Koran & Murder Case

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

So now that you can't use translation as an excuse, what is your response?

Did I use the translation as an excuse? I said it matters. I didn't say every translation is wrong and is full of flaws. Stop putting words in my mouth.

You see, the problem with Muslims who come up with these nice explanations is that you're out of touch with the clergy, and Imams.

You haven't been paying attention to anything I've said, then. I've already talked about my experience with Imams.

The Muslims follow the Hadith which was neither written by Mohamed nor by god and they do give the Hadith the status of the words of god.

Hadiths are words of the messenger, our prophet Mohammed, the ones that don't quote either God or the prophet are based on stories that (we believe) have happend to the prophet Mohammed. Check your sources before you spew more shit.

As for the story of Hindi

For the 2nd time, her name is Hind.

As an outsider, and a Jew, the beauty of your larger message is completely lost on me once the story ends in conversion

I don't really care how you interpret the story. I had a point and I made it. Take it how you will. Hind was not forced to convert. She converted way later after the incident that I spoke of, willingly. If she was forced to convert they would have forced her to do it before she taught herself more about Islam. However, this was not the case.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by mburbank

It's GONE through it? You're certain about that? I mean, I'm not predicting a return to auto dafe I think you're being pretty cocky. Everybody always thinks the way things are in their time is hwere everything has always been headed and that history can just stop changing now.

Ugh. Okay, this moral equivalence crap is getting silly.

"Oh yeah! Oh yeah! They have suicide bombings and codified oppression of women!? Well what about Pat Robertson and anti-gay legislation!!?? IT'S ALL THE SAME!!"



If we can't get away from citing the fucking Crusades every time we talk about a suicide bombing that happened YESTERDAY, then this argument is pointless. I also think it's in fact a discredit to intelligent and peaceful muslims all over the world.

"okay, so this muslim ran into a coffee shop in Israel and blew up some children....BUT, what VERSION of the Koran was he reading, huh?????"

!!!!!!!!!

This is crazy. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

AND if it was correct to determine that a religion had something inherently evil in it, would you agree that Christianity should have thrown out with the bathwater during the Inquisition?

No, I didn't say there was anything evil about anything. My point was that you can believe all sorts of crazy religious texts, and take them at their most literal meaning, but it's how you choose to act on it that defines you. I think that's what separates Christianity in America today from Islam in the Middle East today, for example.

But there's barbarism a plenty in most of your religous texts, and even when there isn't much, there are always swaths of people ready to read it in.

Right, that's what I said.

Right now all three branches of government are controlled by a party headed by a man who does not seem to think the church/state divide is all that important and at very least is due for some serious ventilation.

Oh, come on Max. This isn't fair, it doesn't even belong in a conversation about the Koran being used to codify law in the Middle East.

When Bush says something that seems even remotely Christian, or seems to cross that church/state line, there are millions of Americans, led by Jon Stewart, who will jump on him for it. It'll get debated in the press. It'll be the punch line on Letterman. It simply isn't the same.

do you honestly believe that Christianity would be way more civil just do to it's inherent goodness?

I dunno, and you're probably right about colonialism and stuff, but we need to play the cards we're handed, no? Because white Europeans colonized the Middle East, should we stick our heads in the sand (no pun intended) and say "hey, sure they're killing Jews and locking up their women, but someone who looks like me killed someone who looks like them 200 years ago, so I need to stay quiet"?

I think violent fundamentalism is a problem all it's own, a poisonous, contageous mental sickness that grafts itself to religion. I think historically there is evidence that strong religous belief makes people vulnerable to fundamentalism. But religion isn't all it likes. It likes nationalism too, and even patriotism.

Certainly, and this is basically all I'm trying to say. I'm not trying to judge Islam, but I am saying that the problem with Islam isn't colonialists, or Israel, or America, or the Lawrence. It's a problem that will ultimately only be solved by Muslims.

[Abcdxxxx]

Fuzzbot - You're all fluff if that was supposed to be your big comeback. I'm dissapointed, really. Let me ask you... how many Hadiths do you happen to believe are authentic ? Isn't there a difference of opinion, and isn't it standard knowledge that some Hadiths were deemed to be forgeries ? By the way, I said the Hadiths recieve the same STATUS as gods word...which is different then questioning if they're gods word.

[mburbank]

Kev; well, now I have a clearer idea what you're saying , I don't think we disagree very much.

Heres the problem I see.

"A Muslim ran into coffee shop and blew it up because he was Muslim! All Muslims, if they have not blown up a coffee shop yet are liable too soon enough!"

I agree, this is a problem that needs a Muslim solution. One could wish for a Muslim Gandhi, and I'm sujre lots of Muslims do.

As far as relatavism goes, I think you miss me. I'm not saying the Inquisition justifies suicide bombing. All I'm saying is pride goeth before the fall. If you want to say Christianity currently has fewer fundamentalists who are generally less a savage then Islam, we don't disagree. But I don't think that has anything to do with the superiority of our good book, and I don't have any faith that history is linear. History is littered with the wreckage of people who thought their worst behavior was in the past.

"Oh, come on Max. This isn't fair, it doesn't even belong in a conversation about the Koran being used to codify law in the Middle East. "

I think it does. Islam has been hijacked. Christianity is ripe for hijack. You are comfortable it can't happen here. I'm not. We have a President who believes God speaks to him who looses no sleep over the death and destruction he's involved in. The administration is actively testing the waters of removing habeus corpus, instatutionalizing torture and the removal of separation of powers. We are about to have a justice on the court who believes in unified executive power. We have a Republican party in control and the core of it's leadship have publicly stated they want as close to a one party system as they are able to get. Do you see a resistance forming? Do you think if George Bush, Dick Chenney, Grover Norquist, Pat Robertson saw the chance to achieve the power of a mullah they'd scruple over it? Don't you think there were probably lots of Muslims who at one point or another said "Hey, I'm devout, but what the fuck is going on here?" along the way?

The time to wake up to encroaching fundamentalism is before it takes root. Sure, we'd never let ol' W do anything silly like declare martial law or round up the intellectuals. We have a really great constitution that keeps that from happening. But what if you add a little fear into the mix, say a big terrorist strike? And the Fundamentalists on the other side of the fence would be happy to help.

I think these cats are seriously dangerous to America. I truly do. And I think they'd like to use some sickening blend of ultra simple minded Christianity and nationalism to back of their version of the 'law' just exactly the way the Koran is currently being abused. I just think we're earlier in the process and lacking a few key ingredients that unfortunately the 'shadowy war against a shadowy enemy' provides.

I hope you're right and I'm wrong, I hope the really serious threats are all on the outside but I think some very powerful interests are trying to make fundamental changes to America on a scale that would have shamed Nixon. I keep waiting for the pendulum to swing the other way like it did when McCarthy fell part, but I don't see it yet.

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Fuzzbot - You're all fluff if that was supposed to be your big comeback. I'm dissapointed, really. Let me ask you... how many Hadiths do you happen to believe are authentic ? Isn't there a difference of opinion, and isn't it standard knowledge that some Hadiths were deemed to be forgeries ? By the way, I said the Hadiths recieve the same STATUS as gods word...which is different then questioning if they're gods word.

If you've read correctly, you fucking ignorant piece of shit, you would've noticed that I already answered those questions indirectly in my post. Do you think I give a shit what disappoints you? You fucking thought Bahrain was a part of Iran, that's fucking laughable. GO DO YOUR RESEARCH. Or are you going to keep blaming it on "IT WAS 5 AM AND YOUR POSTS ARE LONG AND I COULDN'T KEEP UP!"

The Koran is long too, do you get confused a lot with where's where and what's what? Do you misunderstand it so much because you only read it at 5 AM?

Isn't there a difference of opinion, and isn't it standard knowledge that some Hadiths were deemed to be forgeries ?

That is my own business and no one else's. This is why I put (we believe) in that sentence. I believe. Not YOU, I believe that they are the words representing the prophet, I couldn't care less that you fucking don't think so, how does that effect me? We know which ones were forgeries and which ones weren't. It's apparent in the language itself, too bad you don't even speak it before critisizing. People attempted to re-write parts of the Koran, but others can find this out with ease. We know which ones are true and which ones are not because the Koran itself is based on hadiths. We know more about the prophet through hadiths. It isn't an explanation of the Koran. It's confirmation of what's in it.

So if it's not included in the Koran, then obviously it's not really reliable. Are you following? Something tells me you're going to ask a stupid question that's going to end up in me repeating everything I've said.

This is my religion. My personal choice. My faith. I believe what I feel is right to believe in. I believe those Hadiths just like any other Christian would believe in the miracles of Jesus. I believe those Hadiths stressed the importance of the Prophet just like someone from any other religion would believe that their holy text are the words of Gods. What's sickening here is that you think you're being so clever (which you're not, I've yet to see someone half as dumb) without even realizing that if you re-word those phrases, you can actually apply those questions to ANY religion. Those questions are the BASIS of understanding a particular religion. This is what makes religion so personal - You can debate about what you find wrong or questionable in Islam, but the fact remains that you're not even willing to learn because like ziggytrix said, you already MADE your biased opinion regarding this matter and you will do your research (in your case, sadly, it's Google) by trying to find things by looking for it from one lense.

Sucks to be you.

[Abcdxxxx]

1) I've addressed several very direct questions to you, and you refuse to answer any of them. If you're not capable, then don't bother responding. It speaks volumes to my credebility. I don't think google is half as sad as your no response ass.

2) You're back to the language and translation defense, yet, when I presented my claims with the translations IN ARABIC you copped out then too. You already said you're not using it as a defense, then in the next breath you're bitching that I don't speak the language.

3) You're some twit with a computer trying to spread the gospel, and getting challenged. I'm interested in what POPULAR Islam believes. You're nothing. Not to me, and not to the Islamic clergy. What are we supposed to learn from you, when you're completely out of touch with the Islamic clergy, and imams? It sounds like you're butt hurt and don't want to be questioned.... maybe you should have thought of that before you put yourself out on a forum, and got smeared.

4) Your response would have one presume that the Hadiths are clear cut, and that the forged Hadiths are universally recognized in Islam. You wouldn't respond with the number of Hadiths you recognize, but I asked because different Muslims use different groups of Hadiths which they recognize as legit. Meaning, there are Muslims using Hadiths you probably don't.

5) We're talking about Pan-Islamism as a political ideology. Your theological outreach bullshit is pure self indulgence. What you personally believe, and what you were personally taught is anecdotal.

[glowbelly]

i think you're being an ass :O

[Pharaoh]

Spot on Abcdxxxx. The five pillars of fuzzbot.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by Pharaoh

Spot on Abcdxxxx. The five pillars of fuzzbot.

I think cheerleader might be the appropriate role for you here.

[Pharaoh]

OK

Go! Go Abcdxxxx go! Fight! Fight Abcdxxxx fight! Win. Win Abcdxxxx win!

[mburbank]

I hope you're wearing a tight skirt right now. It's no damn good if you're not wearing a real tight skirt.

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

1) I've addressed several very direct questions to you, and you refuse to answer any of them. If you're not capable, then don't bother responding. It speaks volumes to my credebility. I don't think google is half as sad as your no response ass.

I'm not going to spoon-feed you. I've answered your questions as best as I can.

2) You're back to the language and translation defense, yet, when I presented my claims with the translations IN ARABIC you copped out then too. You already said you're not using it as a defense, then in the next breath you're bitching that I don't speak the language.

WTF IS THIS DOUBLE TALK HEY IT'S 5 AM! I said it's possible to make flaws even in the Arabic INTERPRETATION. Because the Koran uses a very difficult language. Arabic comes in 22 different forms. Islamic Arabic differs from everything else, even the basic language we use for literature. Most of the diction is hard to comprehend.

3) You're some twit

From Bahrain, which you thought was in Iran.

4) Meaning, there are Muslims using Hadiths you probably don't.

Well thanks for stating the obvious. I never said there was one type of Hadith, of course they come in different forms if there's sub-catagories of Islam.

5) We're talking about Pan-Islamism as a political ideology. Your theological outreach bullshit is pure self indulgence. What you personally believe, and what you were personally taught is anecdotal.

No, what we're talking about is what I personally believe, you pseudo-intellect who reeks of utter ignorance. That's the whole fucking point of my first post. As for my take on Pan-Islamism, the problem with it is the spirtiual and intellectual diveristy that had characterized the Muslim faith from the start, which made the prospects of achieving religious solidarity across sectarian lines highly unlikely. This was particularly true in the light of the rising Islamic puritan movement, which sought to strip the religion of its cultural innovations.

You're nothing.

Is this the part where you set fire to my trousers and hit me in the face with rivet guns?

Not to me

Gee, that's clever AND intelligent AND it's sure to make me cry for 3 days straight.

Who the fuck CARES if I don't mean anything to you? I'm not on AmericanSingles.com, I'm expressing my opinions on a public message board. Do you even HAVE any idea about this religion? No one has to approve of you but God! No one has to accept you but God, why would I give a shit if you're dumping me, let alone because of my religion?

Minger.

Out of touch with Imams

Imams mean shit. You want to know what fucks Saudi Arabia up? Imams. Why do I have to be in touch with Imams, you toad, if they know no more about Islam than I do? I don't rely on bearded bastards to tell me right from wrong. I'm literate, thankyouverymuch, I can read it for myself in the Koran. It's my final authority. If I needed help, believe me, an Imam would be the last person I'd go to. If you know anything about this area you'd realize what the reputation of Imams are. Look it up (yes, that means open that other IE window, it's as far as your research will go!)

I'm pretty sure we're done here. You assumed a lot of crap, knew fuck-all about the origins and evolution of Islam, or the basic geography of the Middle East, a place you love to critisize blindly, and resorted to petty insults to pat yourself on the back for something you weren't even close to achieving.

Fuck knows why you post a lot if you're as ignorant as you came off here, but if you can't annoy the shit out of people with your sulky, melancholy whining, what can you do...?

[kahljorn]

ABC sounds kind of racist and bigoted to me at times. Does anybody else see that in him, or is it just me?

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

ABC sounds kind of racist and bigoted to me at times. Does anybody else see that in him, or is it just me?

Well, I don't mean to 'gang up' or anything, but I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks so. He keeps cornering others for no apparent reason whatsoever, even though he knows he has nothing to offer but silly excuses for his errors and invalid accusations. He's just one of those self-righteous bores who won't fuck off until they've clenched their fists in victory.

I don't see the point of half of the posts he made in this thread, especially the ones directed towards me, so I don't really want to argue with him, but he's like this little irritating bug in my ear that I feel the need to zap with some repellant immediately. I wonder if he realizes that the elementary questions he's asking me, are all questions I've already asked myself a long time ago.

If it's going to help him sleep at night, I'm ready to just hand this to him and Pharaoh (I am nothing more than a doormat to his highness.)

[Chojin]

Originally Posted by I, fuzzbot

Who the fuck CARES if I don't mean anything to you? I'm not on AmericanSingles.com, I'm expressing my opinions on a public message board.

[Abcdxxxx]

Oddly, you've unwittingly coroborated about half the posts I've made about the Islamic religion in the past week.

Muslims aren't a race, but I haven't said a thing bigoted, or you'd be quoting me on it. What I do know is it's not hard to find where Fuzzbot libelled Jewish women, or questioned the integrity of a scholar simply because he's Jewish. That doesn't bother Kahlhorn or Ziggy apparently. We know that he promotes Conversion as a form of mercy, and that when confronted with Arabic text accepted within major Islamic sects, which licenses child molestation, he writes it off, without accountability for religious pluralism. When asked about homosexuals, he pretends he's being progressive by stating there are worse sins. He lied about freedom of speech in the Arab world. Thank goodness Bahrain, and Tehran sound nothing alike, or that he used the word "here" to describe someplace he wasn't. He wants to only trade verses in Arabic, unless you actually provide him with the Arabic. When asked about Abu Afak, who was murdered for speaking out against conversion, he has no response. When asked about Abu Qurayz, where the entire male Jewish populat was slaughter, while women and children were enslaved, he has no response.

Gang up all you want. I take it as a tribute when you act like you disagree with me, and then say the exact same shit I just said, like it was your own idea. I've studied this shit for decades, and I've argued about it with better.

[CosmoToad]

stop posting long usless crap, no one will read it, and if they do they wont give a damn. And why so defensive, I mean no one did anything, bad

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

Thank goodness Bahrain, and Tehran sound nothing alike, or that he used the word "here" to describe someplace he wasn't.

Nice try again, you used Bahrain and Tehran IN THE SAME POST.

Let me re-phrase that: You included Bahrain and Tehran in ONE sentence and for the rest of the post, you continued discussing media laws in IRAN. Even though we were CLEARLY talking about the Arab world.

Muslims aren't a race

No, they're homophobic orphans who enjoy basket-weaving for Jesus.

but I haven't said a thing bigoted

Who accused you of that?! Those smarmy cunts. Don't take it personally, they're just mean because they lost the argument! You've always been SMRAT!!

or you'd be quoting me on it.

We can't keep bringing up your posts, it's painful to read. Like a full cavity search with a Ginsu knife.

We know that he promotes Conversion as a form of mercy, and that when confronted with Arabic text accepted within major Islamic sects, which licenses child molestation, he writes it off, without accountability for religious pluralism

Couldn't be further from the truth, but I'll let you enjoy this thought.

When asked about homosexuals, he pretends he's being progressive by stating there are worse sins

I didn't really imply that. The question was more specific, as was my answer.

He lied about freedom of speech in the Arab world.

I didn't lie, you just confused us with Iran. I showed you articles of our constitution that promote freedom of speech. I've brought up Jamsheer. You used an example that actually proved and clarified my point (thanks again, I want to shower you with rose petals for that.)

He wants to only trade verses in Arabic

I thought it would lead to cybersex. Your spirit positively shines onto me and it makes me warm and hopeful and I want nothing more than to spend the rest of my life beside you, in bed with you, across from you, within arms reach from you.

When asked about Abu Afak, who was murdered for speaking out against conversion, he has no response.

I didn't respond because we'd be telling the same story, I didn't see the point of that.

When asked about Abu Qurayz, where the entire male Jewish populat was slaughter, while women and children were enslaved, he has no response.

All religions have gone through that. Saying "HAY BUT THE CHRISTIANS SNAPPED MY NECK LIKE A TWIG AND THE JEWS STEPPED ON MY TOES WITHOUT APOLOGIZING IN THE YR 1245" or "THOSE MUSLIMS RAPED MY MOM AND STOLE MILK FROM HER BREASTS 'CAUSE THEYRE MONSTERS WHO EAT FIDDLESTICKS FOR DINNER" or "THAT FUCKING JEW POKED ME IN THE EYE WITH HIS AFRO" doesn't mean anything. We all commit violence in the name of religion, as stated before. I have no interest in denying anything other Muslims did to make it seem like we're the best and purest religion in the world. I just wanted to clear up a few misconceptions, that's all, it's not like I'm begging you to convert.

I take it as a tribute when you act like you disagree with me, and then say the exact same shit I just said, like it was your own idea.

Now he accuses me of plagiarism. Where have I done this? Which thought did I steal from you? Do tell, oh devourer of small gods held sacred by remote mountainous people.

I've studied this shit for decades

Cool. I am studying psychology and you make an interesting side project.

and I've argued about it with better.

Oh hey man, you beat my ass. With chains. The way the Shiites do in the name of Hassan and Hussain. Totally changed my whole perspective on the world and on myself. I'm seriously impressed, I mean, Jesus, you must have trekked through Nepal, watched the sunrise in the Australian Outback and gone on a pilgrimage to Mecca while the rest of us 'immature' ones trawled a lonely, wretched existence.

Tell us more! Teach us! I know nothing! I am nothing! I'm a crusty botch of nature! I bite my thumb at you, Sir!

[CosmoToad]

right on

[Abcdxxxx]

Pan Arabism is a political ideology that calls for the establishment of an Arab State in the area that was ruled by the Arabs during the Umayyads Dynasty.

Pan-Islamism is a political ideology that calls for the establishment of an Islamic State similar to that that was established during the rightly guided Caliphs

Meanwhile, the Lebanese were Phoenicians, the Syrians are Syriacs the Iraqis are Chaldanians, Assyrians, Arabs, and Persians amongst other ethnicities. It goes on and on. Iran sits alongside these diverse nations, as one of the most powerfull members of the Arab League.

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Pan Arabism is a political ideology that calls for the establishment of an Arab State in the area that was ruled by the Arabs during the Umayyads Dynasty.

Pan-Islamism is a political ideology that calls for the establishment of an Islamic State similar to that that was established during the rightly guided Caliphs

Meanwhile, the Lebanese were Phoenicians, the Syrians are Syriacs the Iraqis are Chaldanians, Assyrians, Arabs, and Persians amongst other ethnicities. It goes on and on. Iran sits alongside these diverse nations, as one of the most powerfull members of the Arab League.

o'rly?

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Iran sits alongside these diverse nations, as one of the most powerfull members of the Arab League.

The current members of the Arab League (and the date of their admission):

Egypt - March 22, 1945 (Founder) (suspended, 1979-1989)
Iraq - March 22, 1945 (Founder)
Jordan - March 22, 1945 (Founder) (entered when still using the name "Transjordan")
Lebanon - March 22, 1945 (Founder)
Saudi Arabia - March 22, 1945 (Founder)
Syria - March 22, 1945 (Founder)
Yemen - May 5, 1945 (Founder)
Libya - March 28, 19531
Sudan - January 19, 1956
Morocco - October 1, 1958
Tunisia - October 1, 1958
Kuwait - July 20, 1961
Algeria - August 16, 1962
United Arab Emirates - June 12, 1971
Bahrain - September 11, 1971
Qatar - September 11, 1971
Oman - September 29, 1971
Mauritania - November 26, 1973
Somalia - February 14, 1974
Palestine - succeeding to the position held by the Palestine Liberation Organization since September 9, 1976
Djibouti - April 9, 1977
Comoros - November 20, 1993

Iran is not a member of the Arab League.

Thanks for listening to everything I've been saying. Because I've only fucking stressed it like 100 times or maybe 1000 or perhaps even 5000 when it was 5 AM in the morning and I was confused.

After everything we've gone through, you still CONTINUE to make Iran seem as if it has anything to do with the Arab world. They consider it an insult if you associate them with us. So don't do that, especially if you claim to understand why.

Oh God, just go away already.

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

Pan Arabism is a political ideology that calls for the establishment of an Arab State in the area that was ruled by the Arabs during the Umayyads Dynasty.

Stop giving us big words for something so simple. Pan-Arabism is just another word for 'racial unity' as opposed to religious unity, as it was a more pragmatic goal. This was also easier to achieve than Pan-Islamism. Muslim unity could not be realized except through Arab unity anyways, that's why Pan-Arabism was seen as a practical step.

There. No need for anything else. Unless you want to get into European colonialism, which is a loooong story that I'd rather you look up yourself. Along with what the Salafiyyah's aspired, which was replaced with Pan-Arabism. In al-Husri's words, I'm pararaphasing, I don't remember the quote and can't be bothered to look it up, "religion is something between you and God, the fatherland is here for all of us to take care of." Or something to that effect. That's why the Pan-Arabists considered this movement to be political AND religious, since Islam couldn't be seperated from its strong Arab roots.

While eating a banana I realized that I should add something. Pan-Islamists, Pan-Arabists, al-Banna (whom I mentioned earlier), the radical Islamists and the Islamic socialists ALL called for a return to what they referred to as the "unadulterated Muslim community" (which was established by prophet Mohammed in Medina.) Of course everyone had different visions of that community. The Wahabists (if you wanna talk about Imams you have to familiarize yourself with this) had an exlusivist vision: Anyone who doesn't share it, including the Shiites and the Sufis, would be killed. Nice! Notice how there's many Wahabists in Saudi Arabia who'd still like to follow this model? Notice how many of these Wahabists serve as Imams?

And you want me to be more in touch with them. I like how you just assumed that all Imams preached for the same thing. A lot of them are extremists. An Imam, in its simple definition, in Arabic, means the one who "leads" the prayer. It doesn't mean anything else. Don't tell me these are like the know-it alls of Islam. Michael Jackson knows more about Islam than some of these fucks by just LIVING here*

*Here: West Ruffa, Bahrain.*
*Bahrain: Not Iran.*
*Iran: Not part of the Arab League. It's a powerful country in the region*, however.
*Middle East.

There, I was as clear as I could get.

[ScruU2wice]

The koran wasn't based off of hadiths, the koran is God's words according to islam, I'm not a scholar but I can tell you that for sure :/

But Hadiths are where the religion goes nuts in my opinion. There are so many that are not even misinterperted as much as just completely abused. For instance, I read a hadith or saying that the prophet mohammad pbuh enjoyed dates, milke, and olive oil.

Somehow in some completely insane leap of logic, people believe that we should only eat the foods the prophet liked, so mountain dew and cheetos will land you a one way ticket to hell. Now in all honesty I can't see how you can even start to blaim religious texts or hadiths where people have already demonstrated an extremely loose grip on reality.

If you wanna go ahead and say that the people of the religion are psychopaths and misguided, I don't care and might even agree with you. But to say that the entire religion preaches hate is more backwards thinking than you can shake a stick at.

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

The koran wasn't based off of hadiths, the koran is God's words according to islam, I'm not a scholar but I can tell you that for sure

Yeah, the Koran is God's words, but certain Hadiths are God's words too. Some Hadiths are basically just God's words used in a story, so we can see how it applies to certain things. Like I said before, it's mostly used just to confirm what's already in the Koran: meaning God's words.

But Hadiths are where the religion goes nuts in my opinion. There are so many that are not even misinterperted as much as just completely abused.

I agree with you there, but certain Hadiths make sense to me because it highlights certain parts of the Koran.

This is why Hadiths start with things like: The Prophet Mohammed's reply to that was - "As God said.... " (a few lines from a verse in the Koran.)

But I mean, think about how far back this was. Fresh gossip changes by the end of the day, it's like that game "broken telephone" or whatever you call it, so of course by now it's extremely distorted, this is why for the Sunnis the Koran is our final authority. The Shiites claim that a lot of things happened after the Prophet's death and were more significant, which I just can't agree with.

I'd call Wahabists psychopaths and misguided, because they keep saying that women are basically an embarrassment to society. They should wash dishes and be yelled at for more sex or food. So we're trying to keep the Wahabists out, but it's not working, they already have their own mosque where they mislead other kids into believing that this is the right way for a Muslim to think. Islam has a LOT of respect for women, it's like a certain Hadith that said (rough translation, it sounds better and more poetic in Arabic) -

A man is walking and stuff and he spots the prophet, and asks, "Who is your best friend?" and the prophet goes, "My mother, my mother, my mother, and then my father." This alone should clear up a few things about gender. I'm sure you know that in the Koran it states, and more than once, that Paradise is under the feet of mothers.