Islam: Is it inherently Evil?

[Garpal Gumnut]

As I started this thread and am now mainly a watcher rather than a participant in topics particularly General Chat it is good to see that this thread still continues.

For the present participants a look back at the original posts and subsequent posts may be useful.

gg

 

[Macquack]

Personal life

Turnbull and his wife Lucy Turnbull, 2003–04 Sydney Lord Mayor, in January 2012
Turnbull is married to Lucy Turnbull (née Hughes), who was the Lord Mayor of Sydney from 2003 to 2004 and has held a number of other prominent positions. The couple were married on 22 March 1980 at Cumnor, Oxfordshire, by a Church of England priest while Turnbull was attending the University of Oxford.[140] They live in the eastern suburbs of Sydney.[141]

Turnbull and Lucy have two adult children, Alex and Daisy, and as of July 2016, three grandchildren.[141][142] Alex Turnbull is married to Yvonne Wang of Chinese descent.[143][144]

The use of Bligh as a male middle name is a tradition in the Turnbull family. It is also Turnbull's son's middle name. One of Turnbull's ancestors was colonist John Turnbull, who named his youngest son William Bligh Turnbull in honour of deposed Governor William Bligh at the time of the Rum Rebellion.[145]

Religion
Raised Presbyterian, Turnbull became agnostic in the beginning of his adult life and later converted to Roman Catholicism "by mid-2002"; his wife's family is Roman Catholic.[146][147] However, he has found himself at odds with the church's teaching on abortion, stem cell research and same-sex marriage.[148][149] Turnbull supported legislation relaxing restrictions on abortion pill RU486 and he also voted for the legalisation of somatic cell nuclear transfer.[150][151][152] He did so despite the vocal public opposition to both proposals by Cardinal George Pell, the then-Archbishop of Sydney.[153][154]

What's your point SirRumpole, Mal and Lucy were married in a Church of England Parish not a Catholic Church.

 

[Wysiwyg]

Because we live on the same growing smaller planet, you obviously come from somewhere else.

Well, no I don't come from somewhere else and a genuine accurate reason to the question I posed would suffice.

 

[Miss Hale]

I am happy for you to religion bash as long as you include all religions in your criticism.

In point, an Australian male is not allowed to marry a catholic woman in a catholic church and remain a non believer.

Nope. My husband and I were married in a Catholic church and he wasn't a Catholic.

 

[SirRumpole]

What's your point SirRumpole, Mal and Lucy were married in a Church of England Parish not a Catholic Church.

The fact that Turnbull later converted to Catholicism indicates to me that he did it to keep his wife's family happy, and that therefore Catholicism still exerts an influence over people that don't naturally belong to their tribe. The long arm of religion as it were.

29 countries forbid Muslim women from marrying non Muslim men, an outrageous denial of human rights.

 

[Wysiwyg]

No doubt Waleed will be pushing his agenda as usual.

He ran some integrity checks and sought agreement there is an underlying problem with anti-Islam thoughts in society.

 

[Wysiwyg]

29 countries forbid Muslim women from marrying non Muslim men, an outrageous denial of human rights.

Their way of life is governed by a set of laws. Do we have the moral high ground to say those laws are wrong?

 

[SirRumpole]

Their way of life is governed by a set of laws. Do we have the moral high ground to say those laws are wrong?

What do you think of beheading someone for wanting to marry someone her family didn't want her to, refusing to let women drive, flogging and imprisoning lawyers for defending someone, flogging or stoning women for being raped , forcing women to keep their faces hidden, flogging people for being homosexual......?

So the answer to your question is YES.

 

[Macquack]

The fact that Turnbull later converted to Catholicism indicates to me that he did it to keep his wife's family happy, and that therefore Catholicism still exerts an influence over people that don't naturally belong to their tribe. The long arm of religion as it were.

29 countries forbid Muslim women from marrying non Muslim men, an outrageous denial of human rights.

You have lost me. Catholics forbid Australian Catholic women from marrying non baptised christian men, which I think is a denial of human rights, but maybe not an outrageous denial of human rights!

 

[Wysiwyg]

What do you think of beheading someone for wanting to marry someone her family didn't want her to, refusing to let women drive, flogging and imprisoning lawyers for defending someone, flogging or stoning women for being raped , forcing women to keep their faces hidden, flogging people for being homosexual......?

So the answer to your question is YES.

I see your point but that part doesn't get practiced here in Australia. They are the laws of other countries.

 

[SirRumpole]

They are the laws of other countries.

Some people want Sharia law in Australia.

 

[Macquack]

Nope. My husband and I were married in a Catholic church and he wasn't a Catholic.

I did not say that he had to be catholic, I said he had to be a believer, ie at a minimum a baptised christian. You should know this.

 

[Wysiwyg]

Some people want Sharia law in Australia.

It is practiced by every Muslim. It is their way of life. This article is enlightening but also prises the door a little with statements such as

In 2012, there was a Family Law Council report about: how does the Australian family law system respond to the needs of a culturally and linguistically diverse communities. That’s what it’s about.
How does the Australian legal system best serve the needs of its citizens? And I think that’s a fair enough question to ask.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/explainer-what-is-sharia-law

 

[qldfrog]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03...,-stoning-under-new-laws/10938592?pfmredir=sm
Let's us all wear a veil in support of the religion of peace

 

[qldfrog]

Lets not forget that in case of woman raped, she will be stoned for unmarried sex...
What a beautiful world we live in

 

[bellenuit]

It is practiced by every Muslim. It is their way of life. This article is enlightening but also prises the door a little with statements such as



https://www.sbs.com.au/news/explainer-what-is-sharia-law

The problem with Sharia is that it is a wedge. You often hear Muslims say that they would like the good parts of Sharia to be implemented. That it would be an improvement to some aspects of our justice system.

However, if there are parts of Sharia that are better than our equivalent or similar laws, then they should use the processes that everyone else uses to get laws changed. Write letters and articles, try and persuade their fellow Australians and if they gain some traction, petition their MPs. Then it would become part of our legal system and you would not even need the word Sharia to describe it. That promotes social cohesion not social disintegration.

The article itself is disingenuous.

Dr Hussain explained that while punishments do happen, they are only carried out in conservative Muslim countries, and are not representative of what Sharia law is about.

Most Muslim countries are conservative and many that aren't are under extreme pressure by hardliners to restrict freedoms to others, as in Indonesia.

While Sharia is enshrined in the Koran and unchanging, fiqh can vary according to the situation at hand, meaning Islamic law can adapt and remain applicable to modern life.

Or can equally adapt to become oppressive again as countries slide back into hardline control, as the above post on Brunei shows. Malaysia is also becoming more hardline as is Turkey. And of course Sharia is enshrined in the Koran and unchanging means the hardliners in the community already have the weapon they need to push for more extreme forms of Sharia.

Muslims have the same means as anyone else to improve laws that need improving so let them do that in a socially cohesive manner. Providing a distinct legal framework outside that of fellow Australians is not the way to go. What about those in the Muslim community that don't want to live under Sharia no matter how moderate the implementation? For those who do agree to aspects of Sharia, how do we know that the agreement is voluntary and not forced upon them by pressure from other Muslims.

The feel good stuff in the article: It’s very broad and includes ordinary ways of life, for example how you behave towards other people. Religious duties like prayer and fasting and giving to charity – which is very important,” she said. “It also includes how you behave towards other people". Sharia Law is not required to continue with that behaviour. It is when you get to legal issues that are already enshrined in Australian Law that the problems arise, such as from the article: commercial law, inheritance law, family law

 

[SirRumpole]

For those who do agree to aspects of Sharia, how do we know that the agreement is voluntary and not forced upon them by pressure from other Muslims.

The trouble with Islam is that everyone is bludgeoned into obeyance by the idea that some hardliner will take it on themselves to instigate "justice" on those who step out of line.

 

[Miss Hale]

I did not say that he had to be catholic, I said he had to be a believer, ie at a minimum a baptised christian. You should know this.

The way you phrased it implied he had to be a believer in the Catholic faith.

 

[Wysiwyg]

The problem with Sharia is that it is a wedge. You often hear Muslims say that they would like the good parts of Sharia to be implemented. That it would be an improvement to some aspects of our justice system.

However, if there are parts of Sharia that are better than our equivalent or similar laws, then they should use the processes that everyone else uses to get laws changed. Write letters and articles, try and persuade their fellow Australians and if they gain some traction, petition their MPs. Then it would become part of our legal system and you would not even need the word Sharia to describe it. That promotes social cohesion not social disintegration.

The article itself is disingenuous.

Dr Hussain explained that while punishments do happen, they are only carried out in conservative Muslim countries, and are not representative of what Sharia law is about.

Most Muslim countries are conservative and many that aren't are under extreme pressure by hardliners to restrict freedoms to others, as in Indonesia.

While Sharia is enshrined in the Koran and unchanging, fiqh can vary according to the situation at hand, meaning Islamic law can adapt and remain applicable to modern life.

Or can equally adapt to become oppressive again as countries slide back into hardline control, as the above post on Brunei shows. Malaysia is also becoming more hardline as is Turkey. And of course Sharia is enshrined in the Koran and unchanging means the hardliners in the community already have the weapon they need to push for more extreme forms of Sharia.

Muslims have the same means as anyone else to improve laws that need improving so let them do that in a socially cohesive manner. Providing a distinct legal framework outside that of fellow Australians is not the way to go. What about those in the Muslim community that don't want to live under Sharia no matter how moderate the implementation? For those who do agree to aspects of Sharia, how do we know that the agreement is voluntary and not forced upon them by pressure from other Muslims.

The feel good stuff in the article: It’s very broad and includes ordinary ways of life, for example how you behave towards other people. Religious duties like prayer and fasting and giving to charity – which is very important,” she said. “It also includes how you behave towards other people". Sharia Law is not required to continue with that behaviour. It is when you get to legal issues that are already enshrined in Australian Law that the problems arise, such as from the article: commercial law, inheritance law, family law

Well balanced reply Bellenuit. Definitely 'no' from me too.

 

[Wysiwyg]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03...,-stoning-under-new-laws/10938592?pfmredir=sm
Let's us all wear a veil in support of the religion of peace

Interesting microcosm of the control which this religious law can establish.