What's new

Stop violence against Christians in Karnataka

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think you know much about Islam, or its history.

Lets just say that I know enough to bust the hollow claims of fanbois.


You were the one that said the blasphemy law is legally mandated in Pakistan, & I just showed you that legal mandates means little when no one in the government is made accountable for their killing of thousands of minorities. So there's no flame baiting on my end.

There is a difference and you know it.
 
For others, Islam is what Muslims do. Especially if they do it in the name of Islam.

There has never been another way.

For others, India is also a place where people do all kinds of things I don't want to talk about on this thread. Does it mean their practices equate to Hinduism? No.
 
Should India even be considered a real democracy if it's freedom of speech and religion are restricted, is it even a real democracy now?

freedom of speech,ever heard of the guy name zakir naik,he says all things against hinduism or induces them to join islam
he has his own tv channel with many other such non hindu preaching religious channels
same is the case with christian
and religion are not restricted in india,if that was the case there wont be any muslims,christians in india
 
I don't think you know much about Islam, or its history.



You were the one that said the blasphemy law is legally mandated in Pakistan, & I just showed you that legal mandates means little when no one in the government is made accountable for their killing of thousands of minorities. So there's no flame baiting on my end.

---------- Post added at 10:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 AM ----------



It's not what I'm claiming, it's what Islamic sources & Islam is claiming.

Muslims can practice whatever they want, their actions do not equate to Islam. Just like Hitler killing millions of Jews does not equate to the actions of Christianity.

Because Hitler didn't use the pretext of Christianity at killing Jews, did he? He used racial supremacist theory which makes him a racist.
 
For others, India is also a place where people do all kinds of things I don't want to talk about on this thread. Does it mean their practices equate to Hinduism? No.

If they do those uncouth things and get away hiding behind Hinduism, then offcourse blame goes to Hinduism.
 
Because Hitler didn't use the pretext of Christianity at killing Jews, did he? He used racial supremacist theory which makes him a racist.

People can claim whatever they want, as long as their actions don't have anything to do with that religion, it is meaningless. The Europeans came to America & killed all the native Americans in the name of God & religion as well, did their actions equate to the teachings of Christianity? No.
 
For others, India is also a place where people do all kinds of things I don't want to talk about on this thread. Does it mean their practices equate to Hinduism? No.

Abir answered it.

If things are done in the name of Hinduism, it would be to blame.

If things are done for political reasons, politics would be to blame.

But why compare a "final and perfect" thing to others? It should be able to stand on its own merit.

No?

---------- Post added at 11:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:20 AM ----------

People can claim whatever they want, as long as their actions don't have anything to do with that religion, it is meaningless. The Europeans came to America & killed all the native Americans in the name of God & religion as well, did their actions equate to the teachings of Christianity?No.

Yes, it did.

Its not about just claims, it is about the reality that those deeds were actually inspired by religion or not.

If yes, religion can't escape the blame.
 
People can claim whatever they want, as long as their actions don't have anything to do with that religion, it is meaningless. The Europeans came to America & killed all the native Americans in the name of God & religion as well, did their actions equate to the teachings of Christianity? No.

off course christianity played it's role there and in many other things, that's the whole reason behind separating church from state.
 
Its not about just claims, it is about the reality that those deeds were actually inspired by religion or not.

If yes, religion can't escape the blame.

How can something like terrorism be inspired by religion when God says that killing of one innocent person regardless of religion equals to that of the entire humanity? How can the actions of a few lunatics be inspired by religion when God says only defensive warfare is allowed, & the killing of innocent children, women & old men is not allowed in any circumstance; only the people directly engaged in the war?
 
It's not what I'm claiming, it's what Islamic sources & Islam is claiming.

Muslims can practice whatever they want, their actions do not equate to Islam. Just like Hitler killing millions of Jews does not equate to the actions of Christianity.

You mean this ?

Narrated 'Abdullah:

Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."
Link

"Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:83:17

"Whoever changed his (Islamic) religion, then kill him" Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:84:57


Narrated Ikrima:

Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' Sahih al-Bukhari, 4:52:260 "

Narrated Abu Burda:

Abu Musa said, "I came to the Prophet along with two men (from the tribe) of Ash'ariyin, one on my right and the other on my left, while Allah's Apostle was brushing his teeth (with a Siwak), and both men asked him for some employment. The Prophet said, 'O Abu Musa (O 'Abdullah bin Qais!).' I said, 'By Him Who sent you with the Truth, these two men did not tell me what was in their hearts and I did not feel (realize) that they were seeking employment.' As if I were looking now at his Siwak being drawn to a corner under his lips, and he said, 'We never (or, we do not) appoint for our affairs anyone who seeks to be employed. But O Abu Musa! (or 'Abdullah bin Qais!) Go to Yemen.'" The Prophet then sent Mu'adh bin Jabal after him and when Mu'adh reached him, he spread out a cushion for him and requested him to get down (and sit on the cushion). Behold: There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu'adh asked, "Who is this (man)?" Abu Muisa said, "He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism." Then Abu Muisa requested Mu'adh to sit down but Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice. Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, "Then we discussed the night prayers and one of us said, 'I pray and sleep, and I hope that Allah will reward me for my sleep as well as for my prayers.'" Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:84:58
 
off course christianity played it's role there and in many other things, that's the whole reason behind separating church from state.

No, the role of Christians in power who interpreted Christianity in a certain way played its role there. If Christianity the religion itself had played the role, then Christianity would have been banned from America completely. It is not.
 
Abir answered it.

If things are done in the name of Hinduism, it would be to blame.

If things are done for political reasons, politics would be to blame.

But why compare a "final and perfect" thing to others? It should be able to stand on its own merit.

No?

---------- Post added at 11:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:20 AM ----------



Yes, it did.

Its not about just claims, it is about the reality that those deeds were actually inspired by religion or not.

If yes, religion can't escape the blame.

these answers are given many times yet again the same question and logic is repeated..can't help it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom