Indeed. Which as Berbs already pointed out, is commonly known as childish tit for tat.
So you agree that accepting allah's insults without responding in kind is OK. I don't.
Behave like adult human beings who tell the truth in a mature and polite manner.
Being impolite to a person is not the same as being impolite about their god (in my opinion at least). If a muslim happens to disagree with that, he is entitled to his opinion, as I am to mine. Many muslims have tried to tell me that those ugly and insulting verses are not really insulting to the kufar. That is apparently their opinion. Should I agree with that? I don't think so.
You live in Canada, FFS. You are in no danger whatsoever of being forced into dhimmi status, so spare me the childish whining.
That sounds like the kind of thing that could just as easily have been said about the UK and many parts of Europe a generation or 2 ago, but look what has happened.
For example, muslims groups tried to introduce sharia law into Ontario for civil matters a few years ago. They failed, but I am not so naive to believe that they will stop trying. If they were to succeed, they would no doubt try going the next step by trying to introduce sharia law for criminal matters (death for apostasy maybe??).
Muslim groups in Canada are trying their damndest to create a feeling of guilt in this country, which I would bet they consider to be an effective first step. McLean's Magazine was taken to a Human Rights Tribunal (at taxpayers' expense....McLeans had to defend themselves out of their shareholders' pockets) because McLeans wrote some stuff they didn't like. More intimidation tactics.
Muslim groups raised a stink because the Municipal council of Herouxville (Quebec) wrote their own "human rights manifesto" in which they advocated, among other things, the rights of women to drive cars and sign cheques, and in which they disagreed with the idea of a husband beating his wife with impunity. To be sure, its implied aim was to make a statement to muslims, so a delegation of muslims went to Herouxville from Ottawa (at taxpayers' expense of course) to protest this manifesto, calling it hate speech (even though muslims were never mentioned by name as far as I know). The Muncipal Council did not back down. Bully for them.
So for people who are watching what is going on in Canada, there is plenty to whine about, and I would not characterize it as "childish". I happen to think it rather sad that people in the UK and many places in Europe did not start whining a long time ago. Maybe things would be different.
By the way, what do you mean by FFS?
Yes, well, this may shock you, but muslims are human beings just like the rest of us. So whatever the crappy old texts tell them, they mostly behave like ordinary, decent human beings. IOW, they seek a better life for themselves and their children wherever they can.
Of course they are human. I never said otherwise, even though islamic literature says that we kufars are something less than human (pigs and monkeys). I have never said such a thing about a muslim (saying such a thing about their god is another matter).
I don't blame anybody for looking for a better life. But it does seem rather unislamic doesn't it?....Assuming of course that the hereafter really is more important to them than a more comforatble life here on earth. That I find rather difficult to believe, coming from somebody who took the trouble to leave a third world islamic country to live among a bunch of us kufars "pigs and monkeys" (verse 5:60), whom he is not supposed to have as friends (verse 5:51).
That's all I am saying. They are not being islamic when they do sensible things (like looking for a better life and having kufars for friends). I would bet that such steps are, for many, necessary first steps to leave islam altogether.
Are you implying that a text which gives men permission to beat their wives, (as opposed to ordering them to), has some kind of magical power to override their humanity? If so, you either think the Qur'an was sent by God, or that muslim men are less human than the rest of us.
My understanding of the verse and Al Jalalayn's Tafsir is that said verse is not much permission to beat a woman, but rather
an order from dear old allah. Maybe I have missed something.
The language of the verse appears to be in the imperative form. Maybe I am wrong.
Therefore I would consider anybody who otherwise professes to be muslim, but who does not beat his wife (those being allah's orders after all), is not really being islamic at all. In fact he is being a decent human being, contrary to the orders of his allah guy.
That would make him better than his allah guy. Would a muslim take it as an insult if I try to compliment him that way?
At you. You're the person who is insulting them, by your own account, so the anger would be directed at you.
I take the position that I am not insulting them. I am just insulting their god and prophet. I can't help it if they take it personally.
Conversely, I suppose many muslims would argue that their god is not insulting me, but merely being truthful. They can't help it if I take it personally.
Of course it can. Acceptance of religion in all its weird and backward manifestations has an ability to live inside the same brain as an intelligent and independent mind. Islam is no exception, if it was it would have died out within a few generations of Muhammed's death.
I beg to disagree. I think islam is an exception. There may be other exceptions too, but that would be a separate debate.
Islam is an exception because of, among other things, the rules on apostasy in islamic law.
Didn't the prophet say "If anyone changes his islamic religion, kill him" (Bukhari hadith, volume 9:57)?
I am more inclined to suggest that the estimated 80 million hindus who were slaughtered during the muslim conquest of India were the ones who were courageous enough to have the independent minds. Apparently they chose to die rather than convert.
My understanding of islamic literature basically tells me that I must either convert or die. It isn't happening here because muslims don't have the horsepower to enforce that law......................YET.
Islam was spread by the sword. Do not both muslims and Hindus refer to Afghanistan as the "Hindu Kush" (Hindu slaughter)? That's what my Hindu and Sikh friends tell me anyhow. Are they wrong?
Were it not for that pervasive coercion, then I would agree with you. Islam , in the absence of such brutal coercion, would have died out long ago, because it is totally senseless.
Topic: Israeli Air Raids on Gaza