NationStates Jolt Archive

There was another thread that went back and forth about whether or not the Saudi government discriminates against Christians. The main thing lacking in the discussion was some proof one way or the other. Anyhow, at the risk of arousing some intense feelings, let me present the case

Although considered as holy in Islam and mentioned in the Quran dozens of times, the Bible is banned in Saudi Arabia. This would seem curious to most people because of the fact that to most Muslims, the Bible is a holy book. But when it comes to Saudi Arabia we are not talking about most Muslims, but a tiny minority of hard-liners who constitute the Wahhabi Sect.

The Bible in Saudi Arabia may get a person killed, arrested, or deported. In September 1993, Sadeq Mallallah, 23, was beheaded in Qateef on a charge of apostasy for owning a Bible. The State Department's annual human rights reports (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2004/41731.htm) detail the arrest and deportation of many Christian worshipers every year. Just days before Crown Prince Abdullah met President Bush last month, two Christian gatherings were stormed in Riyadh. Bibles and crosses were confiscated, and will be incinerated. (The Saudi government does not even spare the Quran from desecration. On Oct. 14, 2004, dozens of Saudi men and women carried copies of the Quran as they protested in support of reformers in the capital, Riyadh. Although they carried the Qurans in part to protect themselves from assault by police, they were charged by hundreds of riot police, who stepped on the books with their shoes, according to one of the protesters.)

Let's look at some excerpts from the 2004 report:

c. Freedom of Religion

The Government does not provide legal protection for freedom of religion and such protection did not exist in practice. Freedom of religion did not exist. Islam is the official religion, and the law provides that all citizens must be Muslims.

The Government prohibited the public practice of non-Muslim religions. In general, non-Muslims are able to worship privately, but must exercise great discretion to avoid attracting attention. Conversion by a Muslim to another religion was considered apostasy. Apostasy is a crime under Shari'a and, according to the Government's interpretation, is punishable by death. On October 31, a citizen was arrested in Hofuf and jailed. International NGO and local media reports claimed that he had converted to Christianity. No further information on him or his case was available at year's end.

...

There were reports that Christians were detained for practicing their religion. During the year, there were scattered raids, arrests, and detentions of Christians throughout the country, although fewer than in the past. In February, the Government deported a resident Christian after he provided an Arabic Bible to a citizen. In November, the Government deported an Indian Christian arrested in April. There were credible reports that Mutawwa'in arrested him for religious reasons after a dispute with his employer. According to other reports, the Mutawwa'in beat him on the day of the arrest and confiscated his personal property, including two Bibles, compact disks, a personal computer, and religious videos.

The Government did not officially permit non-Muslim clergy to enter the country for the purpose of conducting religious services, although some came under other auspices. Such restrictions made it very difficult for most non-Muslims to maintain contact with clergymen and attend services. Catholics and Orthodox Christians, who require a priest on a regular basis to receive the sacraments required by their faith, particularly were affected.


It goes on and on. Certainly, on the face of it, this is pretty good evidence that the Saudi government is far less considerate of Christians that the US government is of Muslims. What of it? I guess Christians are better off here.

I'm no fan of the Saudi regime. They use their oil wealth to spread their oppressive and violent form of Islam worldwide. The blame for 9/11 rests on them.

Yay one religion is using a government to impose its views and discriminate on another suprize suprize :rolleyes:

I'm no fan of the Saudi regime. They use their oil wealth to spread their oppressive and violent form of Islam worldwide. The blame for 9/11 rests on them.

My thoughts exactly.

Who gives a rat's ass what the Saudi government does?

Well, when the Bin Laden family has major influence in an already screwed up Monarchy/Dictatorship, what can you expect?

Who gives a rat's ass what the Saudi government does?
People like me who live in places that the people they've brainwashed have attacked in the past and might attack in the future. I blame them for attacking my people and I'd like to make sure it doesn't happen again, by whatever means necessary.

Who gives a rat's ass what the Saudi government does?
No one except the international press. And the folks that like to present the worst of America to the rest of the world.

The Saudis have been very critical of our alleged desecration of the Koran. Apparently, that's a very hypocritical position for them to take.

People like me who live in places that the people they've brainwashed have attacked in the past and might attack in the future. I blame them for attacking my people and I'd like to make sure it doesn't happen again, by whatever means necessary.

Well then maybe instead of attacking Iraq, Afghanistan, and every other Muslim country on the planet, we should attack Saudi, eh?

Eh?!

But nooooooooo ... can't do that, now, can we?

by whatever means necessary.

But don't you think our troops dying for some damned Arab countries is a little too far, damn human rights groups! We should just drop an anthrax bomb on the area.

The Saudis have been very critical of our alleged desecration of the Koran. Apparently, that's a very hypocritical position for them to take.

The Saudis are critical of a woman wearing short sleeves. I wouldn't take them too seriously.

Well then maybe instead of attacking Iraq, Afghanistan, and every other Muslim country on the planet, we should attack Saudi, eh?

Eh?!

But nooooooooo ... can't do that, now, can we?
I agree. We had no business going into Iraq when Saudi Arabia is just as oppressive and funds global terrorism. Why weren't they mentioned in the "axis of evil" speech? Oh, right, because the hous of Saud and the Bush family are buddies.

But don't you think our troops dying for some damned Arab countries is a little too far, damn human rights groups! We should just drop an anthrax bomb on the area.


No no no no no no no no NO.

There is nothing wrong with the Saudi people, only the Saudi government. Don't slaughter millions of innocents based on the actions of a few morons.

But don't you think our troops dying for some damned Arab countries is a little too far, damn human rights groups! We should just drop an anthrax bomb on the area.
Not for some arab country. To stop the spread of the Wahabi terrorist ideology.

In my opinion invasion of Saudi Arabia would have been more justified than invasion of Iraq.

Not saying that it's necessarily justified, but most of the 9/11 hujackers were saudi's, the saudi royal family supports terrorist groups, and are responsible for human rights abuses that make anything Saddam did look like nothing.

I agree. We had no business going into Iraq when Saudi Arabia is just as oppressive and funds global terrorism. Why weren't they mentioned in the "axis of evil" speech? Oh, right, because the hous of Saud and the Bush family are buddies.

Nod ... I find it really strange, but I guess Bush can't be bombing his friends. Just think of how cheap gas would be in the US if we took over Saudi, though. Practically free!

Maybe that's the problem ....

Who gives a rat's ass what the Saudi government does?
Oh, I don't know...the Saudis?

No no no no no no no no NO.

There is nothing wrong with the Saudi people, only the Saudi government. Don't slaughter millions of innocents based on the actions of a few morons.

by "area" I don't neccessarily mean cities like Mecca, Medina, or whatnot, just enough dropped into the places where those morons live and work.

Oh, I don't know...the Saudis?

Meh ... that's like saying the average American cares what the US government does. Most don't. Voter turn out proves that every 2 years.

Duh. This information is well known.

Nod ... I find it really strange, but I guess Bush can't be bombing his friends. Just think of how cheap gas would be in the US if we took over Saudi, though. Practically free!

Maybe that's the problem ....

Maybe i've misinterpreted the whole stuff, but, wouldn't the bulk of the muslism in the world go crazy if the US would start an attack on Saudi Arabia? OTOH, i know a lot of people who already are crazy, so, it doesn't exactly matter... :p

Nod ... I find it really strange, but I guess Bush can't be bombing his friends. Just think of how cheap gas would be in the US if we took over Saudi, though. Practically free!

Maybe that's the problem ....
Nah, we're addicted to sweet light crude. Saudi doesn't produce that. That's why we buy so much of our oil from Venezuela instead.

It goes on and on. Certainly, on the face of it, this is pretty good evidence that the Saudi government is far less considerate of Christians that the US government is of Muslims. What of it? I guess Christians are better off here.

Another interesting note is the US government installed the Saudi regime.

Nah, we're addicted to sweet light crude. Saudi doesn't produce that. That's why we buy so much of our oil from Venezuela instead.

Right-right. Us Olde Yuropians get a good part of our oil from Saudi Arabia...

Another interesting note is the US government installed the Saudi regime.

Wrong. The U.S. never installed any Saudi government. It was the British.

Maybe i've misinterpreted the whole stuff, but, wouldn't the bulk of the muslism in the world go crazy if the US would start an attack on Saudi Arabia? OTOH, i know a lot of people who already are crazy, so, it doesn't exactly matter... :p

Saudi Arabia? No.

Indiscriminately bombing Mecca? Yes. Even I would take up arms on that one.

Meh ... that's like saying the average American cares what the US government does. Most don't. Voter turn out proves that every 2 years.
I'm sure any Saudi Christians do care. They may be in a tiny minority, but I doubt they like being discriminated against.

I'm sure any Saudi Christians do care. They may be in a tiny minority, but I doubt they like being discriminated against.

Are there any Saudi Christians at all? That would surprise me.

Saudi Arabia? No.

Indiscriminately bombing Mecca? Yes. Even I would take up arms on that one.
True, as long as our tanks dont go near their holy sites or our troops dont enter any mosques, very few Muslims will be pissed.

I'm sure any Saudi Christians do care. They may be in a tiny minority, but I doubt they like being discriminated against.

If there are any Saudi Christians, they should move. That would be my advice.

It's like all those American Christians bitching because they can't go to Mecca. Like they have some God given right to go wherever they please.

Are there any Saudi Christians at all? That would surprise me.
I don't know if there are, but there are christians working in Saudi, and some of them are being held against their will. I've read that Phillipino and Indonesian guest workers sometimes have their passports confiscated by their employers to prevent them leaving when they find out the job they were promised pays only pennies compated to the wage they were promised. Many of those guest workers are christians and some have been imprisoned for their beleifs.

If there are any Saudi Christians, they should move. That would be my advice.

It's like all those American Christians bitching because they can't go to Mecca. Like they have some God given right to go wherever they please.
Oh, how tolerant. Really. People have a right to practice what religion they want to in what place they want to. What does it bother the government if some people have a different faith?

True, as long as our tanks dont go near their holy sites or our troops dont enter any mosques, very few Muslims will be pissed.


Exactly. Notice what turned the tide in Iraq ... what made the average Iraqi citizen start taking up arms against the insurgents? The day a group of insurgents bombed a mosque. In Islam, waging war in a mosque is a detestable violation. Once the insurgents did that, they proved they were not defending Islam, but only their self-serving interests and all Muslim men were called to stop the insurgency.

True, as long as our tanks dont go near their holy sites or our troops dont enter any mosques, very few Muslims will be pissed.
Of course the Wahabbi clerics will shelter fighters and terrorists in their mosques, so we will have to go in.

Oh, how tolerant. Really. People have a right to practice what religion they want to in what place they want to.

Actually, no they don't. Freedom of religion is a right granted by governments. Non-Muslims are not permitted in Mecca. That's just the way it is. We don't want Christian preaching in our holy place any more than a Christian would want me teaching Islam in their church.

Exactly. Notice what turned the tide in Iraq ... what made the average Iraqi citizen start taking up arms against the insurgents? The day a group of insurgents bombed a mosque. In Islam, waging war in a mosque is a detestable violation. Once the insurgents did that, they proved they were not defending Islam, but only their self-serving interests and all Muslim men were called to stop the insurgency.

It scares me though that people are so violent... :(

yeah but remember how pissed the Iraqis got for one little bullet hole in their Golden Mosque thing. Now multiply that by thirty, and you have a hell of a lot of Muslims with AK-47's standing outside of that mosque waiting for you.

Of course the Wahabbi clerics will shelter fighters and terrorists in their mosques, so we will have to go in.

If they do, then they can be declared apostate. Sheltering terrorists in a mosque is forbidden by Islam. The house of God is meant to be a peaceful place. We're not even allowed to talk about war in the mosque.

It scares me though that people are so violent... :(

Well that's people for ya.

Sheltering terrorists in a mosque is forbidden by Islam. The house of God is meant to be a peaceful place. We're not even allowed to talk about war in the mosque.

Apparently, some people don't seem to have a problem with that. :(

Apparently, some people don't seem to have a problem with that. :(

True ... some people don't ... but they're wrong.

Actually, no they don't. Freedom of religion is a right granted by governments. Non-Muslims are not permitted in Mecca. That's just the way it is. We don't want Christian preaching in our holy place any more than a Christian would want me teaching Islam in their church.
I think I'm going to disagree about that. I've seen churches turned over to Jewish congregations without a lot of "sanitizing". It all depends on the level of tolerance and common sense that the congregation possesses. The five-a-day prayers might cramp the Thursday and Sunday services, but I certainly believe that there are congregations that allow Muslims to have the use of their churches. You'd be surprised how far Christian tolerance goes.

If they do, then they can be declared apostate. Sheltering terrorists in a mosque is forbidden by Islam. The house of God is meant to be a peaceful place. We're not even allowed to talk about war in the mosque.
When so many muslim cultural centers, mosques, and madrassas around the world are bankrolled by the Saudis, and headed by Saudi trained religious scholars you can bet they won't label the fighters hiding in the mosques apostates. They'll call for all Muslims to fight the invaders.

but I certainly believe that there are congregations that allow Muslims to have the use of their churches

Aye ... but not when they're using them. If it's an empty building, sure, but they don't want their children tainted by blasphemous faiths. Go ahead ... ask a preacher if you can do a ritual goat sacrifice in the vestibule on Sunday morning.

When so many muslim cultural centers, mosques, and madrassas around the world are bankrolled by the Saudis, and headed by Saudi trained religious scholars you can bet they won't label the fighters hiding in the mosques apostates. They'll call for all Muslims to fight the invaders.

Very few of the world's mosques are bankrolled by the Sauds. The giant cathedral like ones, to be sure, but that's about the extent of it.

Of course they'll call for all Muslims to fight the invaders. They called for all Muslims to fight the Americans in Iraq. It didn't work, did it?

Aye ... but not when they're using them. If it's an empty building, sure, but they don't want their children tainted by blasphemous faiths. Go ahead ... ask a preacher if you can do a ritual goat sacrifice in the vestibule on Sunday morning.
Okay, I didn't realize you were offering to participate in a dinner on the grounds.

Aye ... but not when they're using them. If it's an empty building, sure, but they don't want their children tainted by blasphemous faiths. Go ahead ... ask a preacher if you can do a ritual goat sacrifice in the vestibule on Sunday morning.
I don't think that ritual goat sacrifices (something I am sure most christian ministers, or leaders of any religion for that matter, would violently object to) really compares to what we're talking about here.

Very few of the world's mosques are bankrolled by the Sauds. The giant cathedral like ones, to be sure, but that's about the extent of it.

Of course they'll call for all Muslims to fight the invaders. They called for all Muslims to fight the Americans in Iraq. It didn't work, did it?
This site claims that 80% of mosques in the US are directly funded by the Saudis. That's alot of mosques in the US alone. Considering that Saudi money goes farther in nations like Pakistan it stands to reason that they could build many more mosques and madrassas there for less money.

www.conservativetruth.org/article.php?id=1420

Yes, it's a conservative website. I have seen the same figure elsewhere though.

This site claims that 80% of mosques in the US are directly funded by the Saudis. That's alot of mosques in the US alone. Considering that Saudi money goes farther in nations like Pakistan it stands to reason that they could build many more mosques and madrassas there for less money.
But does that mean that they are partially funded (ie 1% of donations came from Saudi) or are they fully funded by the saudi government? Are the Saudi's just big donators, or are they actually controlling people with their money?

This site claims

Many sites claim a great many things. I tend to avoid the internet as a source for mosque bookkeeping.

I'd also like to point out that mosques have a big box by the door with a slot in it for donations. Completely anonymous donations. I've seen men slip hundreds of dollars in that box. Now, if they're Saudi men, I suppose one could claim Saudi financing .... in a pinch.

Saudi Arabia? No.

Indiscriminately bombing Mecca? Yes. Even I would take up arms on that one.
--------------------------------------------------------------
If there are any Saudi Christians, they should move. That would be my advice.

It's like all those American Christians bitching because they can't go to Mecca. Like they have some God given right to go wherever they please.

Muslim invaders did burn and sack nearly every fire temple in Iran back in the 7th century, including some of the holiest ones. Then they made many Zoroastrians convert at the point of the sword. Think about the US not only burning Mecca to the ground, but also Medina, and every Mosque throughout Saudi Arabia, and not only burning it but also desecrating them, because that is the situation that happened when the Arabs invaded the Sassanid Empire and tried to destroy Persian culture. But anyway, I'm more interested in the other post, perhaps we forget that freedom of religion is sort of a necessary thing?

7th century

'Nuff said.

'Nuff said.

You still probably hold the 11th-13th Century Crusades against the Christians, and certainly if you don't MANY if not the majority of Muslims do. Islamic repression of Zoroastrians continued for quite a while my friend. Just because the Holocaust, were it 1400 years old still not mean the Jews could think the nazis were evil for their crimes?

You still probably hold the 11th-13th Century Crusades against the Christians, and certainly if you don't MANY if not the majority of Muslims do.

No I don't and no they don't.

Actually, no they don't. Freedom of religion is a right granted by governments. Non-Muslims are not permitted in Mecca. That's just the way it is. We don't want Christian preaching in our holy place any more than a Christian would want me teaching Islam in their church.
I'm not referring to Mecca itself. But the entire nation of Saudi Arabia? So what, maybe all Muslims should be expelled from Israel? All non-Christians from the US? That's ridiculous.

I'm not referring to Mecca itself. But the entire nation of Saudi Arabia? So what, maybe all Muslims should be expelled from Israel? All non-Christians from the US? That's ridiculous.

Non-Muslims are allowed in Saudi Arabia, just not Mecca itself. Freedom of religion is something granted by governments. It's not a God given right. Read the Bible ... worshipping other gods gets one smitten ... that's not Freedom of Religion.

Originally posted by: Drunk commies reborn:We had no business going into Iraq when Saudi Arabia is just as oppressive and funds global ism I agree with u on the later part, but as far as I know, the Saudi government has not attempted any ethnic cleansing campaigns recently like Saddam Hussein's regime did. I would classify George Bush as penny-wise and pound-foolish: meaning that hes sometimes adept @ instituting small changes( that no-caller list thing ) but is either led astray by his Cabinet( very likely methinks) or simply just doesn't know foreign policy very well. For example, why in the Lord's name did he feed the entire country bull about nuclear weapons in Iraq?

I think going to Iraq was not morally wrong; as I said before, Kurds were being slaughtered. But we did a simply abysmal job @ handling the logistics. There are dozens of countries in the world today under the heel of psychos like Saddam. Much as we'd like to, we cannot police them all. That really sucks :(

No I don't and no they don't.

How can you speak for all Muslims? Many I know claim Bush is a Crusader.

Non-Muslims are allowed in Saudi Arabia, just not Mecca itself. Freedom of religion is something granted by governments. It's not a God given right. Read the Bible ... worshipping other gods gets one smitten ... that's not Freedom of Religion.

Thats sort of the rule for the three Abrahamic faiths. Cyrus the Great and his successor Darius were both extremley tolerant Zoroastrians.

How can you speak for all Muslims?

How can you?

Cyrus the Great and his successor Darius were both extremley tolerant Zoroastrians.

Great! So what?

Great! So what?

Hmmm, I'm making a connection... Do you see? Islam for most of its history has been forcing itself on everyone at the point of the sword, following their armies. Be the victims Zoroastrians, Christians, Jews, Hindus, or Pagans, armies of Islam have destroyed them and made them Islamic at the point of the sword. Is that not wrong? Cyrus, Darius, and the successive Persian kings were tolerant. One of Cyrus's first acts on conquering Babylon was to free the Jews exiled there and send them home with money to rebuild their temple. Islamic armies, when they conquered Ctesiphon in 637 had the libraries burned, the citizens massacred, women and children enslaved, treasures pillaged, the sacred fire-temples destroyed.

Hmmm, I'm making a connection... Do you see? Islam for most of its history has been forcing itself on everyone at the point of the sword, following their armies.

That's a lie. The majority of the world's Muslims are not now, nor have they ever been Arabic. Indonesia, Africa, Europe, China, Canada and the US were never put at the point of a sword, yet nearly a billion Muslims are in those places combined.

I'm sorry the Persians got the shaft 1400 years ago, but it's not my problem ... or yours, for that matter. Are you Zoroastrian because you believe it, or because you hate Muslims? If it's the latter, become Christian. It would suit you better and you'd have more up to date lies.

Orignally posted by: Keruvalia: Even if the Holocaust were 14000 years old, could the Jews still not think the s were evil for their crimes

OK maybe i paraphrased a little bit but that was the gist of it. That ideology reeks of the same argument that certain anti-Semites use: The Jews crucified Jesus. That means that all Jews are of the same ilk as their predecessors.*








* I'm not trying to point fingers @ anybody for Christ's . But i'm saying some people thinik that

Orignally posted by: Keruvalia: Even if the Holocaust were 14000 years old, could the Jews still not think the s were evil for their crimes

That wasn't posted by me.

That's a lie. The majority of the world's Muslims are not now, nor have they ever been Arabic. Indonesia, Africa, Europe, China, Canada and the US were never put at the point of a sword, yet nearly a billion Muslims are in those places combined.

I'm sorry the Persians got the shaft 1400 years ago, but it's not my problem ... or yours, for that matter. Are you Zoroastrian because you believe it, or because you hate Muslims? If it's the latter, become Christian. It would suit you better and you'd have more up to date lies.

Chinese Muslims, if I am correct, are mostly Turkish groups in Xinjiang (Sp?). Turks and Indonesians were some of the few who joined peacefully. However, Persia and much of India were utterly ransacked and hundreds of thousands if not millions killed. It was, I will admit nothing of the magnitude of the mongols, but still, was horrible.

I am a Zoroastrian because I believe it, and I do not hate Muslims at all.

Christianity has very close ties to Islam. Khadijah's uncle (his first wife) was a Christian, and encouraged The Prophet to spread the word of God as it had been revealed to him through Gabriel. Jesus is highly regarded, and Mary is the only woman mentioned by name in the Qur'an.
My curiosity lies with wether the al-Sauds encouraged this one, or if it is a product of the mutawain, civilians that act like morality police, who belong to the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice. Those guys do not often know the Qur'an very well.

I am a Zoroastrian because I believe it, and I do not hate Muslims at all.

Then why are you blaming us for something a bunch of silly Arabs did 1400 years ago? Can you not stand on your own merits, rather than by attempting to denegrate others?

Tolerant Muslim rulers? How about Umar, Muhammed (peace be upon him), Sulieman the Magnificent (who paid for the Jews and Muslims of Spain, and many Coptic Christians to come to the Ottoman Empire after Iberia fell to the reconquista), and even Salah al-Din (Saldin)? If I recall correctly, all of these men were noted for thier compassion, pity and wisdom. In modern times, how about King Hussein of Jordan???
So don't ragging on Islam and it spreading at the point of the sword, especially after Constantine made Christianity the official religion of Rome. Christianity spread at the point of a sword.

Then why are you blaming us for something a bunch of silly Arabs did 1400 years ago? Can you not stand on your own merits, rather than by attempting to denegrate others?
I'm not, I'm just pointing out there is a history of this sort of behavior displayed from the earliest times. I'm sort of asking Muslims state that they realize that they have done bad things in their history. I ask the same of Christians and other religious groups too. Hell, I'll even admit that Zoroastrian Sassanid Kings pursecuted Christians after Constantine converted which continued off and on until the 550s when they were ended forever. Persia has more than enough merits to stand on, thank you.

Tolerant Muslim rulers? How about Umar, Muhammed (peace be upon him), Sulieman the Magnificent (who paid for the Jews and Muslims of Spain, and many Coptic Christians to come to the Ottoman Empire after Iberia fell to the reconquista), and even Salah al-Din (Saldin)? If I recall correctly, all of these men were noted for thier compassion, pity and wisdom. In modern times, how about King Hussein of Jordan???
So don't ragging on Islam and it spreading at the point of the sword, especially after Constantine made Christianity the official religion of Rome. Christianity spread at the point of a sword.

How about Abu Bakr, Umar, Mahmud Of Ghazni, Tamerlane, or Mehmet II?

I'm not, I'm just pointing out there is a history of this sort of behavior displayed from the earliest times. I'm sort of asking Muslims state that they realize that they have done bad things in their history.

We already know and we already admit it. Where've you been? Do we have to get it tattooed on our foreheads for you to be satisfied?

We already know and we already admit it. Where've you been? Do we have to get it tattooed on our foreheads for you to be satisfied?

No, I'm reasonable, but thank you for that... it's all I needed.

Non-Muslims are allowed in Saudi Arabia, just not Mecca itself. Freedom of religion is something granted by governments. It's not a God given right. Read the Bible ... worshipping other gods gets one smitten ... that's not Freedom of Religion.
Finally, I can tie this back to my original post. The Bible is supposed to be a Holy book to Muslims, right? Why is it that the hard-liners in charge of Saudi Arabia won't permit that Holy book to be read in their country. We're just talking about a variation on Muslim fundamentals, right? Like the difference between Baptists and Methodists.

Finally, I can tie this back to my original post. The Bible is supposed to be a Holy book to Muslims, right?

No.

Torah, yes.
The teachings of Jesus, yes.

The Bible places the writings of Paul and the writings of the Prophets within the same pages as the holy word of God. That is blasphemy.

Freedom of religion is something granted by governments. It's not a God given right. Read the Bible ... worshipping other gods gets one smitten ... that's not Freedom of Religion.

Whoa there. People have the right to believe in what they want. Freedom of religion isnt something granted by the government but a fundemental human right. Just because one faith says that if you worship another god you get smitted(smitten whatever) doesnt mean that its not a fundemental right.

Non-Muslims are allowed in Saudi Arabia, just not Mecca itself. Freedom of religion is something granted by governments. It's not a God given right. Read the Bible ... worshipping other gods gets one smitten ... that's not Freedom of Religion.
Yes. It does get one smitten. But who are we to say which religion is right and which is wrong? You know very well that no religion can be proven or disproven. So how can a government persecute members of a different faith?

Oh, and I know some Non-Muslims are allowed in Saudi Arabia. But I was referencing your point that non-muslims should just move out of Saudi Arabia, which I find ridiculous. Why should it matter what you believe? Are we not all God's children, and are we not all allowed to live on His earth?

Whoa there. People have the right to believe in what they want.

Yes ... but not practice it *whever* they want. There is no right to that.

But I was referencing your point that non-muslims should just move out of Saudi Arabia, which I find ridiculous.

I didn't say non-Muslims, I said Saudi Christians. Big difference. They're not going to change the mind of the King, so they may as well just move if they feel so persecuted. However, until I hear from a Saudi Christian, I will reserve judgement on whether or not they're really persecuted.


Are we not all God's children, and are we not all allowed to live on His earth?

Yes, of course. But hippie and reality rarely go hand in hand. We're allowed to live here, but other people decide where and how.

Yes ... but not practice it *whever* they want. There is no right to that.

Really why not? Why am I not allowed to go into a street and profess whatever belief I want?

Yes ... but not practice it *whever* they want. There is no right to that.
Yes, but banning them from an entire nation is absurd. I understand certain Holy Sites beeing restricted---but calling for a minority religion to move out of a nation because the majority has a different faith (as you did) is absurd.

Non-Muslims are allowed in Saudi Arabia, just not Mecca itself. Freedom of religion is something granted by governments. It's not a God given right. Read the Bible ... worshipping other gods gets one smitten ... that's not Freedom of Religion.

The fact is thought the saudi government invited nearly a million christains into saudi to do jobs that the arabs are too bone idle to do.

It invited this immigration, so it should respect the rights of the people it invited.

(Or are you saying that deep down, at some fundamental level, the BNP has the right idea).

Really why not? Why am I not allowed to go into a street and profess whatever belief I want?

In the US, you are. Knock yourself out. Don't bring it into my home, though. Hence, you don't have the right to do it *everywhere*.

"I say nuke the whole place from orbit...its the only way to be sure." -CPL Hicks from the movie Aliens.

one missle, 20 warheads...bye bye middle east :eek: :sniper:

Yes, but banning them from an entire nation is absurd.

Shrug ... it's not my nation. I don't make the rules. I do have to follow them when I am there, though.

It invited this immigration, so it should respect the rights of the people it invited.


If I invite you into my home, does that give you the right to take a shit on my kitchen floor?

"I say nuke the whole place from orbit...its the only way to be sure." -CPL Hicks from the movie Aliens.

one missle, 20 warheads...bye bye middle east :eek: :sniper:

Don't be an asshole.

Non-Muslims are allowed in Saudi Arabia, just not Mecca itself. Freedom of religion is something granted by governments. It's not a God given right. Read the Bible ... worshipping other gods gets one smitten ... that's not Freedom of Religion.

Last I checked, the only major Religion still into the smiting business was Islam.

Sure, there is the occasional Christian or Hindu nutjob/mob but they in no way compare to the atrocities so called "people" pull off in the name of Islam.

If I invite you into my home, does that give you the right to take a shit on my kitchen floor?

And how does holding private prayer meeting equate to shitting on the kitchen floor? That's ridiculous, and you know it.

In the US, you are. Knock yourself out. Don't bring it into my home, though. Hence, you don't have the right to do it *everywhere*.

Thats you saying dont bring it into your home. That doesnt mean there isnt a fundemental right of freedom of religion. Hell I could make a general comment about someone from a different race not being allowed to come into my house because of their skin color calling them infereor and not equal to me. That doesnt mean that they are in fact infereor. Just because you dont want me to practice a different religion in your home doesnt mean I dont have the right to.

Last I checked, the only major Religion still into the smiting business was Islam.

Ermmm .... no. Only Allah smites. People aren't allowed to. I don't care what a few goniffs choose to do, it doesn't change Islam nor does it cheapen it.

Or can I start going around saying the godhatesfags.com people represent Christendom? I'd dearly love to.

It goes on and on. Certainly, on the face of it, this is pretty good evidence that the Saudi government is far less considerate of Christians that the US government is of Muslims. What of it? I guess Christians are better off here.
I agree, though it's no surprise that the Saudi government are bigoted scum.

People like me who live in places that the people they've brainwashed have attacked in the past and might attack in the future. I blame them for attacking my people and I'd like to make sure it doesn't happen again, by whatever means necessary.
I would say that a war on Saudi Arabia is a good idea, except that it's the stupidest thing America could possibly do. It would surely "prove" to most Muslims that America really was waging a Fourth Crusade against Islam.

And how does holding private prayer meeting equate to shitting on the kitchen floor? That's ridiculous, and you know it.

It does equate. The Sauds are very serious Wahabi Muslims. When you're in Saudi Arabia, you are in the Saud's personal property. To a Wahabi, praying to Jesus - a man - is equal to taking a shit on the floor. It is gross blasphemy.

It equates with perspective. Perspective is important. It is essential to realise that the world doesn't believe as you do. Whether I agree with the Saudi practice is immaterial. It's not my place to change it.

It does equate. The Sauds are very serious Wahabi Muslims. When you're in Saudi Arabia, you are in the Saud's personal property.

Whether I agree with the Saudi practice is immaterial. It's not my place to change it.
?
If you're not ready to die for it, put the word 'freedom' out of your vocabulary.

?

My freedom is not under attack.

My freedom is not under attack.

So if it doesnt affect you you dont have to do anything....

Keruvalia,

So you're in favor of the US doing what ever the hell it wants to Muslims on US soil then.

And how far does that morality extend. Should the US do what ever is its will and within its power anywhere. Or just so with in it's boarders?

So if it doesnt affect you you dont have to do anything....

That's not what I'm saying. However, I'm not going to go wage war and die just so some fat American tourists in hawaiin shirts can take pictures of their tube top clad daughters in front of the Kabbah.

I prefer to side with the freedom for Muslims to have a place to go without having to witness such nonsense.

That's not what I'm saying. However, I'm not going to go wage war and die just so some fat American tourists in hawaiin shirts can take pictures of their tube top clad daughters in front of the Kabbah.

I prefer to side with the freedom for Muslims to have a place to go without having to witness such nonsense.

:headbang: wow thanks for stereotyping american tourists and losing any respect I had for you as an intellegent poster.

So you're in favor of the US doing what ever the hell it wants to Muslims on US soil then.

The US is not a Kingdom. The very soil is not owned by George Bush. It's a completely different country with a completely different culture. The two cannot be compared.

If the government of the US suddenly started rounding up Muslims and deporting them or stripping them of their citizenship, I would take up arms and I would fight and probably die for it.

:headbang: wow thanks for stereotyping american tourists and losing any respect I had for you as an intellegent poster.

That's what people are arguing for. Gotta take the good with the bad, you know. They want Saudi soil to be as free as American soil.

What that leads to is pork rind crumbs all over the mosque.

I will have none of that, thanks.

The US is not a Kingdom. The very soil is not owned by George Bush. It's a completely different country with a completely different culture. The two cannot be compared.

If the government of the US suddenly started rounding up Muslims and deporting them or stripping them of their citizenship, I would take up arms and I would fight and probably die for it.

:headbang: words fail me now.

That's what people are arguing for. Gotta take the good with the bad, you know. They want Saudi soil to be as free as American soil.

What that leads to is pork rind crumbs all over the mosque.

I will have none of that, thanks.
So now i can include all non violent muslims with terrorists?

I prefer to side with the freedom for Muslims to have a place to go without having to witness such nonsense.
Since when does anyone have a right not to be offended? You're like those fundie Christians who think they have a right to keep homosexuals out of their country.

My freedom is not under attack.
There is a quote, I don't remember who said it about the Nazis
First they went after the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not stand up for them.

Then they went after the Catholics, but I was not a Catholics so I did not stand up for them.

Then they went after the Protestants, and by then there was nobody left to stand up for me.

He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.

Ermmm .... no. Only Allah smites. People aren't allowed to. I don't care what a few goniffs choose to do, it doesn't change Islam nor does it cheapen it.

Or can I start going around saying the godhatesfags.com people represent Christendom? I'd dearly love to.

Feel free to.

If enough Christians were gay bashers then others might actually agree with your statement. If not then they would view your opinions poorly.

Your radical Muslim brothers(a minority in Islam they might be), lend credence to my statement about Islam being somewhat more violent and intolerant. If it wasnt for their actions, I would just be some guy saying shit.

I am an atheist, so I dont think much of religion...though I am more than willing to believe in God. That being said, it isnt fundamental Christians that make me think of animals, it is people rioting and killing 17 people because a book was supposedly flushed down a toilet. It was pictures of people partying in the streats because thousands of people DIED and a few buildings fell down. It because a people/govt/religion is willing to kill a person because they gave someone a book.

Maybe the people I am thinking about dont represent Islam. But there seems to be a whole lot of them, and they are pretty vocal. And the supposedl "decent" muslim dont seem interested enough to say they are wrong, or maybe they secretly agree with them...how do I know?

If I was a Christian, and some Christians behaved the way many muslims do, I would be in line denouncing them. Where is the denouncement from so called main stream muslims? A drop here a drab there.

While I would love it if religion didnt exist at all; except for Islam none really bother me. I would be pretty happy if Muslims just ceased to exist. Maybe find a version of orthodox judiasm(which I also cant stand, but at least they dont go around killing people) that they like and settle into that.

And as to whatever personal reasons made you convert to Islam.. good for you. If it gives you peace that is all that counts and that is what religion should be about. Unfortunately, many of your "brother" dont seem to view your religion as a means towards gaining peace.

Saudi Arabia is widely known for extremist views, funding terrorism, and has a strong hold on world oil prices. Also, they are supposedly allies to the USA (as demonstrated in Desert Shield/Storm). If an Islamic coup were to depose the House of Saud and take control of the oil reserves, it would be a bigger boost to the international terrorist community than any other in history.

As a side note, if Bush wants to safeguard the world, invade Iran, or North Korea, or Russia for that matter. Russia's military is in such a horrible state of disrepair and neglect that America could have a good chance of defeating their military, should neo-communists (Putin on a bender) take over. (But nobody has the manpower or resources to occupy Russia. Except maybe China.)

<snip>

best post so far on this topic.

So now i can include all non violent muslims with terrorists?

Where do you get that out of what I said?

Are you one of those who believe "religion of peace" means having to let anyone who wants to walk all over us?

Where do you get that out of what I said?

Are you one of those who believe "religion of peace" means having to let anyone who wants to walk all over us?

Well you said we have to take the good with the bad. So you assumed out of a stereotype that Americans are sloppy tourists who would ruin the city/buildings/country. So why cant people say they dont want arabs in a place because they think they will set off an attack? And no i dont believe in a religion of peace. I think the world would be better off without religion.

Since when does anyone have a right not to be offended?

In Mecca, Muslims have the right to not be offended. It's been that way since the first Caliph. That's since when.

If Christians had a place they could call exclusively their own, then I guarantee you there would be Christian morality in place. Oh wait .... the Vatican. Gosh.

I wonder if it's ok to have man on man butt sex in public there. I mean ... after all ...

Well you said we have to take the good with the bad. So you assumed out of a stereotype that Americans are sloppy tourists who would ruin the city/buildings/country. So why cant people say they dont want arabs in a place because they think they will set off an attack? And no i dont believe in a religion of peace. I think the world would be better off without religion.

Americans are, in general, very sloppy tourists. Americans have this thing in them that makes them think they can go anywhere in the world and do anything they want. It's sad, really, and it makes me ashamed to be an American.

In Mecca, Muslims have the right to not be offended. It's been that way since the first Caliph. That's since when.

If Christians had a place they could call exclusively their own, then I guarantee you there would be Christian morality in place. Oh wait .... the Vatican. Gosh.

I wonder if it's ok to have man on man butt sex in public there. I mean ... after all ...

Last time i checked you could still visit the Vatican if you wanted to no matter what religion you are.

Americans are, in general, very sloppy tourists. Americans have this thing in them that makes them think they can go anywhere in the world and do anything they want. It's sad, really, and it makes me ashamed to be an American.

So where are your facts? Where are the statistics that prove this. Where are the eye witness accounts or the newspaper stories. All i see here is an opinion that one poster has presented.

So where are your facts? Where are the statistics that prove this. Where are the eye witness accounts or the newspaper stories. All i see here is an opinion that one poster has presented.

You actually need proof that Americans think they can go anywhere they want in the world and do whatever they want?

Hell's Bells, man. I assume you're American and you're arguing that you should be able to go to Mecca because you say so! If that's not proof of the mentality, I don't know what is.

The US is not a Kingdom. The very soil is not owned by George Bush. It's a completely different country with a completely different culture. The two cannot be compared.

If the government of the US suddenly started rounding up Muslims and deporting them or stripping them of their citizenship, I would take up arms and I would fight and probably die for it.
I disagree. The law is the law, be it by fiat, order, bill, or amendment. By your own statment earlier, should you not leave peacefully? The land doesn't belong absolutely to the people who own it, or rights to the water that passes over it, the minerals that might be underneath it, or the air above. Not even in America.

The *only* thing that protects you in America, is the good will, temperance, and compassion of people who strongly disagree with you. If you can't keep that covenant in return, you may well find yourself fighting. The mind of General William Techumsa Sherman has found an everlasting purchase in the American psyche. A wise man would not gamble against that.

You actually need proof that Americans think they can go anywhere they want in the world and do whatever they want?

Hell's Bells, man. I assume you're American and you're arguing that you should be able to go to Mecca because you say so! If that's not proof of the mentality, I don't know what is.

No i want proof that americans are slobbering tourists who are going to leave pork rines in your precious mosque. I anyone has the right to go wherever they want. I dont supose you agree with East germany's policy of keeping east germans in that side of the city and building a wall to make sure they cant leave.

In Mecca, Muslims have the right to not be offended. It's been that way since the first Caliph. That's since when.

If Christians had a place they could call exclusively their own, then I guarantee you there would be Christian morality in place. Oh wait .... the Vatican. Gosh.

I wonder if it's ok to have man on man butt sex in public there. I mean ... after all ...

Are you claiming that man on man butt sex is permitted in Mecca? if not that I fail to understand the analogy. Even if it was permitted, I would fail to understand the analogy.

It seems to me that the only religion that bars people(of other religions) from going places is Islam.

It seems to me that the only(well mostly) Religion that is used as a justification to kill people(modern times) based upon their religion is Islam.

It seems to me that the only religion that advocates the most brutal of punishments for the most innocuous of crimes is Islam.

The religion that oppresses women te most : Islam

The religion that inspires the average person to kill other average people the most : Islam


Now, maybe Islam isnt the cause, but it definately seems to a common factor.

It seems to me that the only(well mostly) Religion that is used as a justification to kill people(modern times) based upon their religion is Islam.
Say what? I know you regret that (mostly) (recently).

It seems to me that the only religion that bars people(of other religions) from going places is Islam.

It seems to me that the only(well mostly) Religion that is used as a justification to kill people(modern times) based upon their religion is Islam.

It seems to me that the only religion that advocates the most brutal of punishments for the most innocuous of crimes is Islam.

The religion that oppresses women te most : Islam

The religion that inspires the average person to kill other average people the most : Islam


Islam does none of those things. People do those things.

I'm sorry you can't see the difference. I can go blow up a building in the name of Yoda, but would that make you believe Star Wars to be evil? Who care what people declare as their reason for something.

It's the action that matters, not the declaration.

Allah has never once asked people to blow up buildings or oppress women or bar anyone from Mecca. Islam does not inspire murder. Greed and ignorance do that.

No i want proof that americans are slobbering tourists who are going to leave pork rines in your precious mosque.

It's for the same reason I've had people put milk in my meat fridge. People are ignorant and don't really care. They have their way of doing things and everything else is either stupid or pointless.

The average American Idiot doesn't know that they're not supposed to enter a mosque if they've just had a big bacon sandwich and they won't bother finding out before just barging into the mosque because they think they have the right.

Do that in the wrong country and you get beheaded. That's just the way it goes.

Islam does none of those things. People do those things.

I'm sorry you can't see the difference. I can go blow up a building in the name of Yoda, but would that make you believe Star Wars to be evil? Who care what people declare as their reason for something.

It's the action that matters, not the declaration.

Allah has never once asked people to blow up buildings or oppress women or bar anyone from Mecca. Islam does not inspire murder. Greed and ignorance do that.

Granted i dont think Islam is evil and I dont associate terrorist with the main stream version of Islam to absolve the religion because people did it is not correct. An idea caused these people to act in the way they did. And like it or not they acted according to the word of God as they thought it was. An ideal has a lot of power its not just people

It's for the same reason I've had people put milk in my meat fridge. People are ignorant and don't really care. They have their way of doing things and everything else is either stupid or pointless.

The average American Idiot doesn't know that they're not supposed to enter a mosque if they've just had a big bacon sandwich and they won't bother finding out before just barging into the mosque because they think they have the right.

Do that in the wrong country and you get beheaded. That's just the way it goes.
Pst your Hypocricy is showing. You say we shouldnt label arabs because of just a few hard liners. And yet your labeling Americans because of a few people and your fridge.

An idea caused these people to act in the way they did.

Yep ... greed.

And like it or not they acted according to the word of God as they thought it was. An ideal has a lot of power its not just people

No. They acted in accordance to what some cleric told them. Nothing more. Those clerics prey on poor uneducated young men and I find them detestable.


Pst your Hypocricy is showing. You say we shouldnt label arabs because of just a few hard liners. And yet your labeling Americans because of a few people and your fridge.

I didn't say anything about Arabs. Less than 15% of the world's Muslims are Arabs. I said don't lump all Muslims because of a few hardliners.

Now ... how many thousands of examples of the Ugly American do you need before you'll concede? I'm sure there're plenty of Europeans who would love to help me out here.

Yep ... greed.
So the young kids who blow themselves up in the name of an ideal do it for greed?



No. They acted in accordance to what some cleric told them. Nothing more. Those clerics prey on poor uneducated young men and I find them detestable.
Okay here is a point we are going to adress. When we speak about a religion and its faults you apparantly associate it with a failure of people not the actual religion or God itself. So I am also assuming then that you give the credit for all the good things in the name of Allah to people as well and not to the God?

I didn't say anything about Arabs. Less than 15% of the world's Muslims are Arabs. I said don't lump all Muslims because of a few hardliners.
It doesnt matter what group i use. You cannot use a stereotype on one group of people and then say you cant use it on another.

Now ... how many thousands of examples of the Ugly American do you need before you'll concede? I'm sure there're plenty of Europeans who would love to help me out here.
Really so you dont really have any examples of how Ugly Americans tourists that come from your own experience? And when i mean first hand I mean a primary source from you actually witnessing the event not having it told to you.

So the young kids who blow themselves up in the name of an ideal do it for greed?

Their families generally get a rather large sum of money for their actions. So, yes, it is for greed. They're poor, their family needs money, a cleric tells them that their wife and children will get enough money to sustain them for 5 years in one lump sum if they'd blow up a marketplace. Greed.


Okay here is a point we are going to adress. When we speak about a religion and its faults you apparantly associate it with a failure of people not the actual religion or God itself. So I am also assuming then that you give the credit for all the good things in the name of Allah to people as well and not to the God?

I give credit where it is due. Qur'an says quite clearly not to oppress women. Qur'an is the word of Allah. If a man oppresses women in the name of Allah, he is simply a schmuck. Why would you blame the religion, then?


Really so you dont really have any examples of how Ugly Americans tourists that come from your own experience? And when i mean first hand I mean a primary source from you actually witnessing the event not having it told to you.

I have plenty of personal experience. I probably don't have enough to satisfy you, though, hence, I will call upon outside sources.

Their families generally get a rather large sum of money for their actions. So, yes, it is for greed. They're poor, their family needs money, a cleric tells them that their wife and children will get enough money to sustain them for 5 years in one lump sum if they'd blow up a marketplace. Greed.
But thats not greed. Greed is an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth. Thats trying to help ones family survive not getting them another sab.. Greed is a far different thing then trying to get money to help sustain their families.



I give credit where it is due. Qur'an says quite clearly not to oppress women. Qur'an is the word of Allah. If a man oppresses women in the name of Allah, he is simply a schmuck. Why would you blame the religion, then?
So if a person does something good In the name of Islam you wont give any credit to Islam for doing it was my question.



I have plenty of personal experience. I probably don't have enough to satisfy you, though, hence, I will call upon outside sources.
So because of your limited interaction with a small group of your fellow americans you label the rest of us slobs and bad tourists. Jeez once again what ever happened to the dont label a group of people because of the actions of a few?

So because of your limited interaction with a small group of your fellow americans you label the rest of us slobs and bad tourists. Jeez once again what ever happened to the dont label a group of people because of the actions of a few?

You know what's so damn funny about this so far?

I never once said "all".

You really need to stop being so sensitive.

You know what's so damn funny about this so far?

I never once said "all".

You really need to stop being so sensitive.

You made an inclusive statement when you said american tourists. You made no distinction whatsoever. You assumed that all the people who went there would disrespect the city and treat it as some sort of second grade tourist attraction. If your going to make a vague or broad statement be able to back it up or dont say it at all. Also I had two other points in that post which need to be adressed like the incorrect concept of greed you used or my question on your giving credit where credit is due.

You made an inclusive statement when you said american tourists. You made no distinction whatsoever. You assumed that all the people who went there would disrespect the city and treat it as some sort of second grade tourist attraction. If your going to make a vague or broad statement be able to back it up or dont say it at all.


I really don't know how you could consider "in general" vague. Americans are, generally, horrible tourists. Am I speaking to a 10 year old? Is it necessary for me to add the "not all, but some" to that?

Just how much do I need to dumb it down? Alabama dumb or can I at least keep it to a Virginia level?

I really don't know how you could consider "in general" vague. Americans are, generally, horrible tourists. Am I speaking to a 10 year old? Is it necessary for me to add the "not all, but some" to that?

Just how much do I need to dumb it down? Alabama dumb or can I at least keep it to a Virginia level?

1.Way to go with the straw man fallacy. In general is vague. You dont cite a specific group of americans you just say in general and people assume that if its in general then it must be a majority of Americans. Just because you assume that you made a statement in one way does not mean others will interpret it so especially online. Next time if your going to try to insult me dont bother posting at all. I have enough respect to insult you so extend the same common courtesy to me.

2.Their families generally get a rather large sum of money for their actions. So, yes, it is for greed. They're poor, their family needs money, a cleric tells them that their wife and children will get enough money to sustain them for 5 years in one lump sum if they'd blow up a marketplace. Greed.

But thats not greed. Greed is an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth. Thats trying to help ones family survive not getting them another sab.. Greed is a far different thing then trying to get money to help sustain their families.

3.I give credit where it is due. Qur'an says quite clearly not to oppress women. Qur'an is the word of Allah. If a man oppresses women in the name of Allah, he is simply a schmuck. Why would you blame the religion, then?

If a person does something good In the name of Islam you wont give any credit to Islam or does it all go to the person?

Edit: Funny how you can find gems in other threads.Because we're taught - by the same guy, incidently - *not* to judge. No matter what. People can claim whatever they like. Allah will deal with them.

So if your taught not to judge then why are you passing judgement on American tourists?

Please Captain Semantic,

You're specifically arguing that because of the behavior of some, the prohibitions should extend to all.

That said. Fine, let's be Imerpial about it. We'll let the Europeans judge the Americans, and they will also in turn judge all Muslims. Then after their judgement, the Americans and Muslims will be left to enforce it amongst themselves to the limit of their respective abilities. What could be more fair?

But thats not greed. Greed is an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth. Thats trying to help ones family survive not getting them another sab.. Greed is a far different thing then trying to get money to help sustain their families.


Actually, it is greed.


If a person does something good In the name of Islam you wont give any credit to Islam or does it all go to the person?

I said "I give credit where it is due".

Edit: Funny how you can find gems in other threads.

Yeah. You caught me. You're so smart.

So if your taught not to judge then why are you passing judgement on American tourists?

I'm not. I'm pointing out an obvious fact. Many American tourists are very annoying to the locals. We're the only people who believe that they would understand English better if we scream it or add "o" at the end of each word. We're the only people who will walk into another person's country and make fun of their customs.

Deal with it. When we go overseas, we suck.

You're specifically arguing that because of the behavior of some, the prohibitions should extend to all.


No. I'm saying that's why Saudi Arabia does it.

Whether or not I agree with Saudi doing it is immaterial. It's not my country and I have no say in how it's ran.

Geeze, people. What the fuck is wrong tonight? Sudden case of retardeds all around, eh?

Actually, it is greed.
I just gave a definition of greed and it doesnt coincide with the example of a poor person killing themselves to get money to support their poor family. So tell me how is it still greed.

I said "I give credit where it is due".
Can you give me a straight answer here. I asked if a person does something in the name of Islam are you going to give credit for that act soley to the person or to the Religion as well?

I'm not. I'm pointing out an obvious fact. Many American tourists are very annoying to the locals. We're the only people who believe that they would understand English better if we scream it or add "o" at the end of each word. We're the only people who will walk into another person's country and make fun of their customs.

Deal with it. When we go overseas, we suck.
Really so the opinions you have just presented are now an obvious fact. You offer no statistical proof or primary sources which validate your claim. Hence it is your OPINION not a fact.

Edit:No. I'm saying that's why Saudi Arabia does it.

Whether or not I agree with Saudi doing it is immaterial. It's not my country and I have no say in how it's ran.

Geeze, people. What the fuck is wrong tonight? Sudden case of retardeds all around, eh?
So I suppose you would then agree with the statement that during World War 2 no country had the right to say that Germany killing the jews was wrong? And once again with the pointless insults. Whats up with that man. Just because people havent all suddenly admitted they were wrong and that you are correct in your debate we have all suddenly become "retards"?

I just gave a definition of greed and it doesnt coincide with the example of a poor person killing themselves to get money to support their poor family. So tell me how is it still greed.


Your given definition: Greed is an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves.

You think the family needs or deserves that huge chunk of money? I'd say blowing yourself up to get it is proof of an excessive desire, wouldn't you?


Can you give me a straight answer here. I asked if a person does something in the name of Islam are you going to give credit for that act soley to the person or to the Religion as well?

Religion does nothing. People do. Religion is an inanimate set of ideas.

Really so the opinions you have just presented are now an obvious fact. You offer no statistical proof or primary sources which validate your claim. Hence it is your OPINION not a fact.

Ok you win. You're right. Congratulations. You've argued on the internet and now you've won. Feel better? I hope you get lots of cash and fabulous prizes and an interview on 60 Minutes.

So I suppose you would then agree with the statement that during World War 2 no country had the right to say that Germany killing the jews was wrong? And once again with the pointless insults. Whats up with that man. Just because people havent all suddenly admitted they were wrong and that you are correct in your debate we have all suddenly become "retards"?


Nazi Germany ... completely different. There are no Christian gas chambers in Saudi Arabia.

It's not a matter of not saying they were wrong, but for not knowing how to read. I explained why Saudi Arabia does what it does and suddenly I become the whipping boy for it? Did I say I agreed with it? Did I say "Go Saudi! Fuck all those Christians!"?

I don't like the idea of allowing just anybody into Mecca - for the reason I cited - but, either way it happens, there is nothing I can do about it. I am not a Saud, I am not an Arab, and I have absolutely zero controlling interest in what goes on in Mecca.

Amazing how in a written media people will come in illiterate.

Your given definition: Greed is an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves.

You think the family needs or deserves that huge chunk of money? I'd say blowing yourself up to get it is proof of an excessive desire, wouldn't you?

You gave the example of a poor person blowing themselves up in order to support their poor family. How do the not need it or not deserve it? I would say blowing yourself up to get your family money is idiotic and wrong but not greedy.


[QUOTE=Keruvalia]Religion does nothing. People do. Religion is an inanimate set of ideas.
The question is a yes or no answer. So once again YES or NO if someone does something in the name of Islam do you give the credit to the person only or do you give credit to Islam and Allah? And more importantly religion isnt an inanimate set of ideas. Religions deal with according to them beings who posses power greater than anything we have achieved and about the salvation of our souls. How can you classify that as an inanimate set of ideas if you believe in a religion?


Ok you win. You're right. Congratulations. You've argued on the internet and now you've won. Feel better? I hope you get lots of cash and fabulous prizes and an interview on 60 Minutes.

I am reminded of the saying if you cant stand the heat dont go into the kitchen.

I don't like the idea of allowing just anybody into Mecca - for the reason I cited - but, either way it happens, there is nothing I can do about it. I am not a Saud, I am not an Arab, and I have absolutely zero controlling interest in what goes on in Mecca.

Amazing how in a written media people will come in illiterate.


1.Didnt you say I won in that arguement about your reason for not wanting to let people in mecca who werent muslims in?

2.I hate it when people in a debate decide when they dont feel that they are doing as good as they think they should begin attack other people. Keep your posts on topic and dont call people who are being courteous to you retards or illiterate.

So once again YES or NO if someone does something in the name of Islam do you give the credit to the person only or do you give credit to Islam and Allah?

That's not a yes or no question. However, since you want a yes or no, I'll give you one:

No.

It doesn't answer your question, though. I already did that. I'm sorry you can't read. Have you tried Sylvan? I hear it helps a lot.

I said: Religion does nothing. People do.

So, gee ... guess I don't credit the religion, now do I? I guess I will have to keep it Alabama dumb with you.

I am reminded of the saying if you cant stand the heat dont go into the kitchen.

I am reminded of Bedevere trying to get the peasants to figure out how to determine if the woman is a witch.

I can see sarcasm is lost on you, too.

No humor, no sarcasm, keep it to single syllables. Got it.

I am reminded of Bedevere trying to get the peasants to figure out how to determine if the woman is a witch.

I can see sarcasm is lost on you, too.

No humor, no sarcasm, keep it to single syllables. Got it.

:upyours:

:upyours:

Man ... that was way too easy.

That's not a yes or no question. However, since you want a yes or no, I'll give you one:

No.

It doesn't answer your question, though. I already did that. I'm sorry you can't read. Have you tried Sylvan? I hear it helps a lot.

I said: Religion does nothing. People do.

So, gee ... guess I don't credit the religion, now do I? I guess I will have to keep it Alabama dumb with you.
So if religion does nothing then why is it around?

So if religion does nothing then why is it around?

It contains within it ideas on propriety, hygene, law, and useful tidbits of information such as history and lineage.

However, blaming religion for someone doing something is like saying the law is bad because someone commits murder. The law is nothing but paper, religion is nothing but ideas.

It is people that choose to follow, or break, or bend the law.

double post

It contains within it ideas on propriety, hygene, law, and useful tidbits of information such as history and lineage.

However, blaming religion for someone doing something is like saying the law is bad because someone commits murder. The law is nothing but paper, religion is nothing but ideas.

It is people that choose to follow, or break, or bend the law.

Then if thats how you feel about religion since we already have laws and standards that exist outside of all the different types of religions that people agree on why not just abolish religion period. It seems to be an outdated concept if what you say is true and also since so many horrible things are done in the name of religion once they are all gone things can only get better.

I'm no fan of the Saudi regime. They use their oil wealth to spread their oppressive and violent form of Islam worldwide. The blame for 9/11 rests on them.

I said it before and I'll say it again
Nothing good ever came from the province of Najd c_c

So then why not abolish all religions and abide by the one set of universal guide lines that people stick with. No murder, not stealing, adultry ect. Whats the point of having something like that if we already have laws which detail these ideas on property, hygene, law and what not especially since these religions are the cause of numerous fights now and in previous times.

Man's law is impermanent and, thus, not worthy of anything.

I said "propriety", not "property".

Anyway, you're dealing with a world full of vastly different cultures and, thus, you cannot apply all things universally. The human condition cannot be quantified. Some religions try to say that their way is the only way and any who are not their way are less than human ... wait ... not "Some" ... only one, actually. Maybe just that one should be abolished.

To apply something universally, though, you must have a universal definition. You say not to murder, ok great. Now define murder. Is abortion murder? Is the death penalty murder? Is hunting deer murder?

since so many horrible things are done in the name of religion once they are all gone things can only get better.

Oh, and incidently, people have done horrible things in the name of movies and tv characters and some have said they've done horrible things because a dog told them to.

Should we likewise abolish movies, tv, and dogs?

Man's law is impermanent and, thus, not worthy of anything.

I said "propriety", not "property".

Anyway, you're dealing with a world full of vastly different cultures and, thus, you cannot apply all things universally. The human condition cannot be quantified. Some religions try to say that their way is the only way and any who are not their way are less than human ... wait ... not "Some" ... only one, actually. Maybe just that one should be abolished.

Could you enlighten me as to which religion is the one to say their way is the only way?

Could you enlighten me as to which religion is the one to say their way is the only way?

That would be Christianity. They seem to be of the opinion that if you're not Christian, you're going to Hell. Not all Christians believe this, mind you, but it is a majority mindset. I'm sure there's scriptural basis for it somewhere, but I'm not gonna look it up.

Christianity is also the only religion left in the world that actively seeks out converts while the rest of the world's religions require you to go to them of your own free will if you want to convert.

Every other religion seems to have a live and let live philosophy when it comes to that sort of thing. Islam, the second largest religion in the world, specifically states that you cannot force people to convert nor cajole them in any way (Qur'an 10:99).

It goes on and on. Certainly, on the face of it, this is pretty good evidence that the Saudi government is far less considerate of Christians that the US government is of Muslims. What of it? I guess Christians are better off here.
Many Muslim nations are oppressive of Christians. But they're far more oppressive of Ba'hais. Do Christians ever do anything to further that cause?

No. So, regardless, they're hypocrites. They should try to stop persecution period, no matter whether it's witchcraft, homosexuality, or liberalism, not just fundamentalist Christianity.

Christianity is also the only religion left in the world that actively seeks out converts while the rest of the world's religions require you to go to them of your own free will if you want to convert.
Not true. Islam is the same way. And there's a ton of wacko, vegetarian Hindus out of California, that worship Krishna.

Also, in Orthodox Judaism, if you're born a Jew, they try to "actively" get you to be orthodox.

The only way to solve a problem such as this is to follow Truman's footsteps and nuke them. Case Closed.

There is only one way to contain a culture's discrimination. Complete, total dominance and extreme suppression. We should all take a lesson from the Ancient Julii and the Tergzolonic Tribes. And, of course the Germans.

That would be Christianity. They seem to be of the opinion that if you're not Christian, you're going to Hell. Not all Christians believe this, mind you, but it is a majority mindset. I'm sure there's scriptural basis for it somewhere, but I'm not gonna look it up.

Christianity is also the only religion left in the world that actively seeks out converts while the rest of the world's religions require you to go to them of your own free will if you want to convert.

Every other religion seems to have a live and let live philosophy when it comes to that sort of thing. Islam, the second largest religion in the world, specifically states that you cannot force people to convert nor cajole them in any way (Qur'an 10:99).

So if i dont believe in Allah I will still go to heaven?

Not true. Islam is the same way. And there's a ton of wacko, vegetarian Hindus out of California, that worship Krishna.

Also, in Orthodox Judaism, if you're born a Jew, they try to "actively" get you to be orthodox.

No, Islam is not the same way. If a person doesn't convert of their own free will, then they are not Muslim. It's just that simple. You have to go to them. They will never come to you. They don't stand on street corners handing out pamphlets and even some take it so far as to not advertise for the mosque unless it's in a Muslim newspaper.

You're also very wrong about Orthodox Judaism.

I don't know about Hare Krishnas.

So if i dont believe in Allah I will still go to heaven?

That's up to Allah, not to me. However, Hell is reserved for the truly evil who die without repenting and people who die apostate (Muslims who reject Islam).

If you try to live a good life, be generally nice to folks, and don't go out of your way to do others harm, then yes, there is a place in Paradise for you.

Sure you can visit the Vatican no matter what religion you are... but the Kabbah is not a tourist site. It is a holy site, dedicated to God, and treating it as less is a desecration.

In Mecca, Muslims have the right to not be offended. It's been that way since the first Caliph. That's since when.

If Christians had a place they could call exclusively their own, then I guarantee you there would be Christian morality in place. Oh wait .... the Vatican. Gosh.

I wonder if it's ok to have man on man butt sex in public there. I mean ... after all ...
In Iran, the Zoroastrians had and still have a right to not be offended... Omar and Abu Bakr didn't care...

In India, Hindus had a right to not be offended, but Mahmud of Ghazni didn't care...

The Christians of the Byzantine Empire had a right to not be offended in Jerusalem or Antioch, did the Invaders care? No!


Look, I'm not trying to beat a dead horse or advocate trading like for like, but if you want people to respect your rights it's best not to attack theirs (And similar instances continue today)

You know, even I, a Zoroastrian, entered the Vatican. I was respectful, because in the home of another faith, I will show respect. Its sort of sad how the Church opens a holy place to me while Islam closes it to everyone. I can see your fears of desecration quite well though. In a modern society, freedom of religion is a necessity, though I don't see a nation that abolished slavery in 1962 becoming modern any time soon. (Yes look it up, Saudi Arabia never abolished chattel slavery until that year)

That would be Christianity. They seem to be of the opinion that if you're not Christian, you're going to Hell. Not all Christians believe this, mind you, but it is a majority mindset. I'm sure there's scriptural basis for it somewhere, but I'm not gonna look it up.

Yup, John 14, 5Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?"
6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."

8Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."

9Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? 10Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. 11Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves.

Christianity is also the only religion left in the world that actively seeks out converts while the rest of the world's religions require you to go to them of your own free will if you want to convert.

That's a misunderstanding. According to the UN the Muslim religion is the fastest growing religion by far, almost twice as fast as the evangelical Christians. The fact that if you don't convert ends up with your house being burned down is a possible connection.

Every other religion seems to have a live and let live philosophy when it comes to that sort of thing. Islam, the second largest religion in the world, specifically states that you cannot force people to convert nor cajole them in any way (Qur'an 10:99).

Sadly it isn't practiced the way it is written. The Qur'an does say what you've said, at least they have a code of conduct for taxing foreigners and Jews and Christians that live in their lands written in the Qur'an, but, a majority of the sect do not practice it the way that you and I read it.

Didnt they just give Women the Vote?

Look, I'm not trying to beat a dead horse

Actually, you are. I've already admitted there are some ugly folks who proclaim Islam and nasty things have been done by Muslims in the past ...

Do I have to do it again?

How many times do I have to admit it before you'll be satisfied?

If you're waiting for an apology for it, well, not gonna happen.

That's a misunderstanding. According to the UN the Muslim religion is the fastest growing religion by far, almost twice as fast as the evangelical Christians. The fact that if you don't convert ends up with your house being burned down is a possible connection.

Yes, Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world right now. Kudos to us. It's not because we actively convert, though. Muslims don't come knock on your door and hand you pamphlets, Christians do. That's *active* conversion.

In order to convert to Islam, you must go to the Mosque of your own free will. They will never come to you. They will never approach you on the street. They will never come to your house.

However, if you're alleging that people are being forced to convert through house burnings or whatever, I'd like to see some proof. I don't believe you.

Yes, Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world right now. Kudos to us. It's not because we actively convert, though. Muslims don't come knock on your door and hand you pamphlets, Christians do. That's *active* conversion.

It's called Dawa, to actively invite non-muslisms to Islam.
http://www.dawanet.com/methods/publicschool.dawapublic.asp
Students are routinely exposed in their classroom to new information and opinions, hence they tend to be more receptive to new beliefs and ideas.

Schools are therefore fertile grounds where the seeds of Islam can be sowed inside the hearts of non-Muslim students. Muslim students should take ample advantage of this opportunity and present to their schoolmates the beautiful beliefs of Islam. At a time when the Christians are being told they have to zip their lips while at School, Muslims are filling the gaps left by their departure.

An undated posting at www.SoundVision.com posts a page titled “18 Tips for Imams and Community Leaders.” The 15th tip, “Establish a parents' committee to monitor public schools,” has special interest.

So let’s not pretend that active proselytizing isn’t going on from anyone other than Christians and move on.

However, if you're alleging that people are being forced to convert through house burnings or whatever, I'd like to see some proof. I don't believe you.

Try reading anything published by the Hamas... Their intent is quite clear.

But in addition to known terrorist organizations, recent hot spots are spread all around the world, from Liberia in West Africa to the Netherlands to Southeast Asia. Many countries are feeling the strains of religious conflict and terrorism along the edges of the Islamic regions, as different as Chechnya, Nigeria, Spain, Central Asia and the Philippine (even China is worried about violent separatist sentiment in its vast and mostly Muslim western province of Xinjiang) are from each other, they all have had problems with the Muslim communities that was to first grow (nothing wrong with that) but then displace or convert the people already in the areas they grow into (there is something wrong with that), even if it needs to be done violently (not only wrong, criminal and people have the right to fight back).

More than 500 people were killed last year in three southern Thai provinces, attacks targeting Buddhists in an attempt to drive out the non-Muslims. Islamic insurgents gun down prominent non-Muslim civil leaders, making people fearful of standing up for their rights and instead, they move away or convert.

"We are seeing more tears in the fabric between Muslims and non-Muslims," said Mohammad Khalil, who researches Islam and modern society at the Middle East Institute in Washington. "In too many minds, violence has replaced dialogue; calls for separation have replaced efforts at coexistence. These are not good signs."

It does equate. The Sauds are very serious Wahabi Muslims. When you're in Saudi Arabia, you are in the Saud's personal property. To a Wahabi, praying to Jesus - a man - is equal to taking a shit on the floor. It is gross blasphemy.


So, basically, you are saying they are morons. I kind of suspected this, since they are too lazy and feckless to get by without importing filipino labor, despite having a relatively high level of poverty to begin with.

And to consider that a private prayer meeting somehow equated with defecating on a floor, well that is utterly stupid, for a whole host of reasons.

(It also explains however, why arabs are probably the most filthy people on the planet, what with holding such backwards views, i.e. praying to jesus = taking a shit in someone's kitchen)

Finally, since Wahabi's are so offended by secularism, I am now convinced that they should be deported from tolerant western nations. It is for thier own good really. I wouldn't want them being upset by all that pluralism.

And don't you think, if this really bothers them so much, they should stop inviting *christian* economic migrants in the first place. Maybe they should try and get muslims for these jobs instead. It's hypocritical and you know it.

Americans are, in general, very sloppy tourists.

In all fairness, if you going to generalise about American's like this, you have no place complaining when people generalise about Arabs being terrorists.


Americans have this thing in them that makes them think they can go anywhere in the world and do anything they want. It's sad, really, and it makes me ashamed to be an American.

Freedom of religion is a fundimental human right. You should have the freedom to practise your religion anywhere in the world. You can pray to Allah in the Vatican if you choose. You may get some odd glances but there is nothing to stop you. You say, what right do Christians have to prophsy in Saudi Arabia, I say what right do the Saudi Arabians have to stop them?

I don't have any problems with Shias. But I do have a problem with Sunnis who subscribe to the tenets held forth by Zangi about the spread of Dar al-Islam by force. This includes all Wahhabis, and a scattering of other Sunnis.

IMHO, subscribing to those tenets is de facto advocating the forcible overthrow of the government. It's illegal to do that in the US. So, for everyone's happiness, I would deport ANYONE, including US Citizens, who freely spoke up and said they adhered to those tenets.

We did this in the 1960s. There were plenty of Communists who were happier elsewhere. For deporting US citizens, you merely wait until they travel overseas, and then revoking their passport permanently is a mere administrative function.

Yesterday here in Britain a large group of Islamic extremists marched through London burning American flags and crosses. Although many of us can see their anger at recent, if inaccurate, news articals at the violation of the Quran, few want to see such ugly scenes on our streets. Islam is a wide and varied faith and to regard Saudi-Arabian bigotry as the norm among Muslims is as inaccurate as to describe all Americans as loud and sloppy tourists. I should know. we see a lot of American tourists here and they are mostly very nice people. Saudi policy on Christianity is morally unacceptable and illustrates that their country has no place in the modern world. If all nations adopted similar attitudes to theirs we would return to the dark ages. Christianity should rise above this rather pathetic behaviour and show the Saudis that we are better than that.

Christianity should rise above this rather pathetic behaviour and show the Saudis that we are better than that.

I think Christians have sucsessfully done this by not marching and not burning Qurans and Crescents.

No.

Torah, yes.
The teachings of Jesus, yes.

The Bible places the writings of Paul and the writings of the Prophets within the same pages as the holy word of God. That is blasphemy.
Okay. So should the possession of an Old Testament be apostasy? How about a Torah? I don't know that it is, or isn't, just looking for your opinion.

What's the difference between a Muslim going to the Vatican and visiting St Peter's as an exercise in tourism and a Christian that wants to go to Mecca because he has a historical interest in Holy places?

Let's take a break and offer our sincere thanks to Keruvalia for his measured and intelligent responses. Let's also hope that he has a little hair left by the time this thread dies out.