Tell me about Islam

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm beginning to realize that their antagonism is an expression of their fear about the spread of Islam. Islam is the fastest growing religion, not only in the world but also in the US. Moreover, it is growing in the US, not by immigration, but instead by conversion. They know this. They feel terribly threatened by this because they fear Muslims will take over the US and want to convert it to a Sharia state. They fear it will give birth to grops like ISIS.

There is nothing frightening about Islam in the U.S. It's a very small part of the American social fabric. Muslims in America will never be numerous enough to take the country over, certainly not within the lifetime of anyone posting here.

As far as I know, no one maintains records on conversions. Therefore, all discussion of growth by conversion is opinion unsupported by facts. If you know of a source of reliable facts on conversion numbers, do share.

Different PP here. I, too, have heard that the conversion stats, such as they are, are very suspect. A major factor is that Islam punishes apostasy with death. Lapsed Muslims (born Muslim or converted) are never striken from the "total number of Muslims" (such as this is), because it's actually impossible to leave Islam, whether you were born into it or converted. In modern societies, thankfully, you aren't killed, instead Muslim authorities simply continue to count you as a Muslim, even though you've converted to another religion or become an atheist. A secondary reason for failing to account for lapsed Muslims is, obviously, the huge premium Islam places on winning converts.

I've heard it said that you can tell the doubters at prayertime by watching their butts, to see if they bobb with enthusiasm.

I don't think that in modern societies, such as the U.S., there are any "Muslim authorities" counting, or not counting the number of Muslims. Is there a religion question on the Census? Otherwise I am not aware of any centralized surveys on religion other than the privately commissioned ones.

I've heard several people say "when I was a Muslim" quite freely so clearly, in the West leaving Islam is in fact possible. There are social costs for doing so but the same applies to any religion.

A Muslim-majority country, though, is a different story. Those tend to record your religion on your ID documents, and changing it there from Muslim to anything is...challenging. Just 'cause I need to be polite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
When have you ever lived in a Muslim country? And yet you're educating Muslims who do?

I find PP, with her rigorous logic and extensive facts, much more believable than you, with your disengenous half-truths and your snarky responses. Responding with snark and ad hominems makes you look less credible, not more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is this your best response? To ridicule me and put other peoples' words in my mouth? I never called Muhammed a pedophile, that was another poster. And I put quotes around
"beauty" because I was quoting you and your repeated use of the word "beautiful" to describe your religion. I don't happen to agree, so I needed to indicate that "beauty" was your word, not my own. You seem to live by the adage, when you have no response, attack the person.

No matter. The facts are now a matter of record. Other readers can read your limited statements, and then they can read more complete descriptions from the other PP and myself. And they can draw their own conclusions.

Muhammad was called a pedophile, yet you're offended that I poked fun at "unconsensual"? WTH? And yes the quotes around beauty is sarcasm. If you merely disagreed, you'd simply state you disagree. So if you're going to dish it, better develop a thick skin.

I'm in no way offended that you caught my spell-check function in the act of making a bad correction - who would be offended by something like that? But now I'm surprised you're making such a big deal about it. I've resisted pointing out grammatical/spelling errors in your many posts, because that's what adults do.

My point was, and still is: you're only undermining yourself when you keep resorting to nonsense retorts like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is this your best response? To ridicule me and put other peoples' words in my mouth? I never called Muhammed a pedophile, that was another poster. And I put quotes around
"beauty" because I was quoting you and your repeated use of the word "beautiful" to describe your religion. I don't happen to agree, so I needed to indicate that "beauty" was your word, not my own. You seem to live by the adage, when you have no response, attack the person.

No matter. The facts are now a matter of record. Other readers can read your limited statements, and then they can read more complete descriptions from the other PP and myself. And they can draw their own conclusions.

Muhammad was called a pedophile, yet you're offended that I poked fun at "unconsensual"? WTH? And yes the quotes around beauty is sarcasm. If you merely disagreed, you'd simply state you disagree. So if you're going to dish it, better develop a thick skin.

I'm in no way offended that you caught my spell-check function in the act of making a bad correction - who would be offended by something like that? But now I'm surprised you're making such a big deal about it. I've resisted pointing out grammatical/spelling errors in your many posts, because that's what adults do.

My point was, and still is: you're only undermining yourself when you keep resorting to nonsense retorts like this.

PS. I never called Mohammed a pedophile, either. There seem to be two of us who are sticking to trying to clarify your statements--and then there's at least one other poster who specializes in hit-and-run insults. Don't join him/her with the hit-and-run insults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So where did u get the idea we Muslims want or need you to think Islam is fabulous? Just because your in laws do? There are plenty of conversions to Islam and I hope to God none of them are under any compulsion.

I would never convert but a bunch of my husband's friends married American ladies who went back to Saudia with them, and because life in KSA is much easier for a Muslim, they converted out of sheer convenience of it all. In fact, I remember at a going-away party of one couple, the woman laughingly said, don't mind it, I'll convert and be a bad Muslim!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm beginning to realize that their antagonism is an expression of their fear about the spread of Islam. Islam is the fastest growing religion, not only in the world but also in the US. Moreover, it is growing in the US, not by immigration, but instead by conversion. They know this. They feel terribly threatened by this because they fear Muslims will take over the US and want to convert it to a Sharia state. They fear it will give birth to grops like ISIS.

There is nothing frightening about Islam in the U.S. It's a very small part of the American social fabric. Muslims in America will never be numerous enough to take the country over, certainly not within the lifetime of anyone posting here.

As far as I know, no one maintains records on conversions. Therefore, all discussion of growth by conversion is opinion unsupported by facts. If you know of a source of reliable facts on conversion numbers, do share.

Different PP here. I, too, have heard that the conversion stats, such as they are, are very suspect. A major factor is that Islam punishes apostasy with death. Lapsed Muslims (born Muslim or converted) are never striken from the "total number of Muslims" (such as this is), because it's actually impossible to leave Islam, whether you were born into it or converted. In modern societies, thankfully, you aren't killed, instead Muslim authorities simply continue to count you as a Muslim, even though you've converted to another religion or become an atheist. A secondary reason for failing to account for lapsed Muslims is, obviously, the huge premium Islam places on winning converts.

I've heard it said that you can tell the doubters at prayertime by watching their butts, to see if they bobb with enthusiasm.

I believe the quotes in one of the links provided was for the Muslim count in the US, not Muslim countries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is this your best response? To ridicule me and put other peoples' words in my mouth? I never called Muhammed a pedophile, that was another poster. And I put quotes around
"beauty" because I was quoting you and your repeated use of the word "beautiful" to describe your religion. I don't happen to agree, so I needed to indicate that "beauty" was your word, not my own. You seem to live by the adage, when you have no response, attack the person.

No matter. The facts are now a matter of record. Other readers can read your limited statements, and then they can read more complete descriptions from the other PP and myself. And they can draw their own conclusions.

Muhammad was called a pedophile, yet you're offended that I poked fun at "unconsensual"? WTH? And yes the quotes around beauty is sarcasm. If you merely disagreed, you'd simply state you disagree. So if you're going to dish it, better develop a thick skin.

I'm in no way offended that you caught my spell-check function in the act of making a bad correction - who would be offended by something like that? But now I'm surprised you're making such a big deal about it. I've resisted pointing out grammatical/spelling errors in your many posts, because that's what adults do.

My point was, and still is: you're only undermining yourself when you keep resorting to nonsense retorts like this.

PS. I never called Mohammed a pedophile, either. There seem to be two of us who are sticking to trying to clarify your statements--and then there's at least one other poster who specializes in hit-and-run insults. Don't join him/her with the hit-and-run insults.

This is an anonymous forum. I have no idea who used the term "pedophile" and who did not. But it was used and I didn't see too many people jump in to protest usage of that word. And read again. I didn't state that YOU called Muhammad a pedophile. I said "Muhammad was called a pedophile." I was careful not to accuse you. And I absolutely will judge you on not only your writing but how well you defend your points. It presents your knowledge and careful reasoning. There are a couple of you on this board that reason poorly, and I suspect one of those might be you, UNconsensual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is this your best response? To ridicule me and put other peoples' words in my mouth? I never called Muhammed a pedophile, that was another poster. And I put quotes around
"beauty" because I was quoting you and your repeated use of the word "beautiful" to describe your religion. I don't happen to agree, so I needed to indicate that "beauty" was your word, not my own. You seem to live by the adage, when you have no response, attack the person.

No matter. The facts are now a matter of record. Other readers can read your limited statements, and then they can read more complete descriptions from the other PP and myself. And they can draw their own conclusions.

Muhammad was called a pedophile, yet you're offended that I poked fun at "unconsensual"? WTH? And yes the quotes around beauty is sarcasm. If you merely disagreed, you'd simply state you disagree. So if you're going to dish it, better develop a thick skin.

I'm in no way offended that you caught my spell-check function in the act of making a bad correction - who would be offended by something like that? But now I'm surprised you're making such a big deal about it. I've resisted pointing out grammatical/spelling errors in your many posts, because that's what adults do.

My point was, and still is: you're only undermining yourself when you keep resorting to nonsense retorts like this.

PS. I never called Mohammed a pedophile, either. There seem to be two of us who are sticking to trying to clarify your statements--and then there's at least one other poster who specializes in hit-and-run insults. Don't join him/her with the hit-and-run insults.

This is an anonymous forum. I have no idea who used the term "pedophile" and who did not. But it was used and I didn't see too many people jump in to protest usage of that word. And read again. I didn't state that YOU called Muhammad a pedophile. I said "Muhammad was called a pedophile." I was careful not to accuse you. And I absolutely will judge you on not only your writing but how well you defend your points. It presents your knowledge and careful reasoning. There are a couple of you on this board that reason poorly, and I suspect one of those might be you, UNconsensual.

You think that anyone who disagrees with you reasons poorly. I think people were courteous enough to turn a blind eye to Muslima's stylistic downfalls and focused on the substance of her posts instead. It doesn't really improve your argument to keep quoting a typo made in a medium where spelling is not critical to expression.

[Anonymous]

Since we are all about reasoning, let me ask a reasonable questions: what is the source of the mind-boggling conversion numbers you two have cited?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm beginning to realize that their antagonism is an expression of their fear about the spread of Islam. Islam is the fastest growing religion, not only in the world but also in the US. Moreover, it is growing in the US, not by immigration, but instead by conversion. They know this. They feel terribly threatened by this because they fear Muslims will take over the US and want to convert it to a Sharia state. They fear it will give birth to grops like ISIS.

Like here. You are making an argument that should be rooted in statistics. So where are the sources? Or is it opinion, not fact?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Think on this - the Bible is the Old Testament from the Jewish people, and the New Testament is all about how the messiah (Jesus) came to die for us so that we may go to heaven.

The Jewish text says the messiah would be crucified. And the whole point of all the New Testament about Jesus is to be good to one another and that he died for us.

So Mohammed says that he believes some of the Jewish text, and almost none of the New Testament? He picks ok, I believe Moses, but not the book of Isaiah. He believes Jesus came, but almost everything else is a lie. So the Jewish bible and Christian bible is full of lies. Doesn't that sound a bit strange? Then why even believe any of the Bible? I mean, Christians and Jesus never said the Torah lied, or any large portion of the Torah is a lie. And Jesus said false prophets would come, and the ONLY unforgivable sin is to turn people away from Jesus.

And one more thing - the biggest humdinger of it all.

John (Elijah) and Jesus fulfilled prophecies. Now wouldn't someone as "special" and important as Mohammed be prophecized about - wouldn't god have told somebody he was coming???? No. There are only two prophecies remaining -

1) false prophets who will turn people away from Christianity and Jesus; and
2) the anti-Christ.

Of course, if you are Jewish, you are still just waiting for the messiah, and we know Mohammed was obviously not that.

But what about THIS? What sayeth you to this?

Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Crickets?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This is an anonymous forum. I have no idea who used the term "pedophile" and who did not. But it was used and I didn't see too many people jump in to protest usage of that word. And read again. I didn't state that YOU called Muhammad a pedophile. I said "Muhammad was called a pedophile." I was careful not to accuse you. And I absolutely will judge you on not only your writing but how well you defend your points. It presents your knowledge and careful reasoning. There are a couple of you on this board that reason poorly, and I suspect one of those might be you, UNconsensual.

You called Mary a porn queen.... Or if that wasn't you, you didn't criticize it. So I will absolutely judge you on your shameless hypocrisy.

I also judge you for your petty obsession with a typo. If I wanted, I could go after your second-to-last sentence, which is gibberish, but as an adult I know that people don't always proofread carefully, and I also understand that getting vindictive about a typo is childish and petty. You, on the other hand, go straight to childish and petty with the personal insults, also known ad hominems, that are the hallmark of a sleazy debater.

You need to realize that, since you've put yourself out as some sort of representative of Islam, your behavior reflects very poorly on your religion. You're representing Islam, not acting in some cheap sitcom, for Pete's sake.

[Anonymous]

^^^ WHICH are the hallmark of a sleazy debater.

Speaking of proof-reading. So I hope you won't go all childish and petty on me for that, now, although I certainly do understand your motives for wanting to criticize typos/grammar instead of defending Islamic rules on divorce, et cetera.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm beginning to realize that their antagonism is an expression of their fear about the spread of Islam. Islam is the fastest growing religion, not only in the world but also in the US. Moreover, it is growing in the US, not by immigration, but instead by conversion. They know this. They feel terribly threatened by this because they fear Muslims will take over the US and want to convert it to a Sharia state. They fear it will give birth to grops like ISIS.

Like here. You are making an argument that should be rooted in statistics. So where are the sources? Or is it opinion, not fact?

+1. Put me down, too, as wanting to see a source for this claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm beginning to realize that their antagonism is an expression of their fear about the spread of Islam. Islam is the fastest growing religion, not only in the world but also in the US. Moreover, it is growing in the US, not by immigration, but instead by conversion. They know this. They feel terribly threatened by this because they fear Muslims will take over the US and want to convert it to a Sharia state. They fear it will give birth to grops like ISIS.

Like here. You are making an argument that should be rooted in statistics. So where are the sources? Or is it opinion, not fact?

+1. Put me down, too, as wanting to see a source for this claim.

For this claim to work, whoever made it needs to produce two sets of numbers: growth of Islam in the U.S. by immigration, and growth of Islam in the U.S. by conversion. The first number needs to be lower than the second.

So no, "they" don't know it, I certainly don't. But if you post your sources, I might.