Gary Ashcroft
Posted April 13, 2011 at 7:41 PM

Katelyn,
I can understand your antipathy to the assertions I made in my article. I would probably display a similar reaction if I possessed the same understanding of sharia that you possess. However, through cautious and careful research, coupled with the guidance of thoughtful professors, I have come to see sharia in a much more nuanced light. Islamic law, like much else in life, is best comprehended not from a Manichean, black-and-white perspective, but from a vantage point which acknowledges relative degrees of truth and value.

The fact of the matter is that all legal systems have their strengths and weaknesses. Western law systems, including our own, have perpetrated gross violations of human rights that are comparable to the negative aspects of sharia. If you will remember, our legal system has in recent years sanctioned the use of torture on suspected “enemy combatants,” many of whom had no link to terrorist groups or operations. Obviously, the affirmation of such violations of human rights is repugnant, with our legal system’s temporary approval of such measures besmirching the reputation of our judiciary. However, just because negative occurrences have been manifest in our legal system, does that warrant condemning the entire structure? I would answer with a resounding “no.”

In examining the outcomes of sharia, we can arrive at similar conclusions. Yes, sharia does have some negative consequences, but I would assert that it has generally had an ennobling influence on mankind. When Christian Crusaders were indiscriminately killing Jewish and Muslim civilians, Saladin’s Muslim forces maintained sharia provisions for protection of civilians and their rights, regardless of religion. In the same sense, while much of Christian Europe maintained Mesozoic views on the property and divorce rights of women, Mohammad was introducing reforms that gave Muslim women some of the most liberal entitlements of that day and age. In light of such facts, I think any effort to condemn sharia due to a few backwards provisions is a manifestation of wanton ignorance of the good it has done.

As for your discussion of honor killings, may I point out to you that such happenings are illegal according to Islamic law? There is no discussion in the Qu’ran, Hadith, or fiqh (general Islamic jurisprudence) concerning crimes of shame, and correctly interpreted Islamic law doesn’t sanction honor killings. Yes, such atrocities do take place in Islamic countries, but I would say that they are more cultural than religious in nature. Arab culture, among both Christian and Muslim Arabs, has historically been a tribal. Tribal cultures, no matter what their religious affiliation, have been notorious for embracing the practice of honor killing. In fact, the Coptic Christians of Egypt have performed many honor killings over the course of the past few years.

Concerning the Muslim Brotherhood, I would like to point out that it is by and large a very centrist, moderate Islamist party. In fact, I would liken the Ikhwan, as they are known, to Europe’s Christian Democratic movement. America and its Middle Eastern dictatorial puppets have a tendency to label all Islamist parties as being extremist, but Islamism is a very fragmented and diverse philosophy. To equate the Ikhwan to Wahhabis or the Taliban is like equating modern Christian Democrats to Franco’s Catholic fascism- it doesn’t make any sense.

As far as Glenn Beck’s Islamophobia goes, I think it is patently obvious that he employs such fear-mongering. I watch Glenn Beck’s show pretty frequently (for comedy’s sake only!) and he regularly makes overtly false and incendiary comments about Islam. If such actions are not Islamophobia, then I’m not sure what is.

http://www.byupoliticalreview.com/?p=99812

Tuesday: Abraham being a common link between all 3 Judaism based religions... Abrah's??

Artful Dodger:

> Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah, considered one of the Islamic Republic's most radical clerics, issued a religious edict on his website whereby suicide attacks are not only legitimate but are a must for every Muslim, a special paper by the Middle East Media Research Institute shows.

I prefer the way Christians do it. They elect a president, cast their vote to let the guy do whatever it is he wants. When the guy goes and bombs another country, Christians pretend it wasn't they who allowed it to happen. Then they pretend that it has nothing to do with their Christian values. Since the other guys are evil, it is ok to torture them and kill them anyway. Since they are evil, they asked for it. Torturing and killing is OK if it is politically and economically convenient. When somebody asks why a Christian would allow such a thing to happen, they simply say it has nothing to do with Christianity. Voting and religion have nothing to do with each other anyway. Christians sleep soundly at night knowing that their military killed 400,000 people to protect their Christian values. There is no conflict of conscience. Just go to church on Sunday, and you will be a good Christian in the eyes of God. God doesn't even care about geopolitics anyway.

Artful Dodger:

> Obama said, “I believe that there are many paths to the same place.” Obama also said, “All people of faith—Christians, Jews, Muslims, animists, everyone knows the same God.”

> But Jesus said in John 14:6, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

> He's either ignorant or he's NOT in the faith.

Assumption #1: The Bible is the Word of God.
Assumption #2: God exists.
Assumption #3: Jesus existed.
Assumption #4: John existed.
Assumption #5: The New Testament is an accurate depiction of the life of a man believed to have existed 2000 years ago.

Now, prove all of these assumptions. The general proof is like this: the one book says it is true, therefore it is true. It is a circular argument. There is no proof of the existence of Jesus or the existence of God outside of the Bible. The book itself is offered as proof, but there is no other proof beyond the book. The oldest copies of the book date 200 years after the supposed death of Christ. The gospels were written decades after the death of Jesus. The book was written in Greek and not Aramaic, the language of the people Jesus is supposed to have come from. There is NO mention of Jesus by ANY writers contemporary to his life. No Roman sources, no Greek sources, no sources other than the Bible itself. So, is Obama ignorant of comparing all the Abrahamic religions, or is he ignorant for believing in something that can never be proven?

Artful Dodger: So... Moses and everyone before Christ and everyone after Christ but before his word was spread is automatically damned?? What about the Good Samaritan?

AD has been accused of sleeping in a lot of places, so I reckon he is guilty on this one as well HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Artful Dodger: Using God again!!!

"....ny person who understands the geography, economics, and history of the region knows full well that a two-state solution is the fantasy of a liberal mind. Since the left does not believe in common sense, G-d made the rule that the land should not be divided--and if it is, He will enter into judgement on account of the land as well as the mistreatment of His heritage, Israel. The land, based on prophecy, will be divided and those who support such a division need to watch out, for G-d clearly states in Joel 3:2 NKJ why He will judge the nations who divide His land, when his arm (Messiah) will come in battle for Israel. .."

Well I guess it helps him sell a myriad of books, videos and pay per view.

Personally I think he's just jumping on the band wagon like a snake oil seller.

.. with "Pirates of the Caribbean" music playing in the background....

Former Bosnian Serb army chief Ratko Mladic has filed an appeal against his extradition to the UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague. His family says Gen Mladic is too sick to travel, but the Serbian government is expected to reject the appeal.

Gen Mladic is accused of committing war crimes during the Bosnian war, including the 1995 Srebrenica massacre of 7,500 Muslim men and boys.

Gen Mladic was seized last Thursday in Lazarevo village, north of Belgrade. On Sunday, thousands of people rallied in Belgrade against his arrest. The demonstrators hailed the general as a Serbian national hero. About 100 people were arrested during clashes with police in the Serbian capital.

Know your enemy
Jerry Philipson

Artful Dodger: This could be said of many religious people based on events rather than it's Holy Book. Some who call themselves Christians love the idea of all others (including many Christians as well) dying... Some Muslim extremists relish the same idea.

But both Christianity and Islam preach love thy neighbour and not to bear false witness.

Tuesday: probably the same reason a moth flys to a flame

Artful Dodger: It's difficult dealing with a partner who's stated goal is driving you into the sea

Artful Dodger: Such a rose coloured view of Israeli policy. Especially as Israel seem to be getting confused.

Sounds like the IRA money raisers in the USA painting the "cause" as noble while civilians on all sides were dying.

Artful Dodger: Like those who missed Obama being elected as it was not news worthy? Maybe some read this newpaper and still thought Bush was El President.

Übergeek 바둑이: And of the supplies to the IRA that Gaddafi made in response to an attack by the USA in the 80's on Tripoli... One word that comes from the times that Gaddafi supplied the IRA.. SEMTEX.

....The Lockerbie bombing was just one instance, while the SEMTEX was used in at least 250 booby trap bombings.

"In contrast, our warplanes have killed two of Gaddafi's sons and three of his grandchildren, all aged under 2."

And of the many kids killed or hurt by the weapons he provided to the IRA... which the Libyans and old IRA members have confirmed (as did the capture of one shipment) he did authorise the supply of weapons including... AK47's.. surface to air missiles and SEMTEX.

.. 120 tonnes of weapons .. 5 tonnes captured.

(V):

>Gaddafi is a known aggressor.. are you saying Bush and Obama have committed worse acts of terrorism and mass murder, or killed more of their own people then Gaddafi has?

Gaddafi is accused of ordering terrorist attacks against the West. As I mentioned some 1000 posts ago, the witness at the trial was very flimsy and left a big reasonable doubt about the accused. Then nobody can prove that Gaddafi ordered the bombing. It is surmised by the west, but never proven.

In contrast, our warplanes have killed two of Gaddafi's sons and three of his grandchildren, all aged under 2. The questions is, if somebody killed your family, would you hold feeling of friendship towards them?

As for Bush, does the Iraq War count? I can ask, who has attacked who? How many Lybian war planes have bombed the Us or the UK? It is like Iraq, how many times did Iraq attack the US directly? Or Vietnam, how many times did the Vietnamese attack the US or France?

Is it just me or are the bombings all going one way? It is the way of empires. Empires attack, then they blame the "barbarians" at the other side. It worked great for the Romans, and it still works great today. Our modern Capitalist Empire (The Nato axis) are the Mongols of the modern era.

PaoloRus: Gaddafi is a known aggressor.. are you saying Bush and Obama have committed worse acts of terrorism and mass murder, or killed more of their own people then Gaddafi has?

I know the west has/is a bit of a hypocrite when it comes to violence but.... ....!!

Artful Dodger: Isn't "left" a relative term to a persons own perceived political stance.

The Communist party in the UK would say that the Labour party is right of them politically. Yet the Conservative party would say the Labour party is left of them... yet Labour would say the Conservative were right even though the BNP would say the Conservatives are left wing relatively.

I think that the great leader of his country - it's Qaddafi, not Bush or Obama. Bush and Obama are chauvinists and aggressors.
yes yes )))

Tuesday: I'm not really upset, I just find ANY racial /ethnic slang or whatever disturbing

Artful Dodger: But there isn't a US Liberal Party, it's just a general term. Like Republican, Democrat and Moderate.

Tuesday: That's like the Daily Mail. When most of the UK's papers are reporting 'X' as the headlines.. The Daily Mail comes up with a story that most would consider just plain gossip, or highly selected words that end up with them in the courts again!!

rod03801: And it seems a 'good bulk' of cons state that all 'lib' policies are socialist.. which, it seems is a relative term. I can understand disagreement, but using a term which thanks to the Cold War is considered anti American and an insult just appears to be playing old stereotypes.. Which Conservatives appear to complain they are being targetted by.

Just more "false conflict" is it not?

Tuesday: Griffith

Tuesday: I know how to read. Don't start getting rude. You can replace "rednecks" and "non-rednecks" in what I said as well.

Tuesday: "They"?

You fail to mention that the reason "They" end up having to bring it up, is because a good bulk of libs accuse every one else of being racist for disagreeing with anything the incompetent man does. It's really the libs who play the race card. It has happened so much, I can understand "them" possibly feeling the need to start statements out that way. (It's not because he's black, but)

It seems though from what I've read that the terms (democrat/republican) realistically in terms of being conservative/liberal/moderate have no real meaning. It is possible that a Republican can be liberal and that a Democrat can be conservative. When saying (as it seems to be the way on this board) the likes of "democrats are 'x', republicans are 'y'" it appears this is a void argument.

When the likes of Charles Krauthammer are considered 'neo-conservative' yet hold many "liberal" ideas, such as ...."legalized abortion, an opponent of the death penalty, an intelligent design critic and an advocate for the scientific consensus on evolution, calling the religion-science controversy a "false conflict;" a supporter of embryonic stem cell research using embryos discarded by fertility clinics with restrictions in its applications, and a longtime advocate of radically higher energy taxes to induce conservation"

Political fencing of ideas into camps is imho a fallacy.

Tuesday:
law allows a person who has completed their sentence, (including any fines, parole or probation) to immediately re-register. There is no waiting period, special application or other process.