Fox Fire Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) Yet, unsurprisingly, you fail to provide any evidence to back up your claims. 1. The Muslims at the time of Prophet Muhammad (saw) actually fought in defence of non-believers who were allied to them. 2. The Prophet Muhammad (saw) and the the earliest Muslims were born and raised in Mecca but were forced to flee to Medina amidst persecution, killing, torture, and embargoes simply because they rejected paganism and adopted Islamic monotheism. 3. Nobody was driven out of Mecca after it was recaptured by the Muslims: In fact the Muslims chose to not take revenge (highly unorthodox given Arab tribal culture at the time) for the years of brutal torture, killings, and persecution they endured under the hands of the pagan Meccans who wanted to turn them back from their new religion of Islam. Erm, what about it? Only if they are proven before a court that they've committed MSM and there have to be witnesses who saw them do it, so unless they are doing It in public for some reason or filming it or simply admit to it... the punishment can't be carried out. We also know today that the disease of HIV/AIDs (which attacks the human immune system) is primarily spread by MSM. You can also see the benefit of this law in that Saudi Arabia, who implement most of the Sharia, has the lowest HIV/AIDs rates in the world. The same law is also written in the Old testament but Christians don't take their religion seriously. When Obama re-invaded Iraq, I.S. were no longer affiliated with Al Qaeda, but were actually fighting them on the ground in Syria and there were deaths on both sides (as well as territorial gains for I.S.). They both see each other as enemies and don't cooperate at all. I provided evidence in an earlier comment. I'm not reciting the whole Quran for you. Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun" http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-medina-persecution.htm http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-mecca-tolerance.htm http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/antagonizing.htm Muhammad was the antagonizer, trying to spread his religion. When the people of Mecca rejected him, he attacked them. The Meccans were perfectly fine with Muhammad until he started attacking their Gods. As for homosexuals, heterosexuals have HIV too, but that's irrelevant. Executing or even punishing people for something so arbitrary is absurd. But I do like how your only real justification for killing gay people is HIV. Edited November 4, 2015 by Fox Fire _________________________________________________________________ <Jroc> I heard \ is an anagram of cocaine<\> I can't be rearranged into a line, I already am a line. --Foxburo Wiki-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibrahim (Banned) Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) The verse is talking about what the Muslims should do when they meet the enemy in battle and they are fighting in self defence. Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun" What exactly is wrong with that verse? Allow me to highlight, bolden, underline, and enlarge the text for you. If they stop fighting the Muslims, then the Muslims have to stop fighting them, but they don't then the Muslims have permission to defend themselves. Edited November 4, 2015 by Ibrahim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Fire Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 The verse is talking about what the Muslims should do when they meet the enemy in battle and they are fighting in self defence. What exactly is wrong with that verse? Allow me to highlight, bolden, underline, and enlarge the text for you. If they stop fighting the Muslims, then the Muslims have to stop fighting them, but they don't then the Muslims have permission to defend themselves. Read my citations regarding that verse. The verse literally says: "Fight them until there is not more Fitnah (disbelief)." AKA forced conversion. _________________________________________________________________ <Jroc> I heard \ is an anagram of cocaine<\> I can't be rearranged into a line, I already am a line. --Foxburo Wiki-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibrahim (Banned) Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) Read my citations regarding that verse. The verse literally says: "Fight them until there is not more Fitnah (disbelief)." AKA forced conversion. It's talking about those fighting the Muslims and Read the very next verse "But if they cease, let there be no transgression...", so if they stop fighting the Muslims, then the Muslims stop, as they were fighting only in self defence in the first place. Also there is no such thing as "forced conversion" in Islam, in fact, it's expressly prohibited: "There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut (false deities) and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing." (Q 2:256) Mods, I request this thread be locked. Because Rozalia and Ibrahim arguing is like two elephants fighting over a mud puddle. Edited November 5, 2015 by Ibrahim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Fire Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) It's talking about those fighting the Muslims and Read the very next verse "But if they cease, let there be no transgression...", so if they stop fighting the Muslims, then the Muslims stop as they were fighting only in self defence in the first place. Also there is no such thing as "forced conversion" in Islam, in fact, it's expressly prohibited: "There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut (false deities) and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing." (Q 2:256) That's how you interpret it. Not me. It's literally commanding that Muslims keep fighting until disbelief has been eradicated. Unfortunately, like all Abrahamic religions, the religion in general focuses heavily on punishing non-believers (among other arbitrary things [be it by God or religious followers]). That's how the religion/s converts people in the first place and the biggest problem I have with Abrahamic religion. The focus on punishment. Edited November 4, 2015 by Fox Fire _________________________________________________________________ <Jroc> I heard \ is an anagram of cocaine<\> I can't be rearranged into a line, I already am a line. --Foxburo Wiki-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 All this debate about forced conversions makes baby Jesus cry! Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speaker Faris Wheeler Posted November 5, 2015 Author Share Posted November 5, 2015 (edited) Mods, I request this thread be locked. Because Rozalia and Ibrahim arguing is like two elephants fighting over a mud puddle. Edited November 5, 2015 by Lysandre Mackintosh 1 Peace will never be accomplished without war, but war cannot happen without peace.... or something like that idk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts