- Joined
- Jul 20, 2011
- Messages
- 53,942
- Reaction score
- 30,992
Except I pointed out that it wasn't only used in war related crimes by citing the case of a fascist intellectual who was executed for his fascist publications. Is publishing an article and act of war now?How am I downplaying political violence exactly?
By saying that war, WW2 and fascism are the most harshly judged topics in the West? In which way am I brushing off anything with this statement..?
I'm not downplaying death-sentences being dished out during war, I'm stating the obvious which is that they're used on only in war-related 'crimes', anything similar to that was reeked out from the laws in the West. I couldn't be happier about that this is the case.
Another example from during the Civil War is of a man was tried and executed for treason because he pulled down the American flag. How is that any different than executing someone for insulting the Prophet(PBUH)? Then there's the case of the Rabbi who was imprisoned in the US during WWI for handing out anti-war pamphlets, in fact that case is where the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" analogy comes from and its what the judges compared the anti-war activism to. Is that sufficiently war related in your eyes?
That's a complex question that is answered different based on a whole host of factors. Lots of questions are like that, up to reasonable disagreement.I must admit that I'm not well-versed in the hadiths, but I won't let such detail get on my way really.
I'm merely asking the question that if death for apostasy was merely created for war (as you also stated) is it not absolutely obsolete? What else is there that's obsolete, given that this stuff was written up a long time ago?
Not even sure what you're trying to say here.You can not answer straight because you consider yourself inadequate to answer and it all goes out to window when people start interpreting old scripture as they see fit in which case it doesn't matter which branch they represent : there is dogma and there's agenda, of 'their interpretation' being the only real one.
Traitors being executed during the early civil wars in the Ummah doesn't bother me but I don't support Bangladeshi vigilantes butchering atheist bloggers.What's your personal opinion about someone being sentenced to death from apostasy?
In terms of the claims by the government there are many more than in traditional Islamic societies given the massive expansion and totalitarian nature of the modern bureaucratic state that was created by the West. No one in the Ottoman Empire's heyday was getting fined for tall grass or parking their horse in the wrong spot.I never argued that there are no instances in which the Western societies decide that a certain collective good is more important than certain individual liberties. There are plenty, like taxes, traffic regulations etc. That doesn't mean Islam with all its outdated practices and beliefs fits into modern Western society. It's clear to see in many big cities with large Muslim populations. They don't want to fit into Western society, they create small communities in which they follow their own rules as much as possible. Look at France, Belgium, Netherlands etc.
I still believe Muslims can fit in, but only if they cherry pick their religion (like most Christians).
As for the Muslim communities in the West that form ghettos, are we just going to pretend that they did this all on their own and that the host nations had no part in it? France literally built massive housing projects to stuff these foreigners into so they wouldn't be close to the heart of the city but then created public transport so they could commute and work menial jobs. That whole situation is largely the creation of modern, top-down urban planning and its been a disaster. That's not to say that the Muslim ghettos don't have unique issues but formation of ghettos happens elsewhere as we see in the US with black ghettos and for a similar reason, due to the disaster that is modern urban planning.