Homa Arjoman
Thanks to the several people who sent this article from The Star.
Had she stayed in Iran, Homa Arjomand would now be dead.All — all — of the women's activists she worked with in Tehran have been executed, victims of a reactionary regime that ruled, and continues to rule, by strict adherence to Islam's sharia law.
In 1989, she and her husband paid $15,000 to smugglers to help them and their two young children flee the country.
For three days, they rode on horseback through the mountains, sleeping in barns before finally reaching Turkey.
Two years later, the onetime professor of medical physics arrived in Canada as a refugee. And how grateful she was to be in a secular country, where female equality was the law.
That was then.
Last fall, Arjomand, now a transitional counsellor in Toronto for immigrant women, heard the province had quietly approved the use of Islamic law in Ontario's Muslim community.
A group she'd never heard of, called the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice, had gained the right to hold tribunals, darul qada, in which marriage, family and business disputes can be settled according to sharia.
The 1,300-year-old body of laws and rules for living was inspired by the Qur'an, Islam's holy book.
Arjomand was horrified.
"The last thing I expected in Canada, the last thing I want, is sharia law," she says. "Women are not equal under it, therefore it is opposed to Canada's laws and values. The government can't let this happen."
so it goes to the north; canada is becomeing a islamic state; canada has no problems with muslims, it is to be seen; they give in to them and are falling into the hands of islam. it will be interesting to play hockey and baseball with canada as they play the muslims islamic song before each game and don't forget the prayers that will have to be said during the seventh inning strech or half time. i think we should start with a security fence all along our north border and of cours our south border, what do you think?
Does anybody have a link to this lady's organization so we know where to send donations?
It is time to fight back not just with words, but with our pocketbooks.
Events in the West can be predicted when sufficient data are known, which makes my scenario vary between possible, probable, and certain--I like none of the three. My concerns center about our Western responses to Islam, a thought precipitated by this article concerning sharia law in Canada.
Clearly, in North America, two distinct populations have emerged. Put in simple terms, there are those who get it and those who don't. Those who get it are learning about Islam and identifying it for what it is. They are coming to understand, first, that this is a war. The combatants are life and death. Our values are those of life, liberty, and capitalism. Islam's values are warring on the Laws of Identity and Causality, on life on earth, on freedom, with an intent to kill or subjugate all persons on earth. The more consistant Islamists say they want Islamicization of the globe, but their actions make clear that they lust to kill. They will not be sated until all who are not them die.
Those who do not get it, do everything possible not to dispel the fog obscuring understanding Islam versus the West. Indeed, they seek the fog. In that fog are hatred for freedom, individuals, capitalism, America, and the West. They, alas, are not all. Others refuse to identify Islam for what it is because they "feel" that: all religions are good; Islam is a religion; therefore, Islam is good. They hide behind such contradictory notions as "Islam has been high jacked," and "radical or fundamental or extreme or political Islam." They make no effort to study Islam to determine their beliefs. They along with the ballast populace of appeasers believe that "somehow, we can just get along." Those who do not get it presently occupy most of the seats of power and influence, in and out of government, while those who get it stand on the outside looking in.
The scenario that horrifies me comes when Canada and the United States must face the physical threat of actual Muslim takeover. Muslims will have exploited our values and foibles, become large voting blocks, and like Starbucks, have a mosque on every corner. Those who get it will have double difficulty. Not only will we have to clean out the Muslims, but, before then, we will have to clean out those who do not get it. Those who do not get it will have accelerated to the logical expression of their sundry philosophies and seek to suppress those who get it, using the powers of force necessarily contained in "government."
A civil war concerns me even as a possibility. Such could make the 1861-1865 war seem only a warmup. However, when the cancer of Islam tries to finish off North America, there will be no place left to go. Those who do not get it will stand obstructing life itself, and cornered people might well feel compelled to take them out.
On the hopeful side, I think a better revolution is fomenting already. The popularity of Jihad Watch attests to the fact that those who get it are growing in numbers. The pitiful responses and provocations of Islamists within the comments sections of Jihad Watch expose their intellectual bankruptcy--take away their swords, guns, and bombs, and they have nothing but the empty fraudulence of Islam. Currently responses from the Jihad Watch faithful too often convey insufficient "getting it," but everything must begin somewhere.
If the revolution reaches critical mass soon enough, a civil war such as my nightmare scenario, will not occur. If there ever was a need for Paul Reveres, that time is now.
If, as feared, Islamists launch another horror within the United States this year, no Muslim within America may be safe, nor their mosques, their madrassas, and their fifth column organizations on and off campuses. Blind rage coming from citizens is entirely possible, if not probable, and would be hard to suppress. This would be a mini-civil war, and it would reflect in part that people are rebelling against governments, local and national, which protect only their enemies and not their citizens.
War against Islam is the answer. Civil war is not. Islam is the criminal ideology uniting all terrorists, not "terror," which is only an expression of the ideology. Happily, more and more editorialists, journalists, and others who are getting it, are standing up to say that the war is against Islam. This position is factually correct, and, above all, philosophically correct. What terrorists do has been called for and fully sanctioned by the mainstream philosophical tenets of the Koran, Ahadith, and Sharia.
Samuel Adams, one of our earliest Founding Fathers and revolutionary, said, "It does not take a majority to prevail...but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."
Those who get it fall into Adams' "irate, tireless minority." While adults are too often too closed-minded to change ideas, they do have minds which operate on free will. Our best way out captures that free will and stimulates them to get it. I hope we have as much time as we have determination.
I'm sorry I'm so sleep deprived.
"The pitiful responses and provocations of Islamists within the comments sections of Jihad Watch expose their intellectual bankruptcy--take away their swords, guns, and bombs, and they have nothing but the empty fraudulence of Islam."
I read it as flatulence and it made perfect sense.
Cecil:
EXCELLENT POST!!! Any suggestions on how to proceed?
Susan,
I hate to say this in this way, but she's still a Muslim, and just because she's opposed to the implementation of Sharia law in Canada does not mean that she's willing or able to give up the basic, inherent tenets of Islamification. I would advise you not to send her any money.
You will see that it will be mostly Iranian students and women who will speak out this Sharia
issue. This is an example of liberal block vote buying. That government must go.
"Happily, more and more editorialists, journalists, and others who are getting it, are standing up to say that the war is against Islam".
Are they? I'd like to have directions to these statements, please.
Cecil, your statements are correct and well said. I too fear civil war because of how evenly people are divided politically and because of how adept our enemies are at propaganda and deceit.
I think that people today are afraid to take a stand. What if they are wrong? How do they know that Islam is the problem and not just some rogue Islamists? Doesn't the bible have teachings that could make Christianity look like a murderous sect too? (Yes, but that religion reformed.)
Someone should come up with a simple booklet that shows how Muslim society and the Sharia function today and what kind of culture they intend to import here. I'd also like to have a video of one of the Friday mosque meetings come out on national TV, like the AbuG photos, where anti-Christian/Jewish messages are being taught and where war is being declared against the West.
And if there are people taking photos and videos of the bad things some Americans are doing in Iraq, why is there no magazine with photos showing the good things we are doing? Why is the good never shown? Or spoken about.
Kathleen Parker,in a recent article on the Opinion page wrote,: The US is responsible for, "liberating the Iraqi people; freeing the women of Afghanistan from brutal, murdering theocrats; for sacrificing our own people and billions of dollars to help Iraquis dig out from beneath decades of tyranny; for releasing political prisoners, reuniting families and vaccinating thousdands of children.
Vaccinating Iraqi children?? Did you know that we were doing that? Has anyone seen that in any newspaper or on TV? Why not?
We are allowing the media to suppress all the good we are attempting to do and allowing them to shove the dirt in our faces, day after day.
Is this "irate minority" not irate enough yet to start standing up for what we believe we are doing right and trying to achieve balance in reporting? Or are we too timid, too PC, too beaten down to show who we are, what our country is REALLY trying to do in the world.
The cynics that only think the worst of America or hate her because she is not perfect, (some people have such idealistic expectations of the U.S. that they are enraged when they discover that for all of our striving to be humane and evolved, there is still an element of ignorance and beastliness in the worst of our 'tribe') wallow in the shaming of our troops and look for any 'proof' that we are indeed an imperialistic and evil country.
Our voices must become louder, they must reach more people, those who intuit and deduce the reality we are up against must act to help others understand so they can make the right choices - because once our national self esteem is destroyed and minds twisted in hopelessness and loss of faith in the goodness of America's people, we could easily be overwhelmed.
When we hear the news, biased against the administration and against the U.S., we can begin to doubt the very basis of our culture and our leadership. It helps me to remember: Only good people feel shame for their behavior and say, "I was wrong." Only good people are critical of their actions, evil people deny everything. Only good people say "I'm sorry."
But we must beware. Saying how sorry we are too many times can start to sound like a character defect instead of an apology!
We can acknowledge, that yes, we are still quite unevolved in some areas, but we need to retain the priviledge of also acknowledging that we are a damned sight better than most in many areas.
It seems that we have been taught that to have any national pride is to be arrogant, but what does it mean if we are allowed to have none?
And why have I spent this beautiful Saturday morning devouring JihadWatch and all your comments and rambling on with mine? Because thinking and freely responding to thought is a cherished right we have acquired for ourselves and our children - one that must never be lost.
cgw i agree. i live in ontario, and i am very afraid. slowly islam is eroding our judao-christan society.how can this be stopped? i really want to leave but where to go? even my country of birth my beautiful ireland is full of them ,setting up mosques and islamic schools all over the country{islaminireland,its on the web} i see the arrogance in the work place.. isee the teenage girls wearing their scarves ,jeans and crop tops, what ajoke i see the scarf as an in your face reminder their are muslem and they are here.they are all the same , scratch them deep enough they are all the same. and i have a great hatred for them, all of them wont be happy till all of the world is one islamic state , and we in the west aer distroyed. god bless the u.s.a.i am personally depending on you to eradicats the scourge of the world.god bless "W" and god bless the people of the united states...i really think its late for canadians
Actually CGW, if you read near the end of the article, it indicates that she is no longer a follower of Islam..........which is so wonderfully typical of the Great Persian People...Millions have left Islam.......they will be our allies in fighting Islam....
Thanks
Cecil.. well said.
Those who "get it" are indeed growing in numbers. All we need are the facts and the truth and someone who will listen. We are all soldiers in this war.
Albertanator:
Thanks; I posted before reading the entire article.
I would still be leery about sending money, though.
The mistake - allowing these cockaroaches to infect the west world - needs to be rectified immediately. The Canadian Muslim community needs to be exterminated. Then American Muslim community need to be given to swear allegiance to humanity or be put to death. During WWII the Japanese were not allowed to live on the west coast. As long as there is jihad, the cockaroaches who swear allegiance to Satan ("muhammedans") need to be told that they are not to live in North America. Death to Islam!
"Happily, more and more editorialists, journalists, and others who are getting it, are standing up to say that the war is against Islam".
Are they? I'd like to have directions to these statements, please.
Cecil, your statements are correct and well said. I too fear civil war because of how evenly people are divided politically and because of how adept our enemies are at propaganda and deceit.
I think that people today are afraid to take a stand. What if they are wrong? How do they know that Islam is the problem and not just some rogue Islamists? Doesn't the bible have teachings that could make Christianity look like a murderous sect too? (Yes, but that religion reformed.)
Someone should come up with a simple booklet that shows how Muslim society and the Sharia function today and what kind of culture they intend to import here. I'd also like to have a video of one of the Friday mosque meetings come out on national TV, like the AbuG photos, where anti-Christian/Jewish messages are being taught and where war is being declared against the West.
And if there are people taking photos and videos of the bad things some Americans are doing in Iraq, why is there no magazine with photos showing the good things we are doing? Why is the good never shown? Or spoken about.
Kathleen Parker,in a recent article on the Opinion page wrote,: The US is responsible for, "liberating the Iraqi people; freeing the women of Afghanistan from brutal, murdering theocrats; for sacrificing our own people and billions of dollars to help Iraquis dig out from beneath decades of tyranny; for releasing political prisoners, reuniting families and vaccinating thousdands of children.
Vaccinating Iraqi children?? Did you know that we were doing that? Has anyone seen that in any newspaper or on TV? Why not?
We are allowing the media to suppress all the good we are attempting to do and allowing them to shove the dirt in our faces, day after day.
Is this "irate minority" not irate enough yet to start standing up for what we believe we are doing right and trying to achieve balance in reporting? Or are we too timid, too PC, too beaten down to show who we are, what our country is REALLY trying to do in the world.
The cynics that only think the worst of America or hate her because she is not perfect, (some people have such idealistic expectations of the U.S. that they are enraged when they discover that for all of our striving to be humane and evolved, there is still an element of ignorance and beastliness in the worst of our 'tribe') wallow in the shaming of our troops and look for any 'proof' that we are indeed an imperialistic and evil country.
Our voices must become louder, they must reach more people, those who intuit and deduce the reality we are up against must act to help others understand so they can make the right choices - because once our national self esteem is destroyed and minds twisted in hopelessness and loss of faith in the goodness of America's people, we could easily be overwhelmed.
When we hear the news, biased against the administration and against the U.S., we can begin to doubt the very basis of our culture and our leadership. It helps me to remember: Only good people feel shame for their behavior and say, "I was wrong." Only good people are critical of their actions, evil people deny everything. Only good people say "I'm sorry."
But we must beware. Saying how sorry we are too many times can start to sound like a character defect instead of an apology!
We can acknowledge, that yes, we are still quite unevolved in some areas, but we need to retain the priviledge of also acknowledging that we are a damned sight better than most in many areas.
It seems that we have been taught that to have any national pride is to be arrogant, but what does it mean if we are allowed to have none?
And why have I spent this beautiful Saturday morning devouring JihadWatch and all your comments and rambling on with mine? Because thinking and freely responding to thought is a cherished right we have acquired for ourselves and our children - one that must never be lost.
Very good analysis Cecil !
Though I think civil war will erupt in Europe before the US. They'll never reach the critical demographical mass in your country before things get really ugly in Eurabia.
No one knows for sure how many moslems we have in France, officially around 6 millions, but no one really knows. It's already an ongoing low-profile civil war going on in housing projects.
Islamic organisations are pushing more and more in their demands, schools are burned to ashes by dozens, churches too, thousands of cars are burnt each years etc etc
One thing I'm afraid off is that AQ and friends will try to bring down the US by economical and political means.
If the US is kept busy at home, the next stage is to take over the arab governments Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Lybia, Syria, Egypt etc
After that they have their millions in Europe to act like a fifth column who knows the ground, speak the languages (on the contrary most of us don't speak arab except some Israelis and refugees from french colonies).
Scary but yet I think we'll prevail in the end
,G-d willing
cecil consider another one that understands and what are we doing next? i have in my on little world tried to explain the terror of islam, some listen, most just shrug their shoulders. it is not a simple and easy way out; if it is to be
then it is to be;always did like the adams boys!! always did like a good fight!
So, tell me, why is she still a Muslim? Is her answer, better the devil you know?
Seems that the lady wants to have her cake and eat it. I'm a Christian. That means that I'm not at liberty to pick and choose what I believe or agree with. Either I believe the doctrines of the Christian Church or I don't. There's no both-and. Likewise, Arjomand cannot want to be Muslim and run from Shari'ah when that law is the heart and soul of Islam.
If she's going to get killed anyway, then shuck the whole Arian heresy that is Islam, take up the Cross and prepare to die. If she remains a Muslim, then she ought to shut up because of Sharia'h's centrality to Islam. She can't have it both ways. She's talking like some politicians today who want to support abortion and commune. Just as they can't go against Roman Church doctrine and remain Romanist, she can't be against Shari'ah and remain Muslim.
So, she's got a choice. Piss or get off the damn pot.
As always, I would like to point out that the West DOES have a secret weapon against the Islamists: The fast-growing ranks of ex-Muslims. Support them!
http://www.secularislam.org/testimonies/index.htm
Ibn Warraq's website also has a discussion board, which not too many people know about:
http://www.secularislam.org/discussion33/Default.htm
I am one person that no longer trusts the
Muslim leaders that have become good at displaying rhetoric as facts.
The truth is that millions of Muslims are moving
to Christian based Countries for protection and
freedom,the Saudi's are funding several Islamic
organizations in Canada and Shria Law will be
imposed on people.
Muslim wives living with the threat of abuse
by their husbands can't execise the choice for
non-Shria Law rulings.
While following this issue in the media I
noticed the ones claiming this is good for woman
is always Muslim men. Our gutless Government
wants to appease AL_Qaida,but there is no
pleasing the militant wing of Islam until all
the infidels are slaughtered for Allah.
After seeing the way Palestinians will
use their kids as martyrs for propaganda to
fuel the victim-envy mindset of Hamas and
Hezbollah,I don't doubt that terrorists will
gain power in Canada and then attack Mosques
and Muslims to blame it on Jews and American's.
It's sickening the way Palestinians parade
childrens dead bodies like a trophy,Canada has
laws against child abuse and desecration of
dead humans.
Shria Law is just the start of Islamic rule
for Canada ,militant Islamists are raising funds
in Canada with impunity,they want us dead and
thats it.
I'd suggest that no sensible women ever marry a Muslim male. In Canada, if Sharia law plays out, then we'll have the human rights violations that come with it, as the weaker Muslim men beat and rape the female members of their families.
The United States will most likely have to step in and slap them around again. I know there are some truly good people that post here that are from Canada, so this is absolutely no slight to them, but the Government jellyfish up there need to open their eyes, and soon.
Luckily, people like James Inhofe and Zell Miller are in our Government and will never let this trash have their own set of laws here. Why is it everyone feels like they have to walk on eggshells around the entire subject of the Islamic cult?
They've proven that they're nothing special. All of a sudden everyone's expected to tiptoe around these hooligans. Not me. And not anyone I know. If any Muslim women in Canada are reading this, come on over to the U.S.and see how you're supposed to be treated. I can tell you that we don't treat our women like dogs here, like some of the less intellectual, weaker Muslim men do.
Sharia law should be illegal. No western nation should ever have to entertain that type of ignorant request to have it implemented. The law itself is a human rights violation. The West has to learn to tell these people no. They'll take every inch we give them. They behave like such a sacred group, but our televisions tell us different on a daily basis.
To my Canadian friends, please send your spineless Government officials Qur'an verse 4:34, and let them know that's just the tip of the berg. My opinion is that Canada should have sanctions placed on them if they continue with this Islamic farce.
Muslims, and anyone else of immigrant status ought to be thankful that they're out of the hellhole they came from, learn the English language, or the language of the nation that they infested, and obey the laws of the land that they've migrated to.
If they want their sorry example of law, then they should pack up, and move back to their country of origin.
I'd like to correct what I think is a basic misunderstanding regarding the "reformation" of Christianity. To wit, Christianity does not have a theology of violent expansionism. In the OT violence was often a means to an end and often sanctioned/directed by God Himself.
However, you will never find any passage of scripture--OT or NT--that shows God basically reveling in killing, nor does Christ do anything other than teach that we are all free willed agents. About the most dangerous thing any believing Christian will do to you--and this is so not-my-type-of-Christian--is to try to foist a religious tract on you, much like the Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses.
And those who trot out the old "hitler was a Christian" argument are disingenuous beyond words. Hitler hated Christianity and was basically fascinated by the occult. And unlike Islam, there is nothing in the NT that would come close to qualifying as an endorsement of Hitler's "theology" of killing all Jews.
That then is the difference between Christianity and islam: Islam is unabashedly violent and can back it up with settled theology. Christianity, on the other hand, still debates "just war" doctrine.
Don't people read anymore? The article clearly states that Homa does not consider herself to be a Muslim anymore.
Please note the title of the original article in the Toronto Star (and the title as reported here on the website):
Ontario sharia tribunals "assailed" (my quotations)
Geoff
Doug: I believe Adolf Hitler used to say something like: "We have the misfortune of belonging to the wrong religion. The Muhammedan religion would be far better suited for us than Christianity with its feeble tolerance". At least according to Albert Speer.
Can anybody confirm the actual quote?
People aren't that stupid in Canada. We do have a liberal government though. They have contro, and have proven their desire to keep it.
Remember, Chretien told his members to stick to him, and not the people who voted the members in.
Decent in his dictatorship ment a back seat.
We have had uncontroled dictatorship government for 10 years now. We have martin, the unelected prime minister, tossing around billions of taxpayers money right now.
This is crimminal.
The liberals stuff the CBC media, and others, so we get al-Jazerra style news, exteme anti American, putrid vile news, it doesn't get any more left than that.
Lets not foget paul martin owns alot of oil tankers, and i want to see if his name is on the oil for palace list.
Ali Dashti: I do not know where the quote attributed to Hitler came from. However, it is a matter of well-established record that he and his minions were heavily influenced by occultism and interest in pre-Christian Germanic paganism.
Christianity does have an expansionist ethos--although Doug is right to note it lacks a "violent" expansionist ethos. That last words of Jesus to his disciples are to make disciples of all nations. However, it is also true that the NT makes it clear that the weapons of this war are persuasion and ethical example, not chain-mailed men swinging broadswords. Indeed, Christianity did not get a state until a little more than a century after Jesus' time, when the king of Osrhoene, a small state in Mesopotamia, became a Christian (best wishes to any Assyrians out there). It did not get one capable of waging a serious war until the Armenian and then the Roman rulers converted early in the fourth century AD.
Aki
if Hitler said that he knew that the Islamic religion could achieve far more than even he hoped for.
Perhaps he was hoping to turn Nazism into a quasi Islamic cult to get total control over the Germans.
It is an interesting avenue to explore.
ali
faithfreedom is a very good site for information. i urge people to read the blog or posting section. its also good when someone calls islam an abrahamic faith, ive had a few people who are christians read that section and it helped show how the biblical stories are twisted. ive even been told the islamic story of jesus is tantamount to blasphemy. is your story of apostasy [why you left islam] posted there if it is i'd like to read it.
Nice post Cecil, but just what makes you think that anyone in the government gets it?
The President and most of his most trusted aides are fundamentalist Christians. The most notable fundamentalist voices on 9-12 were Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell who stated quite openly that the attack was "permitted" by God because Americans were sinful. We have bin Laden attacking America for its sins and Falwell, Robertson & Co agreeing that America is sinful! Surely they understood the implication that bin Laden was God's instrument.
The President could not possibly identify Islam as the motivation behind the terrorists because the principles that the Muslims proclaim are proclaimed equally by Christians. Unconditional submission to Allah vs unconditional submission to God. All knowledge comes from the Koran vs all knowledge comes from the Bible. Submit! Obey! Do not question! Islam and Christianity, twin destroyers of the individual human mind.
Don't buy the idea that Christianity isn't as dangerous as Islam because Christians don't kill anymore. It took secularists 400 years - the Renaissance, the Enlightenment and the scientific revolutions of the 19th century -- to cage the Christian beast and remove its grip on art, science and the state. Islam is still a free roving predator not merely joined to but at one with the power of the state and able to inflict incalculable damage on the innocent.
But it gets worse. Iran is on the verge of civil war with a large mass of rebels continuously challenging the rule of the ayatollahs. The President has sent not one cent of aid the rebels! Why? While I can't read minds it seems apparent that the reason the President balks at helping the Iranian revolution is that the rebels are unabashedly secular. Having lived under a theocracy for 25 years they will tolerate no "faith based initiatives" and demand complete separation of church and state. How can Bush support separation abroad and union at home?
In Afghanistan women's rights survived almost six months before the Afghan supreme court ruled that women could not sing on television. Not surprising since the complete name of the new Afghan government is "The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan". Is it soon to joined by the "Islamic Republic of Iraq"? Since Bush believes that civil society must rest on a religious base what other choice is there? Christianity is a non-starter so that only leaves the "Religion of Peace".
There were 650 combatants captured in Afghanistan and sent to Guantanamo. Thirty seven countries had citizens captured among these:
Saudi Arabia 160
Pakistan 80
Yemen 80
Iraq 1
Iran 0
North Korea 0
What's wrong with this picture? Which are our "allies" in the "war on terror" and which compose the "Axis of Evil"?
Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Yemen contributed 320 killers between them, the entire Axis of Evil contributed only 1 combatant. The major contributors are all brutal Sunni theocracies. Only Iran is a theocracy and its brand of fundamentalism is Shia. Iraq was and North Korea is a sadistic secular dictatorship. Had Bush chosen Australia, Canada and Great Britain as the Axis of Evil he would have had 6 prisoners. A blind man throwing darts at a map of the world would have done better. This not poor intelligence, this is not even blindness, this is the your brain on religion, the mind subordinated to dogma.
Here is where religious fundamentalism leads - the complete inability to recognize evil when you see it.
Now, tell me again, who is beginning to "get it"?
certainly not you bob meyer
I "got it" a long time ago. They wish to establish a Muslim state and then reinstate the Caliphate. This is as obvious as the nose on your face. Those is Washington probably do get it, but they are, as many others are, self-absorbed in the problems within their petty fiefdoms. And they have the big-gun false and seditious apologists Islamists whispering assurances in their ears.
Now they have to contend with all the distractions that are coming out of the woodwork: the election, the Iraqi prison scandal, Oil for Food, the Left, ect. All of these distractions are designed to subvert the "war on terror," which any idiot knows is really a war against militant Islam. In my mind, some of these distractions are Islamists tactics against the war.
Americans that don't stand behind the President at this critical point are traitors. We are about to fall into the precipice.
Jimmytheclaw: I am not an Apostate at all, actually. I am a European non-Muslim. But I support the struggle of ex-Muslims as much as I can. Ali Dashti is the name of a famous ex-Muslim from Iran, who wrote an excellent book called "23 years". It is one of the best and most thorough criticisms of the Koran and Muhammed as a person I have ever read. Of ex-Muslim literature, I would recommend it together with "Leaving Islam - Apostates Speak Out" by Ibn Warraq and "Islam and Terrorism" by the Christian ex-Muslim Mark Gabriel.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/newspage.php3
DC, hopefully we will be able to out this jelly fish government this election.
They are already on the defensive, attacking the right wing party, calling them evangelical christians who want to destroy the "fabric of Canada". It's actually the other way around. The Liberals are destroying the fabric of Canada, we want to preserve it, and sew up the rips.
Failing that, separation becomes a vialble option.
Well, as for me I do not know much about the polictics over there (America either North or South). The only thing I know is that what is bad does not have any other name than it is bad, there is no substitute for the truth.
Left for me, I would advise that the law that brought such law(sharia) into action should be carefully looked into and uprooted.When there is no roots for application of Sharia, then the law has to die.In addition, the law should be abolished immediately.Take Britain for example, anybody cannot just come and say he/she wants to implement sharia, the codes are already laid down and no body can change it.
I will use this simple example to illustrate my facts. In Nigeria, when the constitution was about to be made, they said the Sharia law should be introduced( for marriage disputes and other simple cases) However, what do we see today in Nigeria, Massive killing of non-believers...
victimisation of non-muslims, intimidation of infidels etc. That has always been their goal which does not change (To make everybody muslim, which is NOT possible).
There is a proverb in my language that says that "it is gradually the nose of the wild pig enters the house". if you allow the wild pig to sniff, he will definitely come in, if the wild pig comes in it will wreck havoc!
So please for goodness sake if anybody is a Canadian or an American, and he/she is reading this article, please act before it is too late, because by the time you don't stop the sharia law on time, it will definitely grow to become a treat to freedom,and lifes will be lost to restore the freedom!
The land of Freedom is what we know America/Canada to be, and we are looking up to you, dont let this freedom be taken over by these people(Jihadist).
I rest my plea.......
You are right dase. Even in Canada, what they are doing amounts to a constitutional change, and they have no mandate to do it. This is what happens when you get an unelected dictarship government. The Liberal party of Canada has acted as a dictatorship for some time now. We are the governments people, instead of the government being the peoples government.
Thanks to all! You have given us some hope. Please send your army to Ottawa and give us a democracy. Don't leave us out simply because we're not Muslim. :(
I think Cecil said it right with his comments.
Bob, why don't you stop with the tired, worn-out Christian bashing? Let's start at the beginning of your post.
"The most notable fundamentalist voices on 9-12 were Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell who stated quite openly that the attack was "permitted" by God because Americans were sinful."
That statement is quite a misnomer. In fact, they were virtually the ONLY people in America who said that. How do you get that 2-10 people somehow accurately reflect millions of believers? Don't you recall that Pat was pretty much told to shut up and go home and that he later apologized for saying that? No, I didn't think you did.
"principles that the Muslims proclaim are proclaimed equally by Christians. Unconditional submission to Allah vs unconditional submission to God. All knowledge comes from the Koran vs all knowledge comes from the Bible."
Hmm. My Bible doesn't say that. I don't know of anyone who says that except those trying to attack Christianity. Maybe it's a bit of projection going on there.
I'm amazed to learn that the same principles taught by Christians are taught by Muslims. It would really set my mind at ease to know that "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is taught by the Koran. Sadly, it's not.
"Islam and Christianity, twin destroyers of the individual human mind."
Funny how many brilliant men and women throughout history were Christians. It doesn't seem to have destroyed their intellectual capacities one bit. I daresay it hasn't reduced mine, either. It sounds like you have some personal issues, here.
" to cage the Christian beast and remove its grip on art, science and the state" *laughs* Christianity was what made the spirit of free inquiry possible, both materially and philosophically. Who founded the Universities, hmm? And as for a grip on the state, being a Christian was a requirement for holding public office in many states in America up until I'd say the turn of the century. So your timeline is a little off. (It seems to be not the only thing.)
"How can Bush support separation abroad and union at home?" Where are you from, Rob? You seem to inhabit a parallel dimension filled with raving atheists whose hatred has completely warped their vision. Oh yes, Bush is so supporting a union of church and state, something that not even the most ardent Christian founders of this nation envisioned. Yeah. And he won't help the Iranians because...could it be he doesn't want to bite off more than we can chew? Because the situation isn't ripe yet? I don't know either, but your suggestions are preposterous.
I'd laugh if I didn't think that you actually believed it. But then again, some folks thought every word that Pravda printed was truth, too. Sigh...
Maybe we want Iran to help them selfs we have no way of knowing how their minds are working and the chinese and cuba are their frends who do we belive, Clinton hurt the CIA and they do not have a good score card so far we remember the embassy in kosova which was not proving that they are on their game in that part of the world and we were on the wrong side of the fight under cilton, President Bush is to nice to say so in public. So they have to use their own dogs in that hunt mabe if it gets real ugly we can step in but don't think we don't have enough hunting dogs for the fight we have in front of us.
Part of the American Tribe
God B;ess the USA and her Fighting Forces and All who Fight with her give them Strength and Courage and Wisdom to stay the course to Victory Amen
Ok nomorejihad, you explain why Saudi Arabia gets a pass and Iraq gets invaded. Maybe it really is all about oil!
Free inquiry is a result of Christianity? Galileo will be glad to hear that as will modern cloning researchers. A complete history of religious persecution of scientists would fill this website with nothing else.
As for living in a parallel universe, it is Christians who believe in spiritual realms that parallel the world of the senses. Here can be found angels and demons and all kinds of terrors and delights. And you can get there, all you have to do is shutup, obey the word of God, and then die. Oh yes, and hope that you prayed to the right God in the right way because the Lord is rather picky about these things and He sends heretics to eternal damnation.
Atheists live in the real world which is why they are more trustworthy than Christians. We know that there is no God in a parallel dimension to forgive our transgressions.
When you assert that the government of the United States is founded upon the Christian religion you inject the Bible into the law. That is the union of church and state as there must be an ecclesiastical authority to interpret the Word of God. Even if that authority is the Supreme Court it is performing an essentially religious function. That is obvious to anyone but a Christian.
Oh yes, Robertson didn't apologize. A real apology would have gone something like "I can't believe I said something that awful, I don't know what I was thinking. I apologize and ask your forgiveness"
On Sept 17, Robertson put out a press release that said "Toward the end of the program, The 700 Club producers had booked Jerry Falwell for a satellite interview. Rev. Falwell’s initial remarks were completely in accord with what had been said in preceding parts of the program, and then, unexpectedly, he uttered a political statement of blame directed at certain segments of the population that was severe and harsh in tone, and, frankly, not fully understood by the three hosts of The 700 Club who were watching Rev. Falwell on a monitor."
Of course, that was a lie because he had been recorded agreeing with Falwell. Not only that but on 9-14, three days before the press release quoted above, Robertson said
"We have insulted God at the highest level of our government. Then, we say, 'Why does this happen?' It is happening because God Almighty is lifting His protection from us. Once that protection is gone, we are vulnerable because we are a free society."
This is almost identical to Falwell's original statement.
In fairness to Falwell, he had the good sense to say that he blamed no one but the terrorists themselves however, he based this on no one being able to know the mind of God and therefore no one can know what acts take place for what reasons. Anytime a Christian admits ignorance, I'm inclined to agree and forgive him. Of course, it took being condemned by the President of the United States to get him to recant.
Robertson has never recanted.
As for Falwell and Robertson being the only people with this point of view: James Robison concurred with Falwell but blamed American arrogance. Few major evangelical ministers have come forward to unconditionally condemn such assinine statements although in a poll in December 2001 89% of people either completely or mostly disagreed with the idea of the attacks as a sign from God. That still leaves more people who believe it than the population of Texas.
Bob Meyer: As a Christian, I plead guilty to believing in a non-material reality. But, before you think only atheists can be trusted, John Locke, father of the enlightenment and religious tolerance, placed them beyond the pale in his _Letter on Toleration_, since they ipso facto denied the God in whose name oaths were taken (hence their oaths could not be trusted).
Also, I have yet to listen long enough to an atheist before I discover he has divinized some aspect of created reality--i.e., become idolators.
Sharia is going to get way out of hand...as I said if they as muslims feel that they MUST follow this law, how can they be happy just following SOME of the law. In certain instances murder and wife beating are allowed under shaira, both are crimes under the criminal code of Canada...how will law enforcement handle this...some members of society will be held to different rules than others...it cannot ever work both ways. A womans testimony is considered less than a mans simply because she is a woman...this is not the case in courts governed by Canadian law...how can Ontario justify a barbaric law that tramples on the basic human rights of women and still tell those women that they are protected by Canadas code of human rights...and if the government thought that this was such a good idea why did they pass this so quietly, no major headlines, no public discussions, etc...all this to get a few votes...disgusting.
Back in November Eugene Volokh commented on this story. At the time it made sense that this was just another form of arbitration. It did not occur to me (or perhaps him) that people would be forced to do this by community peer presure.
See http://volokh.com/2003_11_23_volokh_archive.html#106999686027106312
Sure bob. athists live in the real world. Athests have also caused about as much killing as muslims. why, a quick look an recent history shows, kim, stalin, Hitler, ho chi min, etc.
The divine nature of God is maybe what is described as the 'spiritual world', we really don't have any other way to describe it.
And it's also clear you don't know much about Christianity either. It's not as simple as 'shut up and obey god'. That's statement is however, and good example of your ignorance.
If you would like to clear your mind of your beliefs, which by the way makes you anything but an athiest, I suggest some reading for you. It may be way over your head and level of understanding, but worth a try if your interested in increasing your understanding, which I suspect you aren't, be cause you call your beliefs "atheism" which shows you don't understand what the word means. What you probably mean to call yourself is one who believes in evolution, which as we know science has no proof of. Science can't even prove the bible wrong, all it can do is confirm it. Anyways, so wise words of a man, which might help you in your quest to understand. remember, this guy lived 1400 years before you, and shows many people where much more intelligent than the left wing "athiest" of today.
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 1
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 2
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 3
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 4
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 5
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 6
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 7
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 8
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 9
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 10
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 11
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 12
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 13
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 14
Staint Augustine of Hippo book 15
Staint Augustine of Hippo on Christian doctrine
Staint Augustine of Hippo on Christian doctrine book 1
Staint Augustine of Hippo on Christian doctrine book 2
Staint Augustine of Hippo on Christian doctrine book 3
Staint Augustine of Hippo on Christian doctrine book 4
And Also
Staint Augustine of Hippo many other of his writings
Now, of course, this man talks about the aspects of christianity, and peoples arguments against it.
It's not my intent to convert you to christianity, but rather it is my intent to help you sharpen your intelect so you don't present silly statements, but rather more intelligent ones to support your theory's.
St. Augustine was a man of great intellect, as well as a good Christian. You would do well to
study his works.
those are his complete works as far as I know, all available for your reading pleasure online which I kindly provided the link to for your enjoyment. The last link is an index to his works, it's best to bookmark that one should you be interested.
well, seems the link thing is turned off here, so:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1301.htm
and
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/
will get you there.
Nathan:
Thank you for demonstrating the incredible irrationality of Christians better than I could ever hope to.
Forget the womanizing, liar ("Lord grant me celebacy just not yet")Augustine, read Aquinas and see what a real intellect can do.
For the rest of the forum:
I swear that I did not write Nathan's post to prove my point, he really exists and believes that science is only correct when it confirms his view of the Bible.
Here is why Canada is doomed: the Canadian Multiculturalism Act.
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-18.7/31859.html
well Bob, that's not what I said, I said that thus far, science has only been able to confirm the bible, not disprove it. Science however, disproves darwinism.
And since god created all, all science can discover is what God already made.
Note, Science cannot look into the future, only the past.
The only one who has ever looked into the future, was God, all his predictions have come to pass.
Because you refuse to believe, and make every attempt to justify your position, you fail to examine the evidence.
The "shut up and do as God says" statement is an admission of complete ignorance of the Gospels, and the message God conveyed to mankind.
When you begin to understand that God meant for you to live well on earth, and that his is a following, his words are parables, not just linear statements. His statement was there is more in the hereafter than this worldly life, and the path to it's discovery is narrow. His meaning was this world is corrupted, and filled with temptations to prevent your spiritual body, which he created in his own image (your very soul) from progressing to his eternal, uncorrupted kingdom. Hell is not some ever burning dungeon; the description of your soul being judged, and cast into a lake of burning sulfur is not meant to be taken in a literal sense. It describes permanent death. The termination of your very spirit, or soul.
Some think Christ will come and build a kingdom on earth. this is also a misinterpretation.
The answer to that parable is in the very beginning of Genesis.
At any-rate Bob, belief in Christ is a spiritual following, and involves much more than simply "shutting up and following rules".
An Atheist for example, if one were to be a true atheist, would believe in nothing. Good or bad would have no defining lines, as that requires belief in something. Without belief in something, who is to say murder is bad? It becomes a lifestyle choice is all. Society may say it's bad, but then, If you were a born murderer who took pleasure in that sort of thing, a good lawyer can draw parallels to other people who do unnatural acts, and therefore argue that your "rights to murder" are being violated.
Oh, and so much more, but your unable to honestly debate. You attempt to justify your unatual acts. And that clouds your ability to reason.
lets take another little example.
'the earth is "billions of years old" Now, how can this be? We assume the big bang theory, which by the way, Is probably correct. Except it was an act, by God himself.
But scientifically, and we know know that the Galaxy is expanding at a given rate, and, it's expansion is slowing at a constant rate. Therefore we can calculate how long it's been doing this. using those calculations we can't conclude the earth is billions of years old. We have some historical evidence that distant planets were more visible, therefore closer than they are now, only a couple thousand years ago.
It is entirely possible to calculate that the first man appeared on this planet only 7- 8 thousand years ago. that doesn't mean the earth isn't older than that, that just means thats when man appeared.
We can't even figure out how proteins are folded, but we know they are, and certain configurations of those fold determine what we are. We now know a misfolded protien can kill us.And is unstpable if it infects our bodies. To assume that these things appeared, male and female, spontaneously at the same time for each species is absurd. it's plain to see we were created by SOMEONE, or something.
I guess I'm messing with Bob Meyer's head too much, LOL
How about this bob:
On Continence
[DE CONTINENTIA.]
ST. AUGUSTINE
It is difficult to treat of the virtue of the soul, which is called Continence, in a manner fully suitable and worthy; but He, whose great gift this virtue is, will help our littleness under the burden of so great a weight. For He, who bestows it upon His faithful ones when they are continent, Himself gives discourse of it to His ministers when they speak. Lastly, of so great a matter purposing to speak what Himself shall grant, in the first place we say and prove that Continence is the gift of God. We have it written in the Book of Wisdom, that no one can be continent, unless God grant it. But the Lord, concerning that greater and more glorious Continence itself, whereby there is continence from the marriage bond, says, "Not all can receive this saying, but they to whom it is given." And since marriage chastity also itself cannot be guarded, unless there be Continence from unlawful intercourse, the Apostle declared both to be the gift of God, when He spake of both lives, that is, both that of marriage and that without marriage, saying, "I would that all men were so as myself; but each. hath his own gift from God; one in this manner, another in that manner."
2. And lest it should seem that necessary Continence was to be hoped for from the Lord only in respect of the lust of the lower parts of the flesh, it is also sung in the Psalm; "Set, O Lord, a watch to my mouth, and a door of Continence around my lips." But in this witness of the divine speech, if we understand "mouth" as we ought to understand it, we perceive how great a gift of God Continence there set is. Forsooth it is little to contain the mouth of the body, lest any thing burst forth thence, which is not for the better, through the sound of the voice. For there is, within, the mouth of the heart, where he, who spake these words, and wrote them for us to speak, desired of the Lord that the watch and door of Continence should be set for him. For many things we say not with the mouth of the body, and cry aloud with the heart: but there goes forth from the mouth of the body no word of any thing, whereof there is silence in the heart. Therefore what flows not forth thence, sounds not abroad: but what flows forth thence, if it be evil, although it move not the tongue, defiles the soul. Therefore Continence must be set there, where the conscience even of them who are silent speaks. For it is brought to pass by means of the door of Continence, that there go not forth thence that, which, even when the lips of the flesh are closed, pollutes the life of him that hath the thought.
3. Lastly, to show more plainly the inner mouth, which by these words he meant, after having said, "Set a watch, O Lord, to my mouth, and a door of Continence around my lips," he added straightway, "Cause not my heart to fall aside into evil words." The failing aside of the heart, what is it but the consent? For he hath not yet spoken, whosoever in his heart hath with no failing aside of the heart consented unto suggestions that meet him of each several thing that is seen. But, if he hath consented, he hath already spoken in his heart, although he hath not uttered sound by the mouth; although he hath not done with hand or any part whatever of the body, yet hath he done what in his thought he hath already determined that he is to do: guilty by the divine laws, although hidden to human senses; the word having been spoken in the heart, no deed having been committed through the body. But in no case would he have moved the limb without, in a deed, the beginning of which deed had not gone before within in word. For it is no lie that is written, that "the beginning of every work is a word." Forsooth men do many things with mouth closed, tongue quiet, voice bridled; but yet they do nothing by work of the body, which they have not before spoken in the heart. And through this since there are many sins in inward sayings which are not in outward deeds, whereas there are none in outward deeds, which do not go before in inward sayings, there will be purity of innocence from both, if the door of Continence be set around the inward lips.
4. For which cause our Lord Himself also with His own mouth saith, "Cleanse what are within, and what are without will be clean." And, also, in another place, when He was refuting the foolish speeches of the Jews, in that they spake evil against His disciples, eating with unwashen hands; "Not what entereth into the mouth," said He, "defileth the man: but what cometh forth out of the mouth, that defileth the man." Which sentence, if the whole of it be taken of the mouth of the body, is absurd. For neither doth vomit defile him, whom food defileth not. Forsooth food entereth into the mouth, vomit proceedeth forth out of the mouth. But without doubt the former words relate to the mouth of the flesh, where He says, "Not what entereth into the mouth defileth the man," but the latter words to the mouth of the heart, where He saith, "But what proceedeth forth out of the mouth, this defileth the man." Lastly, when the Apostle Peter sought of Him an explanation of this as of a parable, He answered, "Are ye also yet without understanding? understand ye not, that whatsoever entereth into the mouth, goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?" Here surely we perceive the mouth of the flesh, into which the food enters. But in what He next adds, in order that we might recognize the mouth of the heart, the slowness of our heart would not follow, did not the Truth deign to walk even with the slow. For He saith, "But what things go forth from the mouth, go out of the heart;" as though He should say, When you hear it said "from the mouth," understand "from the heart." I say both, but I set forth one by the other. The inner man hath an inner mouth, and this the inner ear discerns: what things go forth from this mouth, go out of the heart, and they defile the man. Then having left the term mouth, which may be understood also of the body, He shows more openly what He is saying. "For from the heart go out," saith He, "evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies; these are what defile the man." There is surely no one of those evils, which can be committed also by the members of the body, but that the evil thoughts go before and defile the man, although something hinder the sinful and wicked deeds of the body from following. For if, because power is not given, the hand is free from the murder of a man, is the heart of the murderer forsooth therefore clean from sin? Or if she be chaste, whom one unchaste wishes to commit adultery with, hath he on that account failed to commit adultery with her in his heart? Or if the harlot be not found in the brothel, doth he, who seeks her, on that account fail to commit fornication in his heart? Or if time and place be wanting to one who wishes to hurt his neighbor by a lie, hath he on that account failed already to speak false witness with his tuner mouth? Or if any one fearing men, dare not utter aloud blasphemy with tongue of flesh, is he on this account guiltless of this crime, who saith in his heart, "There is no Coot." Thus all the other evil deeds of men, which no motion of the body performs, of which no sense of the body is conscious, have their own secret criminals, who are also polluted by consent alone in thought, that is, by evil words of the inner mouth. Into which he (the Psalmist) fearing lest his heart should fall aside, asks of the Lord that the door of Continence be set around the lips of this mouth, to contain the heart, that it fall not aside into evil words: but contain it, by not suffering thought to proceed to consent: for thus, according to the precept of the Apostle, sin reigneth not in our mortal body, nor do we yield our members as weapons of unrighteousness unto sin. From fulfilling which precept they are surely far removed, who on this account turn not their members to sin, because no power is allowed them; and if this be present, straightway by the motions of their members, as of weapons, they show, who reigneth in them within. Wherefore so far as is in themselves, they yield their members weapons of unrighteousness unto sin; because this is what they wish, which for this reason they yield not, because they are not able.
5. And on this account that, which, the parts that beget being bridled by modesty, is most chiefly and properly to be called Continence, is violated by no transgression, if the higher Continence, concerning which we have been some time speaking, be preserved in the heart. For this reason the Lord, after He had said, "For from the heart go forth evil thoughts," then went on to add what it is that belongs to evil thoughts, "murders, adulteries," and the rest. He spake not of all; but, having named certain by way of instance, He taught that we are to understand others also. Of which there is no one that can take place, unless an evil thought have gone before, whereby that is prepared within which is done without, and going forth out of the mouth of the heart already defiles the man, although, through no power being granted, it be not done without by means of the members of the body. When therefore a door of Continence hath been set in the mouth of the heart, whence go out all that defile the man, if nothing such be permitted to go out thence, there followeth a purity, wherein now the conscience may rejoice; although there be not as yet that perfection, wherein Continence shall not strive with vice. But now, so long as "the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh," it is enough for us not to consent unto the evils which we feel in us. But, when that consent takes place, then there goeth out of the mouth of the heart what defileth the man. But when through Continence consent is withheld, the evil of the lust of the flesh, against which the lust of the spirit fights, is not suffered to harm.
6. But it is one thing to fight well, which now is, when the strife of death is resisted; another thing not to have an adversary, which will then be, when death, "the last enemy," shall be destroyed. For Continence also itself, when it curbs and restrains lusts, at once both seeks the good unto the immortality of which we aim, and rejects the evil with which in this mortality we contend. Of the one it is forsooth the lover and beholder, but of the other both the enemy and witness: both seeking what becomes, and fleeing what misbecomes. Assuredly Continence would not labor in curbing lusts, if we had no wishes contrary to what is becoming, if there were no opposition on the part of evil lust unto our good will. The Apostle cries aloud, "I know," saith he, "that there dwelleth not in me, that is in my flesh, good. For to will lieth near to me, but to accomplish good I find not." For now good can be done, so far as that there be no assent given unto evil lust: but good will be accomplished, when the evil lust itself shall come to an end. And also the same teacher of the Gentiles cries aloud, "I take pleasure together with the law of God after the inner man: but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind."
7. This conflict none experience in themselves, save such as war on the side of the virtues, and war down the vices: nor doth any thing storm the evil of lust, save the good of Continence. But there are, who, being utterly ignorant of the law of God, account not evil lusts among their enemies, and through wretched blindness being slaves to them, over and above think themselves also blessed, by satisfying them rather than taming them. But whoso through the Law have come to know them, ("For through the Law is the knowledge of sin," and, "Lust," saith he, "I knew not, unless the Law should say, Thou shalt not lust after," and yet are overcome by their assault, because they live under the Law, whereby what is good is commanded, but not also given: they live not under Grace, which gives through the Holy Spirit what is commanded through the Law: unto these the Law therefore entered, that in them the offense might abound. The prohibition in creased the lust, and made it unconquered: that there might be transgression also, which without the Law was not, although there was sin, "For where there is not Law, neither is there transgression." Thus the Law, Grace not helping, forbidding sin, became over and above the strength of sin; whence the Apostle saith, "The Law is the strength of sin." Nor is it to be wondered at, that man's weakness even from the good Law added strength to evil, whilst it trusts to fulfill the Law itself of its own strength. Forsooth being ignorant of the righteousness of God, which He gives unto the weak, and wishing to establish his own, of which the weak is void, he was not made subject to the righteousness of God, reprobate and proud. But if the Law, as a schoolmaster, lead unto Grace one made an offender, as though for this purpose more grievously wounded, that he may desire a Physician; against the baneful sweetness, whereby lust prevailed, the Lord gives a sweetness that worketh good, that by it Continence may the more delight, and "our land giveth her fruit," whereby the soldier is fed, who by the help of the Lord wars down sin.
8. Such soldiers the Apostolic trumpet enkindles for battle with that sound, "Therefore let not," saith he, "sin reign in your mortal body to obey its lusts; nor yield your members weapons of unrighteousness unto sin; but yield yourselves unto God, as living in place of dead, and your members weapons of righteousness unto God. For sin shall not rule over you. For ye are not under the law, but under Grace." And in another place, "Therefore," saith he, "brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye shall live after the flesh, ye shall die; but if by the Spirit ye shall mortify the deeds of the flesh, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God." This therefore is the business in hand, so long as this our mortal life under Grace lasts, that sin, that is the lust of sin, (for this he in this place calls by the name of sin,) reign not in this our mortal body. But it is then shown to reign, if obedience be yielded to its desires. There is therefore in us lust of sin, which must not be suffered to reign; there are its desires, which we must not obey, lest obeying it reign over us. Wherefore let not lust usurp our members, but let Continence claim them for herself; that they be weapons of righteousness unto God, that they be not weapons of unrighteousness unto sin; for thus sin shall not rule over us. For we are not under the Law, which indeed commandeth what is good yet giveth it not: but we are under Grace, which, making us to love that which the Law commands, is able to rule over the free.
9. And also, when he exhorts us, that we live not after the flesh, lest we die, but that by the Spirit we mortify the deeds of the flesh, that we may live; surely the trumpet which sounds, shows the war in which we are engaged, and enkindles us to contend keenly, and to do our enemies to death, that we be not done to death by them. But who those enemies are, it hath set forth plainly enough. I For those are they, whom it willed should be done to death by us, that is to say, the works of the flesh. For so it saith, "But if by the Spirit ye shall mortify the deeds of the flesh, ye shall live." And in order that we may know what these are, let us hear the same in like manner writing unto the Galatians, and saying, "But the works of the flesh are manifest, which are, fornications, uncleannesses, luxuries, idolatry, witchcrafts, hatreds, contentions, emulations, wraths, strifes, heresies, envyings, drunkennesses, revellings, and such like; of which I foretell to you, as I have foretold, that they who do such things shall not possess the kingdom of God." For the very war there also was he showing, that he should speak of these, and unto the death-doing of these enemies was he calling up the soldiers of Christ by the same heavenly and spiritual trumpet. For he had said above, "But I say, walk in the Spirit, and perform ye not the lusts of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. For these are opposed one to the other, that ye do not what ye would. But if ye are led by the Spirit, ye are not under the Law." Therefore being set under Grace, he would have them have that conflict against the works of the flesh. And in order to point out these works of the flesh, he added what I have mentioned above. "But the works of the flesh are manifest, which are, fornications," and the rest, whether what he mentioned, or whether what he admonished were to be understood, chiefly as he added, "and such like."
Lastly, in this battle, against what is in a manner the carnal army leading forth as it were another spiritual line, "But the fruit of the Spirit is," saith he, "charity, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness,faith, gentleness,continence; against such there is no law." He saith not "against these," lest they should be thought to be alone: although even were he to say this, we ought to understand all, whatever goods of the same kind we could think of: but he saith, "against such," that is to say, both these and whatsoever are such like. However, in that among the goods of which he made mention, he set Continence in the last place, (concerning which we have now undertaken to treat, and on account of which we have already said much,)he willed that it should in an especial manner cleave to our minds. Forsooth this same is of great avail in this case, wherein the Spirit lusteth against the flesh; forasmuch as in a certain way it crucifies the lusts of the flesh. Whence, after the Apostle had thus spoken, he added straightway, "But they who are Jesus Christ's have crucified their own flesh, with the passions and lusts." This is the acting of Continence: thus the works of the flesh are done to death. But they do to death those, whom falling away from Continence lust draweth into consent to do such works.
10. But in order that we fall not away from Continence, we ought to watch specially against those snares of the suggestions of the devil, that we presume not of our own strength. For, "Cursed is every one that setteth his hope in man." And who is he, but man? We cannot therefore truly say that he setteth not his hope in man, who setteth it in himself. For this also, to "live after man," what is it but to "live after the flesh?" Whoso therefore is tempted by such a suggestion, let him hear, and, if he have any Christian feeling, let him tremble. Let him hear, I say, "If ye shall live after the flesh, ye shall die."
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1308.htm (30 more)
Nathan,
I stopped arguing with theists years ago because ultimately their final argument is one of faith not reason. Christians pride themselves on their unshakeable faith, i.e. their inability to reason.
Atheism implies nothing other than a disbelief in supernatural entities. To tell a man what his beliefs must be because he doesn't believe in someone else's imaginary friend is insane.
Your argument that there must be a God because we don't understand folded proteins is called the "argument from ignorance" and has been shown to be wrong every time ignorance is defeated by knowledge. Your ancestors argued that there must be gods guiding the planets or else they would fly off every which way. Then Galileo, Copernicus and Newton discovered the laws of planetary motion.
Be of good cheer because for every cure of ignorance there will always be found new questions on which you can hang the existence of God. It is the nature of things that for every question answered there arises a new question. It is the nature of Christians to never learn from past mistakes.
As for belief in the Bible I can only ask why your interpretation is correct instead of the myriad of others. Either you will reply with a reasoned argument in which case your faith is unnecessary or you will reply with a demand for faith in which case your argument is indistinguishable from any other theist.
By the way the universe is billions of years old and humans like us have walked the earth for at least 50,000 years. The evidence for the age of the universe and for evolution is so amazingly complete that denying it should be a test for insanity.
This thread began with my attack on Christian blindness as the reason we will lose the war with Islamic fanatics. The replies have shown that Christians cannot even accept biology and astronomy when it contradicts the beliefs of long dead ignorant barbarians.
As an atheist I can only say "God help us".
You are presenting this bit of news in a misleading way. Sharia is not being set up as a compulsory system, as in the Sudan or Iran. This is completely voluntary. The United States and Canada have, for a very long time, allowed parties settle civil dispute through private arbitration. In Canada, Orthodox Jews have been able to use the arbitration system to settle disputes in rabbinical courts. (If you can show me how halakhah is any more feminist or liberal than sharia, I'll buy you Robert Spencer a ham-and-cheese sandwich). Now, religious Muslims have the same right as their fellow Jewish Canadians to go to a religious court. But resorting to this kind of arbitration is not compulsory, and decisions by sharia courts cannot be enforced unless they match secular Canadian standards of fairness. So what's the big deal? Why the hysteria?
Charlemagne:
Read the entire article..here is a quote:
Now that sharia tribunals are to operate here, she says, many women will be socially and psychologically coerced into participating. To refuse would mean rejection by their families and the community — or worse.
"In a straight disagreement between a husband and wife, the husband's testimony will prevail. That is sharia. Even those women who know they can appeal will not challenge an arbitration decision for fear of the consequences."
This is not voluntary, many muslim women will be forced to confom or be disavowed or worse...as I posted before my husband is a police officer in Ontario and has already run across domestic abuse cases of muslim newcomers where the husband STILL thinks it is his right under sharia to "discipline" his wife...very physically....this aspect of sharia isnt even allowed, its supposedly only for civil cases but clearly some muslim men dont make the distinction...the case I am refering to the husband actually told the officers that they could not charge him as he was protected under sharia law...this is only the first stepping stone to full sharia law, how can muslims be happy practicing only PART of the law...how long before the rest of that barbaric law comes into play? Law enforcement is definatly worried about what they will do if that happens.
"This thread began with my attack on Christian blindness as the reason we will lose the war with Islamic fanatics. The replies have shown that Christians cannot even accept biology and astronomy when it contradicts the beliefs of long dead ignorant barbarians."
Posted by Bob Meyer at May 25, 2004 03:40 PM
What in the world are you talking about? what does astromomy have to do with christian faith?\
What does biology have to do with christian faith? And where did you ever here that christians can't see both the stars and the wonders under an electron microscope?
The reast you can't win an arguement with a christian is because you haven't a clue what your talking about. How can you argue something you know nothing about?
Quite to the contrary, as I took time to show you, it is you who closes your mind, therefore making it impossible to see or thing of anything which you have set your own limits on. In otherwords, your close minded.
Lord help us if all people funtioned that way, we would discover nothing. their are many wonders God created which we have yet to see, discover, explore.
You can go ahead and remain in your ignorance, it really doesn't matter to me. Be like the plant you think you are, live, bloom, whither and die.
The human boby in case you don't know, unlike a tree orplant, offers little value as fertilizer.
What does whether or not anyone have christian beliefs have to do with iraq, and the war against fundamental islam. I understand their religion perfectly, do you?
Do you not understand that it doesn't matter to them if your a Christian, a Jew,a Hindu or Buddist, or a Pagan, Athiest, or what ever you want to call yourself, that their script calls for you to either bow down, stick your butt in the air, praise a rock called Allah, or die!!!
Christianity is not a form of theism, it's a personal individual choice.
Islam is Therocracy, form of government, complete way of life that controls all aspects of it, everything you do, even how you wash yourself, urinate, etc. Their goal is world domination, so you can live in a wonderfull glorius islamic society, like the article above ( children begging) gives example of.
Christianity has nothing to do with this war against this false backward cult, except that our compasion prevents us from simply wiping them off the face of the earth.
And again I will remind you, that godless people have killed more people on this earth than any other.
And don't forget Bob, that you are living in a part of the world where Christianity has brought you the freedom to speak as you do. A quick jog back in time will show you that this was a hard fought for thing, and you are lucky to have this right.
It is typical of people like you, as it was in the early Roman days, for people like you to take refuge in Christian Societies, then when those that persecuted you and chased you there have gone, you turn around and speak against it.
Nathan you are very correct. Bob is just like the muslims in Nigeria, that want to come to America to have a better life, but purport to hates America.
I don't think it is possible to both eat your cake and still have it at hand.
If Bob is reading this, I can invite him as a visitor to Nigeria and live in the Northern states of Nigeria.
After two weeks, I will then ask him about the comments he has made, I am sure he will say otherwise!
Just as you've said Nathan, Bob is a coward that hides under the cover of fake name, internet, and enjoys what he has not worked for(freedom).
If you ask for his real name and Identity, he will run!
If he thinks he knows how to speak for people, he should go an live in the Arabian countries and claim to have fundamental rights.
I guess he would not last 3 days in their cell,
when he passes through severe sharia punishment!
Charlemagne, you can't compare the two. Jewish law and the courts they ask for resolve only minor issues of inheritance and property cases. It does not deal with ANY matter that can be considered criminal, including domestic violence.
Sharia law involves every aspect of islamic life, it's very difficult to separate any of it. Plus as it has been pointed out to you by USAgirl, Muslim women will be intimidated to use it.
The thinking that they can refuse, can result in an honor killing. There already has been honor killings amoung muslims in Canada. This will only result in more in the long run.
Think for a moment what this sharia court will deal with. Familly matters. This includes child custody, (which under Islam always goes to the man almost without exception) Alimony (which In Islamic countries a woman may only recieve for a short time, 6 months or so)
division of property, which the wife gets next to nothing after the children, especially male children recieved their larger share. And on and on.
name one positive aspect of Sharia law which is better than our secular law now? There isn't any.
So why would the Canadian government be so willing to erode the rights of Canadian citizens, which Muslim women are, and force them through intimidation to give them up? It stupid, and a backwards step. And As USA girls mentions, once their foot is in the door, the demand list keeps growing.
I had to laugh the other day when I saw a liberal add, Claiming themselves to be defenders of Canadian traditions. they are not, they are destroying them. this is a Christian based Society with secular laws. If you want to live here, then you live under these laws, if you want things like they were in the country you came from, get out, and go live there if it was so much better.
"Christians cannot even accept biology and astronomy when it contradicts the beliefs of long dead ignorant barbarians."
And by all means Bob, show where astronomy and biology have contradicted Christian beliefs. And I don't mean Christian folklore either, show me where it contradicts anything in the gospels.
"Christian bararian" is a contradiction as well.
That's a broad statement you made, with nothing to back it up. Typical of those ignorant of the topic they speak out against.
Bob Meyer,
I'm a little curious as to your thoughts.
Why is it that Christianity is such a threat to you?
Why is it, that you expect Christianity to change it's God given views to accept your sin?
You either live by Gods rules, or you don't.
God gave you this freedom to choose.
So how is it that love, peace, good will, charity, and all that is the words of God, No killing, no wrong doing, etc. is such a threat towards you?
I would think a world full of peace would be a good thing.
Could it be my friend, that your sinful life demands justification? Do you wish to change the very rules of nature itself to accommodate your lust? Sin of the flesh?
Do you think you have the right to violate the laws of nature?
I'd like to know.
Sin can't be justified in this world, it leads toward more sin, as we can see.
But, I'm no judge, and I live my life according to the rules.
Why?
Because I know I will be judged. Regardless of my military career, which I saved more souls than I took, In my heart I knew it was better, better for YOU, because if action over years weren't taken, you may be living a different life right now. Or, according to fundamental islamic law, you'd be dead for what you are.
Now we have a fundamentalist movement which wants to decide your life.
As a Christian, I think your gay-dom is a sin. But, I let you live in peace, and let God judge you.
The Islamists think you need death.
Tell me why i should fight for your freedom, when
I'm beginning to think I and our freedom armies should just allow Islam to make a wide slaughter of you, as their script says.
I can stand back, hide, prepare for a better day.
I'm very smart in military maneuvers, I know how to gather militia,s go on killing the enemy sprees.
I know how to fight for freedom, justice, and good living.
The one thing Muslims say is true, although they don't have it themselves, but they use this statement to point their finger.
You lost your morality Bob. What those Muslims don't know, is that many of us haven't.
I haven't.
Nathan,
Does science contradict the Bible? Check out Leviticus 14 verses 1 - 20. I didn't know the standard treatment for leprosy was sacrificing two birds and sprinkling the leper with the blood of one bird using the body of the second bird as the sprinkler.
That isn't the best example of Biblical silliness, but it is one of the funniest.
Christianity isn't a form of theism? Theism is belief in a god, (from the Latin "Deus" meaning God) I always thought that Christians believed in God. Boy, was I ignorant!
I am the worst possible sinner in your eyes. That is not a murderer or a child molester it is being gay. My wife and kids are still laughing at that one.
Dase,
I say that there is no substantial difference between Christianity and Islam and you want me turned over to a Sharia court for proper punishment. You can't even see the humor in that especially when the topic of the thread is the evil of Sharia courts.
I confess that I deliberately provoked the most extreme Christians on this thread to demonstrate my point that Christians are blind. To those Christians who still retain the capacity for thought: Watch your "Christian" allies, they are more dangerous than the fanatic Muslim enemy. They are a fifth column composed of sleepwalkers.
The entire point is that every aspect of sharia is contrary to the laws of Canada...how can one move to Canada and hope to be held to different standards of law than its citizens. Women are equal in the eyes of Canadian law, they are the lower class in sharia...with domestic abuse largly unreported how many women will refuse to go to sharia hearings? They will suffer the wrath of their husbands and family members if they refuse. Let us not forget the case of pretty little Farah Khan..the tiny 5 year old girl who was beaten to death by her father then hacked into pieces, placed in several garbage bags and dumped into lake Ontario...from statements he has given he has shown no remorse simply saying she was a "bad girl" a "disobedient child"...will more of this happen if sharia takes over...of course it will.
I am not sure if the moderator of this site would allow my opinion to be heard.
I do not worry about a civil war between Muslims and Christians. I am worried about Jews being lynched by the American public.
On May 26, 2004, former Vice President Al Gore Gore called for the immediate RESIGNATION of the entire NeoCon group, Rumsefeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, Kambon et al. This shows that smart Americans have come to realize the enemy within and the traitors who have misled America into conflict with not only Arabs, but the rest of the world as well. He said "This administration has shamed America."
It is true that 911 has angered many Americans against Muslims. But many scientists believe that the real perpetrators of 911 may be some others. Read http://physics911.org/net/index.php
So, once the real criminals surface, who knows Jews, instead of muslims may be lynched.