Justice Minister Mohammed Al-Eissa gave the world a chilling lesson on the blind faith that underlies the medieval Sharia system imposed by Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. Al-Eissa warned that questioning the Sharia system was akin to questioning God and “Any attack on the judiciary will be considered an attack on the Kingdom’s sovereignty.” That certainly simplifies things. Most people harbor a notion that they can criticize their legal system and call for reforms but Al-Eissa pointed out that their legal system comes from God and is therefore not subject to change on its most controversial parts. “Justice” will continue to be meted out in “Chop Chop Square” (Deera Square, right) in the name of Islam.
Al-Eissa attacked “rights organizations” like they were akin to pornographers. They certainly seemed akin to blasphemers in his mind. He explained that they misunderstand Sharia law and these “rights organizations [are] making big mistakes in their reports.” The biggest mistake is that they do not recognize that Sharia law comes from the Koran (Qu’ran) and “[t]hese punishments are based on divine religious texts and we cannot change them.”
Al-Eissa has a bachelor of arts degree in sharia law at Imam Muhammad bin Saud University.
So, it is easy. Just accept that Sharia is divine law and all of these concerns melt away. Besides he adds, if you cannot trust my religion, what can you trust? — “Islam is a religion of wisdom that calls for dialogue with other religious faiths and peaceful coexistence with other communities. If it was not a good religion, it would not have lasted for more than 1,400 years and won millions of followers around the world.”
As for flogging and executions, those are just divine judgment as unchangeable as God’s word. Besides, he noted,“Islam sympathizes with the victim, not the criminal.”
It was an interesting pivot. If you do not want to view Sharia as God’s justice, than view Islam as the ultimate “law and order” faith.
So there you have it. If you hate it, you either do not understand Islam or you are a blasphemer. Of course, if you are a blasphemer in criticizing Sharia law, then Sharia law demands your death. Problem solved.
Source:Arab News
Karen, It appears there may be less moderate Muslims than there are honest politicians. I say that tongue and cheek. There are many moderate Muslims, but their silence is deafening.
Nick, you are the first and only libertarian I have met who is lucid. I have spoken with Tea Party members in the post office where they claim that the USPS receives all of its funding from the government — and that is simply untrue. Jeff Bezos believes he is God’s gift to capitalism, but his entire business model is based on the Internet, which only exists because of government entities, universities, and other public institutions. Other libertarians have told me the golden era of the U.S. was the Gilded Age, conveniently forgetting how men like George Pullman were actually lords with serf-like employees. Most constantly proclaim that taxes are unnecessary, yet they drive on the Interstate highways that Eisenhower created (Interstate highways would NOT exist in their current form without government intervention).
Do I think, like most liberals, that government regulation is the answer to everything? No, not even close. I’d like to return to the 1960s before bankers made millions before and after they crashed the economy, before the UAW ruined the auto companies, before corporate executives started being given truckloads of cash regardless of their job performance, when the U.S. was manufacturing everything under the sun, and when just about everyone who wanted a job could get one. Some things were not right in the 1960s, to be sure, but overall it was a better time.
“Are all Dems alike, all Republicans?”
Yes, actually, I think the vast majority are. That’s why I do not fit in anywhere, because righties think I’m a liberal on economic matter and lefties think I’m conservative on social matters.
By the way, do you agree with the classic libertarian line about unfettered immigration being good for the country?
P.S. It really annoys me that I accidentally slimed you with a false attribution, especially since there are many people here who deserve such a thing.
saucy – it appears that most liberals feel alike.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/06/26/poll-only-40-of-solid-liberals-say-they-often-feel-proud-to-be-american/
And you are absolutely correct that Muslims only see one Islam – no “radical” no “moderate.”
“Moderate” or “modern” Islam is a term coined to describe Muslims who live peacefully in the West with other faiths, who follow our laws. It is not a word that the Muslim world accepts. Islamic Extremism is the norm, not the exception, in the entire Middle East. If you do not believe me, try to get a travel visa as a Jew to Saudi Arabia.
They reject the idea of reform. In fact, if Sharia Law were to spread to the West, they would force those “moderate” Muslims to get in line and renounce their Western ways, or suffer the consequences. I’ve known Muslims who were born here in the US who got a very unpleasant shock when they went to Iran to visit relatives.
Saucy:
“This is the essence of the problem. Muslims believe that the Koran is perfect as is, so anyone criticizing it is the devil. No middle ground there.”
Exactly.
Paul – hahahahaha!
And that miraculously servers re-wrote after 6 months, and that their contractor defied the written agreement to retain emails for 3 years after the end of the contract.
Mohammed was a conquerer who married a 9 year old, consummated at 11. I don’t think he’d have a problem with Islamic extremism.
Saucy, We are much more alike than you might think. We both call out the BS of Dems and Rep, being true independents. I have stated here many times for whom I vote. I have never voted for a Republican Prez, I have voted for 2 Dem. My voting record is out there, it doesn’t change. There are people who just lie about for whom they vote in order to try and win an argument. I know someone who now lies they didn’t vote for Obama in 2012 when I know they did. I don’t know if it’s shame or just trying to make a point in an argument. I have a liar detector, honed by years of exposing them. You sir are a straight shooter, I enjoy discussing w/ you.
Karen S wrote “But if you cannot have a New Testament, or discussion on how the writer’s views and human frailty may have colored the writings, then there can be no reform or moderation.”
This is the essence of the problem. Muslims believe that the Koran is perfect as is, so anyone criticizing it is the devil. No middle ground there.
Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan once said: “Turkey is not a country where moderate Islam prevails. This expression is wrong. The word Islam is uninflected, it is only Islam. If you say moderate Islam, then an alternative is created, and that is immoderate Islam. As a Muslim, I can’t accept such a concept. Islam rejects extreme concepts. I am not an extreme Muslim.” Erdogan also said that “assimilation is a crime against humanity” referring to the fact that Turks in Germany refuse to become European.
And Turkey is one of the countries assisting ISIS in Syria.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/06/24/syrian-kurdish-leader-turkey-turns-blind-eye-to-isis
Saucy, I will address your comment about libertarians because it is a sane, sincere one. To think all libertarians are alike is ludicrous on it’s face. Are all Dems alike, all Republicans? Well, the duopoly do have to toe a line, but they have disparate views within their ranks. The poor SOB’s only have two choices, or in the case of cultists, one choice! I keep stuff simple. My views on religion is you thank God by being kind and generous to other people. Helping people who need help. Everything else is simply horse manure. Same w/ politics. I, like most libertarians, keep it simple. Less taxes and government, more personal freedoms. We are fiscally conservative and socially quite liberal. People who attack libertarians because of Ayn Rand have a biased and myopic view of a diverse group, connected by a simple ethos, less government, more personal freedom. Sounds like our founding father’s to me.
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html
George Bush on “religion of peace”.
And I don’t for one minute think Isalm is a religion of peace.
http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Moroni,_Angel
Author: Romney, Joseph B.
The angel Moroni is the heavenly messenger who first visited the Prophet Joseph Smith in 1823. As a mortal named Moroni 2, he had completed the compilation and writing of the Book of Mormon. He ministered to Joseph Smith as a resurrected being, in keeping with his responsibility for the Book of Mormon, inasmuch as “the keys of the record of the stick of Ephraim” had been committed to him by the Lord (D&C 27:5). Pursuant to this responsibility he first appeared to Joseph Smith on the night of September 21-22, 1823 (JS-H 1:29-49; D&C 128:20), and thereafter counseled with him in several reappearances until the book was published in 1830. During that time, he instructed Joseph Smith, testified to the Three Witnesses of the Book of Mormon, and otherwise assisted in the work of restoring the gospel.
Because of the angel Moroni’s role in restoring the everlasting gospel to be preached to all the world (cf. Rev. 14:6-7; D&C 133:31-39), the Church placed a statue depicting him as a herald of the Restoration atop the Salt Lake Temple, and later on the hill Cumorah near Palmyra, New York, where anciently he had buried the Book of Mormon plates. Copies of the statue have also been placed atop several other LDS temples.
**************************************
Religious people believe all sorts of weird stories.
Annie – non-religious people believe all sorts of strange tales. Democrats seem to believe 6 computers can crash simultaneously and there are no backups.
Paul, talk about believing weird things, some still believe there were WMDs in Iraq.
Annie – there were WMDs in Iraq. I point you to Operation Viking Hammer.
Bob, Esquire says there wasn’t. Since he’s so knowledgeable I must believe him and all his sources above yours, sorry Paul.
Annie – are you going to believe Bob, Esq. or your own lying eyes. Check out Operation Viking Hammer.
Mr Keebler wrote “Mohammad is probably spinning in his tomb”
Surely you jest.
‘M’ married his favorite wife Aisha when she was 6-7 and he was in his fifties; they consummated the marriage when she was 9-10. Today Muslims justify their marriage to little girls because of his example.
‘M’ instructed his followers to spread Islam by the sword and that is why the Moors invaded and occupied the Iberian Peninsula from 700-ish to 1500-ish.
Immediately after his death in 632, two branches of Islam emerged, Shia and Sunni, which have fought each other since then.
‘M’ wrote somewhat non-violent Koranic passages at the beginning of his career because he was not free to express himself fully. Later he wrote the really nasty passages. According to the principle of abrogation, his later passages supersede his earlier ones. That’s why liberals can find peaceful passages and point to Islam being a religion of peace, while Muslims understand that only the later, violent ones are relevant.
Muslims are doing exactly what ‘M’ would have wanted.
Islam sympathizes with the victim.
Unless the crime is rape.
Well, I guess I can cross Saudi Arabia off of places to visit, since I have blasphemed and criticized Sharia Law.
The difficulty lies in the Qu’ran being viewed as actually written by Allah. That means no changes, updates, no New Testament, can ever be written.
The Old Testament of the Bible is understood to have been written by Man, inspired by God. Hence there could be a New Testament. That is why we no longer burn bulls, for example.
But if you cannot have a New Testament, or discussion on how the writer’s views and human frailty may have colored the writings, then there can be no reform or moderation. Kind of a problem.
Karen – we know the Koran was the word of God, since Mohammad was illiterate and the Koran was dictated by an angel (I think).
You know Mohammad is probably spinning in his tomb. Ridiculous folks they’ve become.
As for Saudi Arabia and Islamic countries that have made Islam their state religion, stay away, far away, especially if you’re a woman, even if you’re an American citizen, you’re still in danger. I’ve known one American woman who was married to a Muslim man and went to visit the husband’s home country, she and the children never came back.
Why do these peole want to call themselves libertarians when they are nothing but righties? Why not just embrace what they are? All the inconsistencies occur when they continue to embrace rightist ideas while not wanting to ‘belong’ to the GOP. They are no more independent and free thinkers than their fellow GOPers. Hence Glibertarians. I have not really seen a real libertarian here yet.
I dream of a world where – one day – tyranny and oppression are brought to just as swift an end as humanly possible.
Nick wrote “Saucy has a bug up his butt about libertarians”
Yes, he does, but not for the reason you stated. I hate inconsistency. Most people hold contradictory beliefs and have no idea they do. Many people think they are libertarians because it sounds so wonderful to not have to pay taxes, yet they fail to pontificate on the infrastructure taxes pay for.
I researched Ayn Rand a long time ago because, at first glance, she appeared to have some interesting ideas. She was a witch. She expected everyone to follow her every move and hated libertarians because they did not always do so (I’m proving your point, sort of). In terms of morality, she made Bill Clinton look pious. She slept with her friend’s husbands. It is likely that one of these people was Alan Greenspan. She believed in unfettered capitalism, yet the best examples of this philosophy, China and Somalia, are not nice places to live.
And as I wrote in “Alan Greenspan, Ayn Rand, and the child killer,” she greatly admired a brutal murderer, William Edward Hickman, because his statement after his 1927 crime was “the best and strongest expression of a real man’s psychology I have heard.”