sharia IS for losers

Submitted by the Grand Infidel of Kafiristan (Australia), Sep 8, 2009 at 05:49

"But since in my point of view Islamic law have a spiritual & moral background within it's rules, I don't mind."

But Muslims don't even have a consensus on Sharia!

The Third Reich had its own laws - so did the Soviet Union. People blindly followed them, sometimes disagreeing but putting up with it silently . Those who dared to question openly were dealt with. Seeing the sharia laws are what you've been led to believe is right for you - I guess you don't have much choice. You'll continue with your beliefs. Maybe some day you'll realise that everyone else has been very happy for a very long time without them and have never and will never have any need for them. They may have been appropriate 1000 years ago in primitive semi-tribal cultures. But 21st century socieities see them for what they are - brutal and retrograde.

"...It's no different with you choosing to live according to Australian government rules... you may not like some of the rules but you gotta follow through...."

It's completely different - don't even try to make a comparison. Australia's laws are not based on religion. Apostasy from a pre-medieval middle eastern cult is not dealt with here by taking someone's life. Women are not stoned for having affairs. Homosexuals are not put to death or jailed. Shoplifters and other thieves do not have their hands cut off. No one is publicly whipped for drinking alcohol or smoking a joint. People are completely free to change their religion.

"Freedom to submit or not is both freedom... right..."

If you are not allowed to make the wrong choice - it isn't freedom at all.

"Qur'an 109 : 6 - To you be your Way, and to me mine.
Isn't that freedom...?"

No - that's more indifference. It just says 'I couldn't give a rat's arse about what you believe'.

Now, putting aside that one little quote from Mo's earliest period - do you want me to pull out any of the plentiful verses in your little green book that are completely against freedom of choice for individuals?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".