Edip Yuksel vs. Ali Sina: Round X - page 36

Submitted by admin on Mon, 09/28/2009 - 08:23

Printer-friendly version

Send to friend

PDF version

Edip Yuksel vs. Ali Sina

Round X - page 36

Back < > Next

Edip yuksel's writings are in gray boxes
Ali Sina's in white pages

I am glad that I am in a country established by deists, monotheists, and muslims (submitters to God alone and promoters of peace), who escaped from religious persecution. The constitution of the United States is mostly in harmony with Quranic principles. I am blessed for not living in a country ruled by Pope, Evangelical Christians, Talibans, Mullahs, or fascist cult of Ali Sina

So the constitution of the US is in harmony with Quranic Principle! Really?

Let us see just take one example and compare:

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.

Now let us see what the Quran says in respect of freedom of faith and speech.

3:85, If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (All spiritual good).

2:193 And fight them until there is no more fitnah (sedition), and religion is for Allah

2:257 those who reject faith the patrons are the evil ones: from light they will lead them forth into the depths of darkness. They will be companions of the fire, to dwell therein (For ever).

Is there any similarity between the American constitution and the Quranic principles? I don’t see any?

Though the USA government is currently infiltrated by Evangelical Christians, there are still many institutions and majority of people who appreciate justice, equality, liberty, and the separation of church and state. I will fight against organized religion influencing the government of my country.

In what ways Islam advocates separation of church and state? The whole concept of Islam is to bring Islamic rule and establish the Quran and Sharia as the law of land. Doesn’t the Quran talk about the right of women being half of that of men and their testimony also being worth half? Doesn’t the Quran define the ordinances for thieve and adulterers? This is interference in the secular law. How can Islam advocate separation of church and state then? Probably you mean Islam advocates the separation of the “Christian church” from state, so that the Muslims can control everything.

Then you talk about justice, equality, liberty. You must be joking. Is imposing Jizyah and humiliating the unbelievers, justice? Are people free to have a different religion other than Islam? Are Muslims and non-Muslims, or men and women have the same rights in the Quran? You simply throw any fancy word you find without ever paying attention to their meanings. The concept of justice, equality and liberty do not exist in Islam.

Thus, Ali Sina's theo-fascist remarks declaring ALL Muslims being "subhuman species" made me decide to discontinue the debate with him. His "subhuman" remark was the last, but a venomous drop that filled his cup of hatred and bigotry. He is not a person to reason with, since his mind is filled with toxic hate and his stomach is thirsty for fresh blood. I now regret calling him with the word "dear," since he does not deserve even its first letter.

You have been looking for excuses to get out of this debate. Everyone can see this excuse is not warranted.

Those who are curious about my response to Ali's "6-Step" criticism of the Quran will find our answer to his and many other criticism at the side notes of the Reformist Translation of the Quran, which will be published in the end of the year, inshallah.

As I promised, I am posting my analyses of the leader of this small cult. A SURPRISE note will follow these analyses:

POSITIVE ASPECTS:

1. Ali Sina is a smart, articulate and well-versed in classic Hislamic liturgy. Thus, I do not think that he was originally a Christian introducing himself as a former Muslim.

2. Ali Sina's website, though frequented by cheerleaders and hatemonger drunkards, is indeed an open forum with no censorship, like our forum at 19.org. I have not yet seen a Hislamic or Evilgelical website with such an open door policy.

3. Ali Sina, though chopped some of my arguments by integrating/devouring them within his arguments, he demonstrated acceptable degree of fairness in posting them.

4. Ali Sina, having full control on the website, could have distorted my responses and he even could have posted some outrageous statements under my name. (This happened in an atheist Turkish forum several years ago!). Ali Sina seems to have integrity in this regard.

5. Ali Sina, though misguided, has complete dedication to his cause. (Since we do not know about his identity, we cannot verify nor falsify claims about his getting financial aid from Evangelical organizations or from CIA for his job to promote hate and genocide.).

6. Though Ali Sina appears to be thirstier for the blood of innocent people than his Hislamic clones, such as members of Taliban and Al-Qaida, he has a mediocre sense of humor that others lack. His sense of humor might be an indication that there is hope for his recovery from hatemongering.

7. Though, using his old sunni mentality, Ali frequently confuses the Quran with books of hearsay, Ali Sina does an excellent job in exposing the numerous problems in teachings of hadith, sunnah, and sectarian jurisprudence. (I have being doing this since 1986 and published more than a dozen books on this subject)

NEGATIVE ASPECTS:

1. Ali Sina follows the Evilgelical-Sunny methodology of Right foot, left foot. Wet foot, dry foot. Low foot, high foot. True foot, lie foot. Here comes the Evilgelical-Sunni sly soot!

Ali Sina shares a strikingly similar poor knowledge of the Quran with Sunnis and Shiites. He uses the same lousy argument. He uses THE STINKIEST SUBSTANCE out of the Sunni holy trash as the MAIN MENUE in his round table. He is not able to read the Quran without smelling the piles of hadith. Now it is clear that his Hislamic disease is still in his heart and mind. His approach to the Quran is exactly similar to of the Sunni or Shiite ones.

Without being brainwashed by these teachings, any reasonable person would and should understand the meaning and message of verses. Sure, we can ask more questions regarding the details WE WISH to see, but there is no end of demands for more details, especially irrelevant details.

The idea of abrogation is a Satanic idea, and it was fabricated by Sunni and Shiite mushriks who had problems with some verses when they tried to twist others. Ironically, his mentality is not much different. It seems that he has rejected the substance of his religion but he is keeping its mind set, its fallacious reasoning methods exactly. No wonder, the Sunnis who are following our argument have found Ali Sina much closer to themselves!

I have no comments about the above. These are all your subjective observations of me. But we already talked about abrogation. I quoted several verses of the Quran that are contradictory. Without trying to refute what I wrote on this topic you just repeated your original statement. You also keep accusing me of using the haith, when my entire criticism was about the Quran.

I wish you engaged in some debate and tried to refute my arguments instead of making psychoanalysis of me. Even if your prognosis of me is found to be true, in no ways it disproves my argument. In logic this is called ad hominen. Ad hominem is when you, instead of discussing the subject, direct you attack at your opponent. Here you and I are discussing Islam and the claim of Muhammad. The topic is Quran. I have laid some charges against this book. You must refute these charges. But you have not done that, not even once. First you falsely accuse me of using hadith and now you are finding faults about my person. Since this debate is not about me (or you) but about Islam and Muhammad, I present no defense of myself. What is clear is that you are dodging the questions that I am raising. You have not refuted even one of my arguments.

Back < > Next

Index to this debate

Average:

Your rating: None