Grim and Appalling--Let the Debate Begin
Submitted by Denis Schulz on Wed, 04/08/2009 - 06:00
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF versionRowan Williams wants a debate, a vigorous public debate about what ails us in the 21st Century. Pope Benedict XVI would like that. So would Rick Warren. Debating is better than gnashing teeth in the dark recesses of one’s mind.
Okay, what kind of a debate? How about Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas? That was a vigorous public debate. Or how about Charles Sumner and Preston ‘Bully’ Brooks? Very vigorous and in public too! Freedom versus slavery! “A nation cannot exist half-slave and half-free,” said Lincoln and Bully Brooks let loose with an antebellum 9/11. The debate was settled by other means during the American Civil War.
But the issue has resurfaced on a larger scale in the 21st Century—can the modern world exist half-slave, half-free? Or should one make that three-quarters-slave and one-quarter free? Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, thinks it is time for a debate though he did not quite frame it in those terms.
Williams studied theology at Christ’s College at Cambridge and at Wadham College at Oxford. He knows more about religion than the average bootblack, probably as much as Jerry Falwell did, more than Lincoln and Sumner, more than Bill Maher and Gary Busey. He’s a theologian and an Archbishop and should be given credit for it. He is also a poet. Nothing on the order of “There was a young lady from Worcester,” but he must be pretty good because he’s won several prizes. Lincoln with his “Four score and seven years ago” and Sumner with his “I mean, the harlot Slavery” would have stood in awe of Williams’s ability to versify. But when it comes to slavery, Williams is a dunderhead. Maybe that is why he wants an open debate—so he can learn something. No one is too old to learn—not even a theologian and Williams, at least, is giving credit to where he believes credit is due.
“I think Islam has made a very significant contribution to getting a debate about religion into public life,” he told the Muslim News.
Well, it certainly has tried! The question is why it has taken the dhimmis and the Archbishop so long to respond. The July 7, 2005 London bombings would have been a great place to start. Lincoln waited till Fort Sumter and by then it was too late. Of course, Jefferson Davis was as rigid in his beliefs as Osama bin Laden, Muqtada al-Sadr, Ali Khamenei and Ali Khan in theirs. Once a debate passes the Sumter watershed things get out of hand and quite ugly.
“And I think it’s very right that we should have this debate and discussion between Muslims and Christians and others in public,” said Williams.
Here! Here!
Yes, it is time to take the discussion out of the side streets and back alleys and the taxicabs where it is being conducted and into the light of day! It might have prevented Adrian Dubiel from being hit twice in the head with a baseball bat by Muslim cabdriver Amran Khan. It might have prevented the March 14, 2009 rape of a 16-year-old girl in an alley by an illegal immigrant from Afghanistan. It might have prevented an English cleric from being beaten up a few yards from his place of worship by Muslim youths shouting, “This should not be a church, this should be a mosque, you should not be here.” It might have prevented William Townsley’s 14-year-old pooch, Snoopy, from being stomped in a park by a gang of ’Asian’ youths. (Townsley was told, “We’ll do to you what we did to the dog.”) It might have prevented a teen-aged Army cadet from being harassed and head-butted while walking to a training session in Carter’s Green. It might have prevented the numerous death threats that forced Michael Nazir-Ali to resign as Bishop of Rochester. It might have deterred Muslim students at Queen Mary University from physically preventing Hindu students from using the school’s multi-faith center.
It might have…it might have…it might have…
Could it have prevented Anjem Choudary from saying homosexuals should be stoned to death? The chances are no. Could it have prevented Istiaq Alamgir from insulting British soldiers home from Iraq and comparing them to Nazis? Again, the chances are no. Could it have prevented 45 Muslim doctors from planning terrorist attacks on the United States? The chances are no. People far gone in hatred can be difficult to dissuade. .
Yes, it is time to get the debate about religion back into public life. There are those that can be saved from a career of ‘senseless’ violence.
But, wait, isn’t there a movement in the United Nations in the opposite direction to limit, to squelch, to shut off religious debate, to criminalize criticism of religion, especially of Islam? Didn’t the UN’s Human Rights Council approve a resolution calling on member states to provide legal protection against the very thing the Archbishop is suggesting—a free and open discussion of religion? Yes, it did!
Acts resulting in defamation of religion or inciting religious hatred could be criminalized. Someone could write an article about Mohammed and Ayesha for a newspaper and go to jail for defamation of religion or draw a picture of the Prophet and be pursued through the streets by a mob shouting “Allahu akbar” and go to jail for defamation of religion. Someone could quote from the Qur’an and be accused of religious hatred. That’s what happened to a couple of Evangelists in Australia.
From the religion of peace and tolerance:
Bukhari: V1B1N6 “Just issue orders to kill every Jew in the country.”
Qur’an: 5:37 “The (Christians) disbelievers will long to get out of the Fire, but never will they get out there from and theirs will be an enduring torture.”
Qur’an: 8:12 “I shall terrorize the infidels.”
Tabari: I:280 “ Because Allah afflicted Eve, all of the women of this world menstruate and are stupid.”
Ishaq: 489 “We are men who think there is no shame in killing.”
Kill…terrorize…no shame…defamation of religion…incitement to religious hatred. Don’t shout “Allahu akbar” in a crowded theatre. How could the Human Rights Council come to such a pass? This is not what the founders had in mind at Dumbarton Oaks in 1944.
How on earth did Rowan Williams get to be an Archbishop? Was it time in grade? Did he know somebody? Was it his poetry?
“Certain provisions of Sharia are already recognized in our society and under our law,” he said. See? It is as easy as that. There is nothing to worry about.
There is a debate going on within Islam between primitivists and modernists, says Williams, a developing system of Islamic jurisprudence. They are experiencing growing pains. “In some of the ways it has been codified and practiced across the world it has been appalling,” said Williams, “and applied to women in places like Saudi Arabia, it is grim.”
Grim! Grim and appalling! Those are the words. Townsley’s pooch, the 45 doctors, Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali…grim and appalling.
It wasn’t the Harvard theologians that debated Jeff Davis, it was Abe Lincoln—and it was grim and appalling. It takes more than kind words to make a slave-master release the death grip he has on his human property. Lincoln talked about slavery; Williams is talking about religion. Old Abe would have made a better Archbishop of Canterbury.
Islam is evil.Is this simple
Islam is evil.Is this simple fact not a common knowledge amongst the kafirs? I wonder why?
Moslems are equally evil.As evila sislam is or perhaps eviler.How do I say this and why do I say?
The happenings around have opened my eyes and brain.
Rowan Wiliams is a member of
Rowan Wiliams is a member of Christendom. Men like him created Christendom in Rome in 325 CE. Jesus never did interfaith! Williams is a fool and a man without knowledge. Some one appointed him because they could not find anyone else. Let his penis be cut off. It probably doesnt work anyway!
He doesnt believe in the Bible, only himself. Men like him is the reason why the Bible is not read. Men like him is the reason I have read the Bible instead of accepting what a man says.
You know what saddens me? All
You know what saddens me? All those liberals and feminists who stay silent about the abuses of Shari'a law against women, gays, and minorities. I spit in there faces one after the other if I can for what they are putting their sisters through, sisterhood my "you know what" dumb feminists.
Much has been written about
Much has been written about the evil Koran by Muslim and non-Muslim authors. The secular variety of Islamic apologists says that the larger part of the Muslims does not strictly guide their lives by it. At most, it is granted that "strict religious" Mullahs follow these old teachings, just like "strict" Christians follow the teachings of the Bible.
However, more important and essential for our observations is that Koran and hadiths mirror the Muslim character, which cannot be disputed. The Koran gives us a picture of how the Muslims really are and how they really think.
Everywhere the muslim surfaces, he is not satisfied with equality, but rather claims dominance over the people that has accepted him as a guest. His goal is to force this people under his thumb, and to become its absolute and complete ruler. He sees himself as the people chosen to rule, whose goal is to bring people under his power in accordance with Koran. Such Muslim thinking, with all of its subversive elements, is written down and given “directly from Allah” in the Koran.
American society is slipping into this grip soon.
Shamsher You couldn't be
Shamsher
You couldn't be more right pal, a Muslim only sees things from the Islamic perspective, this will continously remain a problem in any place a large number of Muslims reside provided nothing is done to put them in touch with real humanity, they just are too much of a problem in the modern world.
Hi BD Muslim eyes seek
Hi BD
Muslim eyes seek "green" everywhere, not the environmental green though, but the Mo kind of green. That is why the problem! Take care
Declare Muslims
Declare Muslims Untermenschen! Brand a sign of their moon god in their foreheads, make them feel subdued, send them to gas chambers, make them wear a bell-bolt to warn of their NAJI presence, put them in a perennial state of shame!
See every moslem who keeps
See every moslem who keeps posting here is completely deluded.Ask any moslem if he sleeps with his own daughter/ daughter in law? ( the daughter in law is in our tradition is better than daughter). He may get angry or he may even stab you.Behind the computer he has to answer yes or no! He and most moslems will say no.that's nasty.Now ask him if it is ok for any moslem to sleep with daughter in law or daughter? He will say no, if he has any sense at all.It's obviously not okay.
Ask him if it's ok to beat the crap out of his wife? He will say Nooooo.It;s unislamic.
Then he is stuck.Ask him why did the prophet sleep with his own daughter in law? he will have no answer.Why did the prophet beat the wives? why did the prophet kill infidels? Innocents? he will stab you and go.That's too unbearable.
Let us ask this faithone who keeps posting.Do you sleep with your daughter/ daughter in law ? Dont ask me back the same question.My answer will be simple No I find that eeck and criminal behaviour and I do not have a rapist rasool who showed us the way and I f I get to know of some one who sleeps with daughter/daughter in law, I will kill him or report to the police stat.But what do moslems do? Praise the rasool and pray to him.Do you not find a disconnection in your thoughts and actions? You love the rasool who slept with his own daughter and still do not want to practice the sunnah of the rasool.
If you dont sleep with your daughter( I am assuming that) why do you pray to the pimp allah who teaches you all to sleep with your own daughter? Can faithone answer me please?
Do you approve of killing innocents? yes or no? If all the kafirs are to be killed as per the wishes of the pimp allah sabka loud ah, then is it right? See earlier the moslem scum bags were depending on the ignorance of kafirs.Now the islamic evil is disrobed.The truthful nature of islam being evil,ugly, obnoxious, violent, abominable, enslaving intolerant is there for all to see.If you worship the pedophile rapist, I do not see a reason to respect you.I have a daughter and I am worried sick about moslem maniacs around.
The reasons why all moslems
The reasons why all moslems are either deluded and/ or have a disconection syndrome( being far removed from reality) are easy to enlist.Difficult to fathom if one is a moslem .Ones the disconnection is clear they become very easily ex moslems( for want of better term)
1.Ask moslems if they all like to sleep with their daughters or bang their son's wife?
2.ask any moslem male if he likes his wife being bonked by his father? If he says no, he is to an extent aware.then ask him how come he brays to this rapist pedophile prophet? he will start lecturing about islam blah blah, that's a typical disconnection syndrome.Most moslems are in that state.They have understood that banging the daughter in law( or getting your own wife banged by your father) is some how incorrect and immoral.But they do not see any thing wrong in praying to that rapist pedophile who did exactly that! Infact they will kill in his name.This is a typical example of disconnection syndrome and delusion together.
Ask any moslem with 6 year old daughter if he would like to give away his daughter to an arab of 55 years? If the money is good many indian moslems will happily give away their daughters sadly.the child bride syndrome is rampant in hyderabad India.Here the moslems are aware that it's wrong to do so , only if they have money.Otherwise the moslem fathers are too cruel.
Now there is no disconnection for some moslems and disconection for others.
Ask a moslem if it's ok to kill all the infidels? If they say yes kill the bastard stat! He has no disconnection syndrome.He is delusional.If he says it's not ok, then ask him why did allah say or order to kill infidels? he will give a long winded lecture.he has disconnection syndrome. If he does not have this syndrome, he would have left islam long time ago.
there are essentially 4 types of moslems
1.Those with delusion and disconnection together.The jihadi type, ready to rape, kill, riot etc. 20% of the moslems are this type.
2.Those moslems with delusions and no disconnection.these will keep telling that the islam means peace etc. this will be 20% The typical rich moslem in a non moslem country and worried about his own safety.
3.Disconnected moslem the poor moslem in a non moslem country who are disconnected in to thinking that maha loud ah mohammad was the best human being ever. 20% and many Indian variety belong to this.
4.Typical exmoslem who has no delusion and disconnection.he knows it's immoral to have sex with daughter, immoral to rape widows whose husband you have murdered,immoral to sleep with little children and mohammad maha loud ah was a rapist, killer, incestuous bastard. They are the exmoslems.Like our Ibraswamy.Who is quite an enlightened human being.It's people like him we need to get the other people out of islamic clutch.The jihadi type who are both deluded and disconnected ( including the deluded sadiq / donald) who should be vapourised.
A Scottish judge allowed a
A Scottish judge allowed a Muslim husband to retain his license after he was booked for driving 64 mph in a 30 mph zone. “He has one wife in Motherwell and another in Glasgow and sleeps with one each night and stays with the other the next on an alternate basis,” argued Mohammed Anwar’s lawyer. “Without his driving license,he would be unable to do this on a regular basis.”
Source: Trumpet Weekly
#3, It saddens me, too!
#3,
It saddens me, too! That is why it is important that we do our best to educate. Perhaps someday, someone will listen and join our cause....if not, they'll learn the hard way and believe me, that is NO fun!
Raisinhead,....could you be a little more blunt next time....I don't think your message was clear enough! lol Good one, girl!
Dears have a look at these
Dears have a look at these videos & comment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTv6ZDRyqe8&feature=rec-HM-fresh+div
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClsEhIJPBG0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1DShnKWf-8
Please do take time to watch these videos.
The evisl of ISLAM Music in
The evisl of ISLAM
Music in ISLAM
Music shop blow up by Taliban
http://www.daily.pk/pakistan/pakistannews/9684-music-shop-blow-up-by-tal...
Brotherhood in ISLAM
http://www.daily.pk/general/generalnews/9675-religious-murders-hurl-paki...
http://www.daily.pk/pakistan/pakistannews/9683-taliban-kill-5-pakistani-...
Secular views of ISLAM
Israeli Woman Killed By Muslim Extremist in Azerbaijan
http://www.ucsj.org/news/israeli-woman-killed-muslim-extremist-azerbaijan
Somalian Christian Killed by Muslim Extremists
http://www.christianadc.org/news-and-articles/129-somalian-christian-kil...
White Father of seven killed by Muslim, whites blamed for it
http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/ep/brown.htm
Nigeria Christian Teacher Killed by Muslim Student Mob
http://www.christianpost.com/Intl/Persecution/2007/03/nigeria-christian-...
Raida, Yemen - Police: Jew Was Killed By Muslim Because He Was Jewish
http://www.vosizneias.com/24153/2008/12/12/raida-yemen-police-jew-was-ki...
Christian Killed by Muslim Militants
http://www.persecution.net/so-2008-05-07.htm
A JUDGE HAS BEEN KILLED BY MUSLIM INSURGENTS IN THE SOUTH
http://nntworld.prd.go.th/previewnews.php?news_id=254709180001&news_head...
Minority hindu being killed in BD by jamat rajakars
http://priyo.com/blog/nagorbawul/15124
Raisin Head wrote: Rowan
Raisin Head wrote:
Rowan Wiliams is a member of Christendom. Men like him created Christendom in Rome in 325 CE. Jesus never did interfaith! Williams is a fool and a man without knowledge. Some one appointed him because they could not find anyone else. Let his penis be cut off. It probably doesnt work anyway!
He doesnt believe in the Bible, only himself. Men like him is the reason why the Bible is not read. Men like him is the reason I have read the Bible instead of accepting what a man says.
Rowan Williams is a man with an empty head who spills nonsense out his mouth. Thank God he does not represent me.
"Williams studied theology at
"Williams studied theology at Christ’s College at Cambridge and at Wadham College at Oxford. He knows more about religion than the average bootblack, probably as much as Jerry Falwell did, more than Lincoln and Sumner, more than Bill Maher and Gary Busey. He’s a theologian and an Archbishop and should be given credit for it."
Just because Williams have a couple pieces of paper from Cambridge and Wadham College at Oxford, does not make him a wise or brilliant man.
"Well, it certainly has tried! The question is why it has taken the dhimmis and the Archbishop so long to respond."
Because it takes him a long time to come up with the drivel that comes out of his mouth.
Amendment I Congress shall
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
What part of the first Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is recognized by Islam?
Until the sob proves to me that Islamic law is applicable I will continue to be an American who believes in my constitution.
Plus the second amendment gives me the RIGHT to bear arms so the sob had better come armed for bear to take away my rights.
Dear faithone can you please
Dear faithone
can you please answer my queries??????? Am waiting for your erudite rendition!
I'm not really sure why
I'm not really sure why Archbishop Williams has been attacked here.
I can only assume it was to do with his widely mis-reported (or at least mis-represented) statements about Sharia Law and its place within the British Legal framework.
In the first place, he was only stating something that is, de-facto, already happening. In the UK, Muslims use Sharia Courts to settle civil issues anyway, whether we (the rest of the populace) agrees or not.
Now I'm not interested here in getting into what this says about Islamic attitude to our legal system, but it is happening.
In the second place, Williams was saying that these courts should be regulated as a subsidiary part of the Legal system; thus ensuring the primacy of UK law and that UK law is always the 'court of appeal' in these cases seems to me to be a very good idea, it should mean that Women get treated fairly in Sharia courts- and if not they will appeal to UK law which will give them fair treatment.
Thirdly, given that the Jewish Comuunity has enjoyed similar facilities (regulated in that way) for some time, it is hard to see why Muslims should not be given the same consideration.
BUT: where Williams was less than emphatic enough was in the requirement for 'subsidiarity' on the part of the Sharia Court - at least this was little reported (but then again that would make less of a good news Headline than "Williams backs Sharia Courts in UK!".
Equally, to be fair, Williams, rather like Pope Benedict is capable of repeated bouts of 'foot-in-mouth' disease. Not so much in what they say (which if read in toto) often is good sense, but in the manner of expression, which is anything but 'media-savy'.
The problem that Williams has is that he faces a UK Press almost universally hostile to Christianity and Christian views, that never seems to miss the opportunity to impune Christian organisations and senior individuals, but he seems unable to come to terms with this and express himself with sufficient care to avoid these problems. (Not that I am sure anyone could, mind you.)
I'm not sure about the attitude of the press in other parts of the World, but in the UK it is becoming increasingly evident that sections of the Press regard the truth as sacred - so sacred in fact that they never dare speak it!
On another point:
It hardly seems fair to harp on about crimes committed by Muslims - be they never so brutal - these are just criminals. Criminals of all races, castes and creeds exist and I do not think that any one group, religion, race, caste or creed has cornered the market in brutality.
In the UK recently an English (therefore probably Christian - in broad definition) taxi-driver has been charged with over 100 sexual assaults/rapes on and of passengers (female) in his cab.
And there are plenty more examples to choose from.
Does this "prove" (male) Christians are all rapists? No, of course not, no more than the examples of crime committed by Muslims prove Muslims are all criminal/prone to voilence/rape/ etc. So, lay off the Muslims on that one, it is an emotive 'red-shirt' tactic not worthy of inclusion in any debate.
proudkafir: to state that all Muslims are evil is, frankly, ridiculous. They are not. The Salafi/Wahabi brand might well be, but they form a minority (albeit a violent, vocal and active one).
Raisonhead: Williams is 'liberal-evangelical' by theology. Amongst other things that means his Christianity will be largely Bible-driven, though not literalistically so. Your suggestion that he should be mutilated is un-called for and unworthy of someone engaged in debate.
I agree totally with theprophetofIshal and Shamshar, though I think his brush is a little broad, substituting Islam for "the Muslim" is pretty accurate (sources in the Koran and Sahih hadith support this).
In fact, as people who believe in Human Rights, it is essential that we accord them fully to Moslems (otherwise we risk becoming what we hate). However, we also have to ensure that we also retain our rights - and this is a problem because many of the 'rights' accorded to people in the UK are conflicting.
(In fact I am with Ghandi on this one - he refused to sign the Bill of Human Rights, requesting one of responsibilities instead. How I wish the UN had gone that way instead!)
However, that does not mean that we have to give in to Islamic doctrine, predjudice, law or anything else.
Indeed, wherever any element of the socio-political-legal strustures of Islam conflict with our tenets of civilisation we must reject them in the name of fairness equality and civilisation itself.
We certainly need to be aware that Islam does seek to impose itself world-wide and we need to oppose any and all attempts to do so, even the most insidious, but we have to do it without falling into the 'trap' of Islam itself - treating the 'other' as an underclass - we need to take and keep the moral high-ground.
I do not recall where this comes from, but it somes up what I belive the attitude of Islam is to the rest of the World. A non-Muslim is speaking:
"When I was in power you demanded your rights and freedoms, because that was according to my principles. When you came to power you took way my rights and freedoms, because that was according to your principles."
We must ensure that Islamic agitation does not, ever, persuade us to erode our own freedoms and rights to suit the 'freedoms' and 'rights' Muslims demand.
#18 He does not represnt the
#18 He does not represnt the bible. Jim Jones used the bible to kill 900 of his followers. Williams did submit to Sharia. I said was he ever casteated because all non-Muslims must be castrated under ISLAM. do you want to lose your penis? Well stop being so submissive to Islam/
[...] bookmarks tagged
[...] bookmarks tagged appalling Grim and Appalling–Let the Debate Begin | Faith ... saved by 2 others thevillageother bookmarked on 05/01/09 | [...]
hadith are never the FINAL
hadith are never the FINAL word in Islam. They are a REFERENCE.
the Koranic verses are out of context. Much of Sina quotes in the Violence department are just the Koran painting a picture of Hell. its never telling Muslims to be violent. PROVE ME WRONG!
If violence is what you wnat... just look up the bible