Would you tackle a Muslim bush

Hipster_Nebula wrote:They've no choice living here though, they'd end up in prison. I'm not suggesting they are in favour, I simply don't know but I've seen a lot of debates where muslim scholars are unable or unwilling to denounce the punishments for apostasy, homosexuality and adultery, it's quite clear thats a grey area.

Being a "community leader" or Imam is a very politically sensitive role and like politicians, local figures are less inclined to denounce anything in case it costs them votes - or status.

wanderlust wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:They've no choice living here though, they'd end up in prison. I'm not suggesting they are in favour, I simply don't know but I've seen a lot of debates where muslim scholars are unable or unwilling to denounce the punishments for apostasy, homosexuality and adultery, it's quite clear thats a grey area.

Being a "community leader" or Imam is a very politically sensitive role and like politicians, local figures are less inclined to denounce anything in case it costs them votes - or status.

Why would denouncing something as barbaric as stoning to death or the cutting of hands lose someone votes? Thats a very strange constituency clearly. It just seeks to underline my point if anything. 

the real question I would have is if we took a vote amongst all muslims in the UK, a referendum if you like, would you be against Sharia Law in the UK. I'd be interested to know the outcome.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:They've no choice living here though, they'd end up in prison. I'm not suggesting they are in favour, I simply don't know but I've seen a lot of debates where muslim scholars are unable or unwilling to denounce the punishments for apostasy, homosexuality and adultery, it's quite clear thats a grey area.

Being a "community leader" or Imam is a very politically sensitive role and like politicians, local figures are less inclined to denounce anything in case it costs them votes - or status.

Why would denouncing something as barbaric as stoning to death or the cutting of hands lose someone votes? Thats a very strange constituency clearly. It just seeks to underline my point if anything. 

the real question I would have is if we took a vote amongst all muslims in the UK, a referendum if you like, would you be against Sharia Law in the UK. I'd be interested to know the outcome.

Death by hanging was banned in this country only 50 years ago and it remained in Northern Ireland until 1973 - and that after nearly 200 years of slowly rising opposition.
50 years ago Islam wasn't on the Western radar and many countries like Qatar, Bahrain and the Emirates were populated by Bedouin tribes. Pakistan was less than 20 years old and other Muslim countries were still ruled by despots, tyrants or the military - some still are. Most of these were installed and propped up by the British.

We're not that far ahead in the "civilisation" stakes and Islam - which has remained fairly constant despite significant cultural diversity for 1400 something years - is catching up faster than any other religion.
Sure we see elements of Islam as barbaric but what about Christians in Africa who still practice female genital mutilation? In order to spread Christianity it adopted tribal beliefs and practises from around the world many of which are barbaric but are considered central to Christian faith in those countries. I mean what about these crazy Catholics and the wax body parts? http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/most-shocking/10-of-the-strangest-religious-rituals-around-the-world/2/ Tribal.

Selective.

Selective to the topic of the thread yes, if we start another thread about each religion I will be just as vocal about my distaste.  It simply can't be denied though the religion in the spotlight right now is Islam, because of the continuing and alarming violence and human rights atrocities carried out in it's name and in countries in which it's observed.

in those terms the other religions are relatively, though not completely, benign. 

so no, not selective.

boltonbonce wrote:

You can "prove" anything with the selective misuse of statistics.

A far more interesting graphic would show the religion of choice for people who kill others for religious reasons.

xmiles wrote:

boltonbonce wrote:

You can "prove" anything with the selective misuse of statistics.

It's what statistics are for.

I'm starting up a new site, Religion Nuts, I'm sick of all this anti-religion talk on here.

At last this thread is getting somewhere.
Lets hope the politicians are taking note.

Religion is like a penis. It's ok to have one and it's fine to be proud of it. Just don't get it out in public and don't try and shove it down my throat.

Good game good game.