I have written many posts about Islam on the RNL. The most recent was A Look at the REAL Islam. In every post, I have supported everything I’ve said:
I have quoted from my personal Qur’an; a Qur’an translated by a devout Muslim and approved by the Islamic community.
I have explained Abrogation: where Muhammad, himself, said that his later “revelations” take the place of his earlier passages.
I have explained and demonstrated that these Abrogations are the source of the many, many contradictions in the Qur’an.
I have explained that this is why the Hadith, or sayings and actions of Muhammad, are necessary: they provide explanation and example for Muslims to follow where the Qur’an contradicts itself.
I have quoted the passages in the Qur’an that declare Muhammad to be the perfect human and that his is the example of how to live the perfect life. This is the part of the Qur’an that gives authority to the Hadith.
I have quoted the Qur’an where Muhammad condemns anyone who questions him or anything he said. This gives further authority to the Hadith
I have explained that a great deal of the really ugly side of Islam is contained in the Hadith.
I have quoted from the oldest and most revered Hadith, and even linked you, the reader, to information about these authors that supports my assertions about their general acceptance.
I have explained that Islamic prophecy is directly opposite of Biblical prophecy: the Muslim savior (or 12th Immam) is the Bible’s Anti-Christ.
I have quoted Muhammad where he says that anyone who denies Islamic prophecy blasphemes Allah and deserves punishment.
I have also posted quotes from leading Islamic clerics IN AMERICA, and posted video clips of MUSLIM CLERICS saying that their goal is an Islamic America. They have openly said they seek to overthrow our government and establish Shari’a law in this nation.
I have posted many articles that demonstrate that Shari’a is creeping into our own court systems.
In short, I have supported everything I have ever claimed, but there are those on the RNL who object to my assertions so vehemently, they are now calling on Utah to censor me. Why? Not because I am wrong. If it was that simple, they would quote from the Qur’an and Muslim clerics to show I am wrong. They have never done this – because they can’t. No, instead of using facts and reason to refute me, they are trying to belittle Utah in a pathetic attempt to get him to censor me instead:
August 26, 2012 at 22:44 (Edit) Reply
Farakhan+ “real” Islam? Come on Utah- don’t lower yourself (or I’m beginning to wonder is it raise yourself?) to this level.
Shall we paint Christianity by Fred Phelps? Terry Jones? Or even Oral Roberts or Jim/Tammy Faye in thier day?
THIS is the heart of the Liberal/Progressive: the desire/impulse to silence any opposition to their belief system – often by any means necessary.
This is also an excellent illustration of why I try to educate people on Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals:” so you will recognize them when you see them in use.
The Rio Norte Line 
When I read that comment, I figured that he thought M. had written the article. M. won’t censor you. He was very clear that we must police ourselves. I know it’s difficult for you, but can you at least put some clothes on before you type?
You mean NOT tell the truth as I understand it so you feel less offended? Sorry, you’d be better off not reading my posts.
WTF???!!!!
I couldn’t figure it if he thought I posted it, was insulting me as the owner of the blog or he was asking me to censor you.
I took it as an attempt to insult you into censoring me.
Either way, the intention seemed clear to me: to silence any attempt to explain the truth about Islam.
I saw it as plea for common sense, not censorship.
But then, I am not trying to paint everyone who disagrees with as an enemy of the US.
It is not common sense to shut someone up because you cannot refute them with fact. It’s censorship — and tyranny.
Tell it the Dixie Chicks
No one shut them up, they just stopped buying their stuff.
Only a Progressive would think those are the same thing.
No one advocating shutting you up, Joe; Greg just pointed out that your post was ignorant. Only a conservative would think those are the same thing.
Really? It would seem to me that is exactly what Drugs was doing.
As for my posts being ignorant: at least they are backed by properly cited quotes from the original source whereas you habitually assert unsupported opinion as fact. I’d stack that up against peer review any day — and I know which one of us would come out on top (at least, in an intellectually honest philosophy department, anyway — not so sure there is such a thing in journalism school anymore).
“It would seem to me that is exactly what Drugs was doing.”
I don’t doubt that you believe that; in fact, that was kind of my point. It seems that no one else saw it that way, though. 🙂
LOL, if you say so…
Th Dixie Chicks were NOT censored.
Melfamy, you aren’t that ignorant are you? The Dixie chicks exercised their right to free speech.
Then the Dixie chick’s fans exercised their freedom by stopping buying their stuff.
Then the Dixie chicks, instead of treating their fans with respect, treated their fans with disdain, and the rest of their fans “left” and their fans that were upset by their treasonous statements stayed away.
If the Dixie Chicks had treated their natural fan base with respect, and not disdain, their fans would have forgiven them and kept buying their music.
I truly enjoyed the Dixie chicks music. I have multiple friends who served our country and who also volunteered at the WTC after 911.
Melfamy your statement accusing individual Americans of censorship is complete idiocy and ridiculous.
Look up the definition of censorship.
Treasonous statements? Here is what Natalie Maines said:
“Just so you know, we’re ashamed that the president of the United States is from Texas.”
If that is treason, you are guilty as well, and so am I.
If you really think that the ban on their music wasn’t orchestrated, you are naive.
I didn’t see it as an attempt to get anything or anyone censored.
Looks like he thought Utah wrote the article.
Now you shall pay, B.! I have just told drugs and other things of this post, and so we shall hear from the horse’s mouth what he thought! You are a very silly boy. Oh, and I forgot about our little bet. I should like M. to check the numbers, because I do believe your silly tail is going to pay the piper!
The whole deal about Islam for me is that while Christianity seeks to influence policy through individuals who accept it, Islam seeks to be be the policy itself by subjugating individuals to it (there is no possibility to reject it). How many atheist, Jewish or Christian legislators do you think there are in Iran’s parliament? In the Saudi government? In the Palestinian Authority? In Egypt? If there are none, should we then consider that “monolithic”?
I have no quarrel with Muslims or Islam, per se, I’ve even stated that there is the possibility to have a Muslim president. What I have always stated is that I believe that Islam is incompatible with our system of government and the Constitution.
With Christianity it is possible to have separation of church and state, I just don’t see how that is possible with Islam – Turkey has been the only secular Muslim state and even it is losing its secularity to a wave of Islamic fundamentalism. While is is inarguably true that the practice of Islam is not monolithic, with Sunni, Sufi and Shia branches of the faith, when applied to governance, it becomes monolithic very quickly. The predominant branch eventually eliminates the competition of the other branches – and any other competing religion to boot – just like Christians are being burned out in Saudi Arabia and two of the three sects were repressed in Saddam’s Iraq.
I don’t think that we are going to see a Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Baptist, Catholic or Methodist takeover of the US government and all the others forced to seek refuge in Canada any time soon…but we are seeing exactly that in Egypt right now. We aren’t going to see Catholics persecuting Lutherans like Kells for not wearing that little school girl outfit that I bought her – but there are “modesty squads” roaming Tehran right now to enforce draconian dress and behaviour codes.
Can anybody name an Islamic nation that is a successful western style democracy or representative republic? Can you name one that is like the US in religious freedom, freedom of speech or just freedom in general? It seems to me that these so called “Islamic republics” are actually totalitarian theocracies. We can argue this on a theological level all day – and at that level most of what the supporters and defenders of Islam claim is true – but I’m not really interested in theory and “supposed to” hypothesis, what I am interested in is what really happens on the ground in the real world when Islam takes over a state. It seems pretty clear to me that once a majority of Islamic adherents take over a government the county transforms pretty quickly to an autocracy…and that is the antithesis of America.
And save your “Muslims can’t take over America” tripe because they can. We are a nation based on an electoral system – if political parties can get a slate of candidates elected, what is stopping a party of religious affiliation from doing the same? Hell, only 40% of the country even thinks it is important to vote, all that is needed is 51% of that 40%…not many at all.
You pro-Islamic pseudo scholars can debate Black3 until you are blue in the face but what matters is what really happens in the real world and that is where your arguments are lacking. Your rhetoric is empty. His is not.
I’m happy to be corrected – but I don’t really expect to be.
Well said, M. I can only respond by saying that the Muslims I know here adhere to a specific law of theirs which demands that while in a foreign country, they must abide by the rules of the land. (I suppose B. could give me the direct quote from the Quran ::: rolls eyes:::) I guess there will always be those who interpret their religion in a different manner, and I do understand the worry…..wish it were so with this president (talk about monolithic.)
I’m getting the giggles now because Mr. Kells actually got me a lil “schoolgirl” outfit. Funny story about it, too. There was a chick (I should say a bi*ch) totally flirting it up with him at work, as well as going through his things at his desk. So I conveniently hid a pic of me giving the finger in my lil school-girl outfit for her to find. ::: giggling::: Yes, Lutherans are merciless! I wish Mr. Kells would let me post one of those shots……they’re funny……and hawt. (They were taken before I weighed 200 lbs.)
I try to apply common sense to the situation. Just like Professor Progressive and the Communist Crustacean will argue all day that Obama isn’t a socialist while his policies have the same end effect, they will argue that Joe is wrong in word when that isn’t even the point – it is the deed that counts…and as far as that goes, he is right.
I cannot speak for all because I am but a casual scholar with respect to Islam but I do know that one of my best friends, a Persian Muslim, counseled me that this is an area of extreme division in the Muslim world, can a Muslim be loyal to a non-Muslim government and Allah at the same time…
Qur’an (5:49) says, “So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their desires, but beware of them lest they seduce thee from some part of that which Allah hath revealed unto thee”, Qur’an (18:26) – “[Allah] maketh none to share in his government.”, Qur’an (19:64) – “And we do not descend but by the command of your Lord; to Him belongs whatever is before us and whatever is behind us and whatever is between these, and your Lord is not forgetful.” and Qur’an (4:141) – “…And never will Allah grant to the unbelievers a way (to triumphs) over the believers.”
I’m sure that many “moderate” Muslims would say that it is possible but I also think that they would be declared apostates if they were subjected to sharia law. There is no doubt that in majority Muslim countries, the interpretation is that a believer cannot serve both government and Allah unless they are one and the same…and as I said, that is the antithesis of America.
And one of the central points I have been making this entire time.
NICELY SAID! (stands and applauds).
Yes, but you omitted the humor. You must admit that Professor Progressive and Crustacean Communist are very funny names. I should come up with one for you, GI Joe.
Agreed–the nicknames are witty. And in my case, even accurate.
“they would be declared apostates if they were subjected to sharia law”
Amazing how they can act when they are 3,000 plus miles from home. No Sharia law here …. not yet anyway. 🙂
It seems pretty clear to me that once a majority of Islamic adherents take over a government the county transforms pretty quickly to an autocracy…and that is the antithesis of America.
Can anybody name an Islamic nation that is a successful western style democracy or representative republic?
Indonesia comes to mind, as does Morocco. Both have universal suffrage, Indonesia at 18, Morocco at 17. In Morocco, the King selects the Prime Minister, but all legislative seats are elective.
Bangladesh, a Parliamentary democracy, kinda poor, but still independent.
Albania, parliamentary democracy
and Egypt, Algeria, etc. Some are not doing so well, but then, neither are we. btw the Islamist president of turkey, who supposedly is anti American , agreed in January to allow NATO to build an early-warning missile defense system in western Turkey, the bastard.
‘I’m happy to be corrected’
Are you happy now, or are you gonna parse away on the parliamentary thing?
Morocco: First it isn’t structured like a western democracy, it is a parliamentary constitutional monarchy. According to the CIA Fact book, in the recent elections,the moderate Islamist party, the Justice and Development Party (PJD), was projected to win the largest number of seats. However, the electoral rules were structured such that no political party could ever win more than 20 percent of the seats in the parliament. So there is no way Islamist or other party can solely gain a majority, so not really like the US at all is it? We don’t restrict representation or place limits on who we vote for, do we?
Indonesia: Here’s just a quick sample that I picked up in one search:
Again, not quite the democratic paradise you present and again, not like the US – blasphemy isn’t a federal crime.
Bangladesh: Per the US Department of State 9http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2007/90226.htm):
Albania: per Wikipedia:
So again, not a Muslim country and not like a the US or western democracies at all.
I’m going to count that as an 0-4…and I didn’t even have to parse.
Greg,
Are you so stuck on the idea of opposing reality that you would continue to subject yourself to defending a losing position? It’s sad, really: I had started to think you better than this…
England is a Parliamentary democracy, Utah, and we don’t share the same history, nor the same Constitution, with any of the countries that I mentioned..
I expected you to parse away, you did not disappoint me.
We don’t stone people with whom we disagree, nor do we bar the path to their churches. We upstanding Americans just bomb the living crap out of them in their own countries. We are so much more socially advanced, aren’t we?
England is also not an Islamic country and it is a parliamentary monarchy, not a democracy…and oh, my God (not yours, of course)
I never parsed – I put forth documented proof to support my points. These were my questions:
You assert that I parsed because you ignored the second question.
Your rebuttal? We indiscriminately bomb Muslim people, so we are evil and that makes us the bad guys.
First, that’s not true and second, what the hell does that even have to do with Islamic governments being autocratic and theocratic?
I would say that you are a fool or a simpleton if I didn’t know better – you have a brain, for some reason you just can’t get past the “far out, man”, Timothy Leary “logic”. This response indicates that you are just a warmed over 60’s America hating, self-loathing hippie.
You conceded the point the minute you typed “bomb”.
I give up.
lol! soon enough! That’s what I get for rushing into print.
We don’t share the same history ……with these countries either.
England is also not an Islamic country…YET!
My words — not Utah’s. 🙂
Remember this: https://therionorteline.com/2011/02/05/britannia-no-longer-rules-the-waves/ and this: https://therionorteline.com/2011/02/09/i-really-hate-being-right-all-the-time-but-somebody-has-to-do-it/ and this: https://therionorteline.com/2011/02/14/cultural-decline-in-the-uk-update/ and this: https://therionorteline.com/2011/12/23/selling-the-pews/.
Of course you do…
Yes, I know: I remember. I was just trying to make a point without opening the door for anyone to claim I was putting words in your mouth, boss. I mean, you know the sort we’re dealing with here, so I saw my comment as a sign of respect toward you, nothing more 🙂
I’m just flagging those posts for the folks who are new to the site and weren’t reading in the days of the two cat and two dog readership…thanks for the props – I appreciate your posts – some apparently think they are hard to hear, but they need to be heard. It always amazes me how you can post a direct quote and it is always “they really didn’t mean it” or “they don’t believe that” and then they turn on you on every literal point, punctuation and definition.
I doubt they will understand the reference, but you will, and those I write for may also. So the only thing I can say to explain their opposition is that they have scales over their eyes and ears, brother. Nothing else makes sense — at least, not to me, anyway.
I am coming to understand Ecc 1:18 more and more with every passing day. 😦
Um, ring-a-ding-ding! I was reading you when you had a Captain America avatar. (I believe that’s who you said it was.) Do you recall our conversation, pieface?
OK, two cats,two dogs and a hot chick. I stand corrected.
“Hot chick?” You mean, Kells is stolen property?!
A-g-g-e-r, is there something we should know? 😉
Acts 9:18:
And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight immediately, and arose, and was baptized.
See, I told you you would understand 😉
Well, now that you silly boys have gotten off on a tangent of Bible verses, I shall present you with my favourite: Mattithyahu 5:16-17: Let your light so shine before men, so that they see your good works and praise your Father who is in the heavens.
Do not think that I came to destroy the Torah or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to complete.
And there you have it.
You cited a poor translation: The Torah and the Law are not exactly the same thing.
I suspect you also take something from this passage that is different from what Christ was trying to tell you. He was not telling you that you are free to pick and choose from His Word, but that you are to obey all of it and to show your faith through your obedience. In the past, you have suggested that you are too willing to read things into Christ’s Gospel that might “forgive” you from having to keep all of His teachings. I’ve said it before and I’ll do it again now because Paul tells us to do so: be cautious in how you decide to live the Gospel. It is not something we are supposed to play with, nor change. Might I suggest Young’s literal translation of this passage — expounded?
Matthew 5:10-20
Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)
10 `Happy those persecuted for righteousness’ sake — because theirs is the reign of the heavens.
11 `Happy are ye whenever they may reproach you, and may persecute, and may say any evil thing against you falsely for my sake —
12 rejoice ye and be glad, because your reward [is] great in the heavens, for thus did they persecute the prophets who were before you.
13 `Ye are the salt of the land, but if the salt may lose savour, in what shall it be salted? for nothing is it good henceforth, except to be cast without, and to be trodden down by men.
14 `Ye are the light of the world, a city set upon a mount is not able to be hid;
15 nor do they light a lamp, and put it under the measure, but on the lamp-stand, and it shineth to all those in the house;
16 so let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works, and may glorify your Father who [is] in the heavens.
17 `Do not suppose that I came to throw down the law or the prophets — I did not come to throw down, but to fulfill;
18 for, verily I say to you, till that the heaven and the earth may pass away, one iota or one tittle may not pass away from the law, till that all may come to pass.
19 `Whoever therefore may loose one of these commands — the least — and may teach men so, least he shall be called in the reign of the heavens, but whoever may do and may teach [them], he shall be called great in the reign of the heavens.
20 `For I say to you, that if your righteousness may not abound above that of the scribes and Pharisees, ye may not enter to the reign of the heavens.
We don’t stone people with hime we disagree you say Greg?
I guess this is all just a hoax ….
American Muslims Stone Christians in Dearborn, MI (Original edit)
“We don’t stone people with hime we disagree you say Greg?”
Well, I did a fine job of butchering that one up (damn iPhone needs a better keyboard).
Should read: “We don’t stone people with whom we disagree did you say Greg?”
I have days like that, Augger. 🙂
The older I get, the less my fingers follow commands. LOL
Utah’s post is worthy of plagiarism. I may just have to steal it one day. 🙂
I’m an open source provider, sorta like the Linux of politics – you don’t have to steal, I’ll give it to you. You just have to promise to make it better…
Well, making that post better is going to be a colossal chore. 😦
Censorship? No! .Silencingdissenting opinions? No!. But calling BS? yes. Wax poetic all you want Utah, but your last two posts on Islam has been painting islam with the brush of the intolerant quotes – to which your beyond lame response was to spout about the “new testament”- as if this is the only part of the bible christians or jews abide.
And then you post that Farakhan=”true” isam”. Please.
We’ve debated enough surely you realize I am not a fan of ANY religion…that I see the value in them all but feel that it is *people* who pervert them.
So I think your attacks on Islam as a whole are as disingenuous as some on the lefts attacks on judaism and christianity. The problem is not the mythology, the religion per se. but the willingness of people to pervery a religion- whatever religion, for their own agenda and beliefs. Which is exactly what you seem to be doing as of late.