Faith Freedom International

[MrHappy]

Here is a pretty good article on the trial going on in Australia about 3 muslim (converts no less) who filed suit against a pastor who was reading excerpts from the qu'ran. Seemingly the church has some kind of web site but I can't find it. If you find it, please post a link.

http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story.jsp?sectionid=1292&storyid=986134
_________________
Islam, religion of peace ? My arse !

[adnan]

so on the whole, is this a good thing or a bad thing?

[MrHappy]

I view it as a good thing. It exposes what is really going on in the mosques.
_________________
Islam, religion of peace ? My arse !

[gymnoceph]

It is a good thing, and hopefully more Aussies will wake up to the Trojan horse of Islam in Western democracies. It also illustrates the fact that muslims who stress that Islam is a "religion of peace and tolerance" should not be automatically granted any credibility. As we all know, many muslims are completely ignorant of Islam's teachings and the conduct of Mohammed. Equally, the opinion of representatives of other religions (such as the Pastor in this case) should not automatically be discountered on the assumptions of ignorance or hatemongering.

The fact that the muslims are in outcry over the fact that the Quran's (many) unpalatable verses are been so publicly exposed is quite simply laughable. As the Pastor said, "why are they in there then?" I am hoping that this sets a precedent. The more people, non-muslims and muslims are exposed to the brutal realities of Islam and the role of the hadith/Quran in directly inspiring this, the better.

Wonder if any of the converts will apostate upon hearing the delightful reality of islamic jurisprudence? Not that they will be able to advertise the fact, thanks to the mercy and compassion of apostasy laws....

Unfortunately though, Australia still does not have a secular constitution; Christianity is upheld, and there is legislation regarding blasphemy etc.

[stopnot]

Assalamu Alaikum one and all,

In a typical FFI style deciding whether this is this a good thing or a bad thing is based,so far, on newspaper reports.

Even the church's website consisits mainly of collection of other newspaper reports – ONLY ONE official document amongst all. http://www.catchthefire.com.au/newsandinfo.html

Why don’t you start reading the Act and it definitions first and then base your views on firm grounds instead on other’s views.

Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001
http://www.dms.dpc.vic.gov.au/sb/2001_Act/A00884.html

3. Definitions

[MrHappy]

[marky]

I think that religions, particularly "contentious" ones like Islam should be licensed to operate.

Mosques and / or Mullahs etc that are found to violate any of the above laws should be banned from teaching. Failure to comply should result in arrest and imprisonment.

I think the whole western world should carefully consider this. In my country there are "religious" people who are "taking the piss" (excuse my language) out of our society, and to rub salt into the wound claiming unemployment benefit: I am paying taxes to support these people.
_________________
The Buddah say, "With your mind you make the World".

[stopnot]

MrHappy wrote:

[marky]

In my country some extremist Muslims (we don't have many) are inciting violence, either directly or by innuendo.

People should be allowed to state their beliefs and criticise others as an absolute. However, where the "force of the statements" borders upon intimidation, or incitement is involved then this should be followed up by due process of law.

And not just Muslims. Look in some countries where powerful Christian movements are not just religious but political. They create an atmosphere in some areas that is bordering upon repressive, and not the multi-cultural / religious atmosphere that should exist.
_________________
The Buddah say, "With your mind you make the World".

[MrHappy]

I do comprehend that it is the pastor that is on trial but the plaintiffs have unwittingly put Islam on the stand also. They have forced the passages in question into the public eye.

As for the ridcule this is a more complicated matter but it is very subtle. In the case of muslims, they get their turbans in a twist about a publication, Satan Verses and issue fatwas left and right to have the author killed. A very extreme reaction and dangerously repressive. Islam's structure exists on this type of law. However, it must be approached sensibly and if there is something so outragous, I dunno, say stoning someone to death, then ridicule away. Whether the pastor is trying to create a degree of animus remains to be seen. His audience, up until the trial was limited to church going members, now the audience is much wider. The other side of the coin is what is being preached in the mosques? Kill the jews, infidel, jews are swine, apes etc etc etc. You can't have it both ways my friend.


If a person stands in public and starts ridiculing your personal believes and personas with a view of creating animosity towards you by the rest of the community would you not get concerned for your safety and find legal means to protect the privacy and security you deserve?

Let me ask you this question, if I were to ridicule the KKK or The Aryian Nation for their belief that whites were superior to blacks, would I be wrong ? You can believe what you like, you just can't convince everybody that your belief is right.
_________________
Islam, religion of peace ? My arse !

[stopnot]

MrHappy wrote:

[MrHappy]

Assalamu Alaikum StopNot

[stopnot]

MrHappy wrote:

[Yohan]

[stopnot]

Yohan wrote:

[Chanakya]

[scepsis]

Duplicate. sorry

[scepsis]

[l l]

What is going on here?
Is the old forum back?
Is the new forum still having problems?

best regards

[MrHappy]

Assalamu Alaikum StopNot.

[marky]

Should be funny, this one. The Christian pastor has the best knowledge of the Koran and the Muslim converts have scant knowledge. I hope that the case does get the exposure that it deserves and Islam comes out looking less than rosy.

Islam is also very "touchy". I remember when the Miss World competition decided (somewhat stupidly) to host in Nigeria. A female journalist made an innocent remark in an article that "Mohammed could take a wife from one of these women". After this, all hell broke loose and a massive riot with death and destruction ensued.

As an aside: Why were they offended ? Surely any hetrosexual male would be honoured to take a beautiful, intelligent and modern woman for a wife.

Then there was Amina who the Islamists were almost obsessed with stoning to death.

All these things which are being covered in the media are starting to put Islam under the scrutiny that it deserves.
_________________
The Buddah say, "With your mind you make the World".

[MrHappy]

I think people have just about had enough of the Islamic fundamentalists whining about their sensitivities being abused when a picture of mohammad with a few chicks is published in a book. Now, why would muslims be offended at a picture of a man who was well known for his fondness for the ladies and yet, the illegal stoning sentence of Amina does not bother them ? A protest about wearing the hijab creates a storm and yet an illegal lashing of a girl in Nigeria (again) is never brought up. You know why ? Because this is a male domination thing.
A girl form Afghanistan entered a beauty competition and if she goes back to Afghanistan, she could face charges.
Indeed, the knots of Islam are beginning to unravel.
_________________
Islam, religion of peace ? My arse !