

RockOnBrother wrote:
Shirina wrote:
Mexico is in chaos. It is impoverished. It is corrupt.

A true story.

A good while back, I met a fellow in grad school whose name I cannot remember. I’ll call him Stan. American USV medical schools were “all booked up”, so he attended a Mexican med school, in a small town the name of which I also cannot remember.

Along with a native Mexican roommate, he rented a second story apartment within walking distance of the campus. One morning, the American student got into a row with the Mexican student. Nothing physical, but angry words were exchanged.

The American then left to attend classes.

During an afternoon break, he walked back to the apartment to find his belongings scattered on the street in front of the apartment’s balcony. He walked upstairs and entered the apartment, where his Mexican roommate, who had arrived minutes before, told him that he, the roommate, had tossed the American’s stuff over the balcony.

The American called the police. When the police arrived, they took a report and arrested the American.

The American student’s crime? Calling the police on El Padrone’s son. You just don’t accuse El Padrone’s son of violating any law in El Padrone’s town.

The American was jailed. He was allowed a phone call, which he used to call his parents in the United States.

The American student’s parents immediately went to the Mexican town, bribe money at the ready, only to find that their son had been transferred to another jail just before their arrival. It took the parents six months and thousands of bribe dollars to finally catch up with their son. Of course, they had to bribe their son’s current jailers to get him released into their custody.

Against Mexican police orders, the three fled Mexico in a hurry.

That’s Mexico awhile back. It’s exponentially worse today.

Just thought of this.

Australia is blessed to have no land borders with corrupt countries. If Aussies choose, they can confine their out-of-country travels to their cross-Tasman Sea neighbors.

I thank God for the existence of The Land Down Under.

I also thank God, literally, for Canada, a great blessing in humble clothing. While Mexico has been not so covertly and vainly plotting to retake what was never theirs to own in the first place, Canada has been aiding the UK, Oz, and NZ to hold the fort from September 1939 to December 1941, joining these nations and Johnny-come-lately America in defeating Nazism, fascism, and Japanese imperialism, and, since WWII, sending Canadian troops throughout the world to spread peace and democracy.

And of course it was the US that basically saved my pretty young mom from becoming a Japanese laundry slave, sex slave, or worse...and saved the whole of Australia from enslavement.
'The Battle of The Coral Sea' etc.

Aha, Her Majesty's Canada;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pE4Y4JhcE58&feature=related
Queen of Canada Salutes Canadian Navy Centenary 2010- Sky News

______________________________________________
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Your grad school friend's experience is a perfect lesson as to why it's a very bad idea to ever set foot in Mexico.
Mexican med school or not.

by ROB Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:03 am

Lest you forget: Aussies and Kiwis were involved from day one. The cruiser fleet that chased the Graff Spee into Montevideo Harbor included a ship whose name started with “HMNZS.” Port Moresby ground troops were Aussies, Yankees, and I believe a few Kiwis. Aussie pilots flew in the RAF and USAAC from Europe to Burma to New Guinea.

by bambu Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:04 am

Shirina wrote:
Many in America, seemingly from the Left, will tell you in US forums, that Mexico/ans once owned the South West and the "La Reconquista" of those states is all just fine and dandy, just Mexico/ans taking back their stolen lands.
The Mexicans got their land the same way the Americans did ... by right of conquest. Do you think the Aztecs spoke Spanish before the Conquistadors arrived?
Excelsior- The national newspaper of Mexico "The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."
This newspaper is just being stupid ... a lot of misguided patriotic zeal. Do you really think that tens of millions of Mexicans fled their home country and crossed into the US legally or illegally -- just so they could return the southwestern US states back to the very same country they tried so hard to leave? Does that REALLY make sense to you? Mexico is in chaos. It is impoverished. It is corrupt. The Mexican-Americans have no desire for their states to fall under the jurisdiction of the Mexican government just so they can screw them up just like they have screwed up Mexico.

And look what happened the last time states tried to separate from the US. Does "Sherman's March" mean anything to you?

You're falling for Mexican propaganda.

No. I believe they're out to take over America and turn it into a new 'Mexico' under their control.
Take all the jobs in America from Americans and for themselves, legally and illegally, any way possible.

Here are Biden, Pelosi and co in action...it all looks very cosy to me:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YobJc5cnk68
Mexican President Calderon Asks Congress to Pass Immigration Reform

by bambu Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:18 pm

RockOnBrother wrote:
Lest you forget: Aussies and Kiwis were involved from day one. The cruiser fleet that chased the Graff Spee into Montevideo Harbor included a ship whose name started with “HMNZS.” Port Moresby ground troops were Aussies, Yankees, and I believe a few Kiwis. Aussie pilots flew in the RAF and USAAC from Europe to Burma to New Guinea.

I could go on, but you should get the picture.

Another picture;

Oprah and her Ultimate Viewers, trip downunder 2010;

Brandy from Missouri, setting foot in the sea for the first time...in the Coral Sea Australia where her countrymen turned the tide against Japan.
The significance of it was not lost on me.

American ladies sure had fun on the beach that day! Smile

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ckj6BGp83l0

by polyglide Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:01 pm

It is an unfortunate fact that any set of laws brought about by man are for one purpose only, to control the vast majority of the population and usually to allow the ruling bodies to take advantage at every opportunity to further their own ends.

You cannot satisfy the majority of people in the more affluent countries never mind the poor ones.

The world getting smaller has not helped, prior to many countries becoming aware of the wealth and living conditions of the better off nations, thought their way of life was IT.

Many now feel they should have a better life [and why not?]

I doubt if there is one country in which the majority of the population are satified with their lot in life and yet the differences in the standard of living between the best and the worst is unbelievable.

It is the fact that in all societies there are those who want more than all the others and therefore you will never get a satisfactory means of government that will work without strong safeguards to ensure compliance
and that is not government by consent but by enforcement.

The only method that would work is by compliance with the rules God given.
.

by bambu Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:20 pm

polyglide wrote:It is an unfortunate fact that any set of laws brought about by man are for one purpose only, to control the vast majority of the population and usually to allow the ruling bodies to take advantage at every opportunity to further their own ends.

You cannot satisfy the majority of people in the more affluent countries never mind the poor ones.

The world getting smaller has not helped, prior to many countries becoming aware of the wealth and living conditions of the better off nations, thought their way of life was IT.

Many now feel they should have a better life [and why not?]

I doubt if there is one country in which the majority of the population are satified with their lot in life and yet the differences in the standard of living between the best and the worst is unbelievable.

It is the fact that in all societies there are those who want more than all the others and therefore you will never get a satisfactory means of government that will work without strong safeguards to ensure compliance
and that is not government by consent but by enforcement.

The only method that would work is by compliance with the rules God given.
.

So basically say the Westboro Baptists and their 'Christian law' ideas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church#Views_on_homosexuality

Their views on homosexuality are partially based on teachings found in the Old Testament, specifically Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, which they interpret to mean that homosexual behavior is detestable, and that homosexuals should be put to death, respectively.[63]

______________________
********************

Sounds like the "All homosexuals should be stoned to death" Muslim brigade in Britain:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1163510/All-homosexuals-stoned-death-says-Muslim-preacher-hate.html

All homosexuals should be stoned to death, says Muslim preacher of hate

All homosexuals should face stoning to death, a Muslim preacher of hate declared yesterday.
Anjem Choudary, the firebrand cleric who wants to see Britain ruled by Sharia law, said such a regime was the only way to fix the country's ills.
Under it, adulterers and homosexuals would be killed by stoning. Asked if that would include anybody - even a Cabinet minister such as Business Secretary Lord Mandelson - Choudary responded with an astonishing diatribe.

Hate, hate and more hate: Anjem Choudary (centre), flanked by two cohorts, prepares to give a press conference on Friday in which he says homosexuals should be stoned to death.

#####

Looks like homosexuals in Britain are doomed, as the number of Sharia law courts in Britain pass the 100 mark, and Buckingham Palace is well on the way to becoming a mosque...as the Sharia takeover lot desire.

The Westboros launched a vicious tirade at Heath Ledger immediately after his untimely death, stating that he was already in hell, for acting in Brokeback Mountain.
Shirley the spokeperson was interviewed on the no1 radio station in Sydney www.2gb.com global on the net, [Americans email and sometimes phone the talkback line] by Alan Jones, the no 1 radio host.
She said her group was coming to kangarooland to protest at and disrupt Heath's funeral.
The patriots were outraged.

Shirley and co never made it to Australia...maybe they heard what the talkback callers had to say after Shirley's interview. Smile

by oftenwrong Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:43 pm

It's a funny old world, isn't it?

by bambu Wed Apr 04, 2012 12:04 am

oftenwrong wrote:It's a funny old world, isn't it?

It is, but only as funny as one is prepared to allow it to be...in one's own backyard.

You get what you put up with.
Put up with it, and you'll likely get a whole lot more of it.

The EDL, Britain First, other groups like them, and their supporters, are no longer prepared to put up with it.

by Shirina Wed Apr 04, 2012 5:45 am

The only method that would work is by compliance with the rules God given.

Which God?

And which rules?

In order to have freedom OF religion, one must also have freedom FROM religion.

by **astradt1** Wed Apr 04, 2012 10:51 am

Interesting that this thread is called 'Sharia law vs. Christian law' and then we get posts directing us to the HEBREW part of the bible not the CHRISTIAN part.............

Should the thread title be changed???

by Shirina Wed Apr 04, 2012 11:31 am

Leviticus 20:13 speaks of a consequent disciplinary action, i.e., punishment, for those who engage in that specific behavior. Please read:

So if we're supposed to be running around murdering homosexuals for doing what comes naturally for them, why aren't we butchering oxen every month for a burnt offering?

Come to think of it, there sure does seem to be a lot of butchering, burning, murdering, stoning, and smiting going on in the Old Testament.

In fact, neither text mentions hate towards a person at all.

One would have to harbor a certain amount of hate ... or blind fanaticism ... or sociopathy ... (or all three) in order to look a friend, family member, or neighbor in the eye just before bashing his skull in with a rock.

by **astradt1** Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:30 pm

RockOnBrother wrote:
astradt1 wrote:
Interesting that this thread is called 'Sharia law vs. Christian law' and then we get posts directing us to the HEBREW part of the bible not the CHRISTIAN part.............

Should the thread title be changed???

“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (Y’shua Moshiach, recorded in Matthew 5:17-19).

Thanks Roc, for the confirmation that there is no such thing as Christian Law just Hebrew and Islamic Law......

Can we now have the thread title changed from the current Islamophobic one?

by Shirina Wed Apr 04, 2012 5:00 pm

I stand ready to discuss and/or discourse upon the texts of Leviticus 20:13 and/or Leviticus 18:22.

I know what they say, Rock.

And everyone is going to have their own interpretation.

However, the OT asks average, ordinary people to become murderers and executioners of their own family and friends should they commit even certain trivial crimes. That much is not in doubt. If Jesus came to fulfill these laws, which you contend, then we become no better than the society which buried a 16 year-old girl up to her neck and pummeled her to death with rocks.

by Shirina Wed Apr 04, 2012 7:03 pm

I’ll do so with you if you wish; just let me know.

I'm listening.

by trevorw2539 Thu Apr 05, 2012 3:55 pm

If a person chooses to not trust in God and keep his commandments, Jesus teaches his disciples to teach the person again, seven times seventy times if necessary, in other words, indefinitely.

Sharia law vs. Christian law - Page 4 Dessin_anime_101

RockOnBrother
Moderator

Posts: 1407
Join date: 2011-10-07

Sharia law vs. Christian law - Page 4 Empty

70 times 7 refers to forgiveness, Matt. 18 v 21-22.

Your Bible is obviously different to mine. 1 Tim 2:3-4 refers to v 1-2. If it is in context of the whole chapter, and Pauls claim to be 'an ordained preacher, and an apostle, a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity' then we must accept that his teaching on the subjection of women is part of the knowledge of the truth, and God's will. I don't think that would go down well in society today.

Though I agree with much you say concerning the 'fulfilling' of the Law, I would suggest that Christ actually 'extends' the Law. The Ten Commandments are concerned, in the main, with man's/woman's outward appearance. Christ brings it to include the inward appearance.

If this is what you are trying to say in your post, OK. I agree.

Your quote. He does not teach his disciples to condemn.

But he himself does. Matthew 23. (the woe chapter) (32-33) 'Fill up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents. Ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell'.

Revelations 2 & 3.

Over Capernaum, Chorazin, Bethsaida.

by Shirina Thu Apr 05, 2012 4:06 pm

So we’ll start here:

At least that cleared up the mixed signals you were sending in regards to Hebrew law. It really did seem as though you were advocating we return to the Bronze Age complete with stonings, slavery, and burnt offerings.

by oftenwrong Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:21 pm

Maya Law involved priests tearing out the hearts of sacrificial victims, which probably stopped a lot of argument.

by trevorw2539 Thu Apr 05, 2012 6:10 pm

oftenwrong wrote:Maya Law involved priests tearing out the hearts of sacrificial victims, which probably stopped a lot of argument.

Origin of the term 'Don't lose heart'? Smile

by Sponsored content