What the...? A letter by Bin Laden?!

[SurlyPIG]

the author does have one good point, which you did not mention: Our countries, the countries of the West, are in a deep state of moral decadence.

HAH!

Whose morals are you making this statement under? Your Christian morals, or are you speaking on behalf of the muslims who are forcing their beliefs on everyone else?

In a VERY brief summary of changing western ideology, the west condones actions or behavior that needlessly harm people. If you view this as moral decadence, then that is just poor judgement. FYI, the Christian majority is rapidly diminishing in the west. But they are not converting. They are just not Christian any longer. Religious bias is all but forbidden in my school system nowadays. We aren't taught commandments or biblical passages, we're given information to formulate our own beliefs. A huge number of individuals in the west turned away from the church in the 60s and 70s, my parents being two of them.

Do not force your interpretation of morals on the west. Your morals may not mean anything to others. For example, when my mom was growing up in England, it was a sin to eat fish on Fridays. But suddenly the Catholic Church changed that. People are finally seeing the blantant illogicality of organized religion. They're coming up with their own ideals instead. The governments of the west no longer use the commandments as their guiding law in the penal system. Instead, they use rights conventions and declarations, laws and bills voted on and passed by the people, or the representation of the people.

This "logic bug" nas not bitten those in Africa and the Middle-East, yet. We have learned to take things in perspective. Polygomy is a founding factor of several religions, but it is condoned by Islam with execution. IE, Amina Lawal; a woman in northern Nigeria who is to be buried up to her neck and stoned to death because she was pregnant while divorced. There's a girl in my class who knows a woman who was imprisoned for seven years in Saudi Arabia because her pants were too short.

Is this the laps in morals you speak of?

I think it's all laughable. If I want to have a can of tuna after my workout on friday, I'm gonna do it. If anyone thinks its a sin, then, I dont mean offense but, tough shit for them. I'm not hurting anyone. I should be going to your their anyway right? ::) Hehe...If a lady in the Middle-East wants to wear pants, why shouldn't she be allowed to? Her pants don't commit murder. They could GET her murdered, but that's another story.

The very notion of hardcore Islamic fundamentalists complaing about opression is the funniest thing I've heard today. Go just about anywhere in Europe, everywhere in NA and Aus wearing a turban, religious hat, hood or clothing, nobody will even give you a funny look. Now if you do that in some of the Islamic countries, you'll probably wind up in jail. You might even wind up dead.

I think, that, thousands of years in the future, the entire world will have become completely athiest, if not, agnostic. I hope that kids learning about the silly religious wars of the early centuries and before then have a good laugh at the sheer idiocy of it all.

Edric, you may think that the will to die for a cause is noble, but keep in mind that these people are only willing to die if they take 10 of their enemies with them. That said, I don't think anybody should believe in anything that strongly. This is my #1 beef with organised religion. I would die to protect others, but not in the name of some untouchable, unknowable force or entity that the common man believes in.

Of course, I wouldn't dream of opressing anyone's core beliefs. Believe what you want to, just don't expect me or anybody else to.

[emprworm]

Instead, they use rights conventions and declarations, laws and bills voted on and passed by the people, or the representation of the people.

but this is the exact problem with pure democracy and moral relativism. Right and wrong should never be decided by the people. THis is called "mob rule" in philosophical terms. Unless a government upholds an objective moral standard, there is no recourse to prevent the democratic majority from saying "lets rule that slavery of Africans is good again". acting strictly within moral relativism and pure democracy, there is no moral or logical precedent to prevent such a thing from happening. Thus the idea of a republic.

THe primary philosophy of a republic is this: "All humans are born with inherent rights by virtue of being human. Rights are not granted by the government, but the government exists to protect them."

obviously in a pure secular society, such a philosophy could not logically exist as a foundation for government. Yet we know deep down in our hearts the such a philosophy is superior to anything moral relativism can provide us, yet at the same we know that no such philosophy can exist without absolute moral values. And that in turn points to a creator.

Moral decay IS happening. It is happening objectively by virtue of the relativist philosophy gaining a foothold in governments. once a government is completely reletavist, there is no such concept as an "inherent right". All your rights as a human being suddenly are at the mercy of the mob. Right and wrong are at the mercy of the mob. Let me say this: during the time of the slave trade, the MAJORITY of people in the world thought it was morally right. it was only the moral absolutists that had logical precedent to step outside the moral context of society and cast judgment upon it. Without moral aboslutism, slavery could not have ended. The mob should never be allowed to dictate right and wrong, lest slavery one day become "right" again.

releativsm IS moral decay by definition because it says that slavery may one day be "right and good" again. Pure democracy will strip all humans away from any concept of inherent rights.

This is an abhorrent situation, yet one that I fear might be upon the entire world someday.

[TMA_1]

You are judging another culture with western ideals. Many laws the nations of islam had were exactly from the old testament. The jews followed those laws. Many ancients did. The terrorism is bad but let other cultures do what they do as long as they dont effect us.

[Acriku]

The difference between ancient cultures and Fanatic Muslim Cultures is the interpretation of the laws that binds them IMO.

[emprworm]

TMA i am judging culture with philosophy. that is universal. you cannot escape logic. no matter where you come from,

IF A IMPLIES B and B IMPLIES C then A IMPLIES C

and that applies to all cultures

[SurlyPIG]

emp you misunderstood me. Didn't you see how I pointed to rights declarations (ie Universal Declaration of Human Rights) and rights conventions (ie The Convention on the Rights of the Child)? They are first and foremost in the backbone of all good law systems. Voting in civic propositions, referendums, and for representation in the passage of bills into laws is secondary. Like I said in the democracy post, the best democracy is one where the majority rules, but an outside power enforces the rights of the minorities. In such a system, nobody could ever vote in slavery! I never said that people should have control over major rights like the right to life and freedom, I meant control over smaller things like Accords, through electoral representation, or like municipal propositions, like deciding where funds are going, smoking in public places, should people have to wear bike helmets when riding, etc.

You speal of our morals being handed down to us by a creator. Biblical law is rarely sane, and never reasonable. In every major religion the first commandment is almost always something to the effect of "You must be a member of this religion." Then the laws get crazy...like the examples I gave of total intolerance for outside ideas, and forcing your own religion on others. This is a matter of life, death, and freedom. It should not be decided by some old book that's gone through who knows how many translations, and nobody even really knows where it comes from.

Have you ever had beer, emp? It's no crime where you live. Drinking it in just about any Arabian country will get you imprisoned, though. Not because it's a controlled substance, not because accidents and deaths warranted its ban, but because its considered unholy. How would you feel if you, a Christian, were imprisoned by a Muslim nation under THEIR religious code? You weren't hurting anybody. The very worst they should do would be to send you back to the USA, but they would likely imprison you and beat you on a regular basis, because it is in the Qur'an. As is the fundamentalist law that encourages ordinary people, including children, to throw stones at the head of a lawbreaker until they bleed do death, their skull cracks, their brain is pummelled, or until they're knocked out and starve. I believe the quote is something to the effect of "Allah looks kindly on those who throw the stone."

[emprworm]

You speal of our morals being handed down to us by a creator. Biblical law is rarely sane, and never reasonable. In every major religion the first commandment is almost always something to the effect of "You must be a member of this religion." Then the laws get crazy...like the examples I gave of total intolerance for outside ideas, and forcing your own religion on others. This is a matter of life, death, and freedom. It should not be decided by some old book that's gone through who knows how many translations, and nobody even really knows where it comes from

Ace, i think you are grossly mis-interpreting religion and moral law. Moral law does not dictate a specific religion. Yet at the same time you cannot have a moral law without a moral law giver. All moral law does is imply a moral law giver. It does not make a specific claim to being Christianity. It is perfectly acceptable to have a government that appeals to a "Creator" of moral law. That is not pushing any commandment at all. A society that sees morality as something that came about through the evolutionary process CANNOT say that slavery is always wrong. In fact, evolution strives to DESTROY the weaker species. Evolution is all about killing/competing- majority killing minority. THe idea of a white race elminating a black race or vice versa is in perfect harmony with evolutionary principles. I reject the idea of having a government founded upon relative morals. You seem to agree. Yet at the same time you reject reliigous principles. Well you cannot have aboslute morality without making an appeal to a moral law giver- i.e. God. It is not out of place for a government to hold the PHILOSOPHY (not religion) that moral law is absolute Yet absolute morality implies a creator. (remember A implies B implies C therefore A implies C) My point is that upholding this philosophy is not pushing a religion at all.

you MUST have a basis for morality as a society. once you lose that basis or it becomes convoluted, then you wind up with...well...the world as we know it.

and we know where the bible came from. it is the only recorded source of human history beyond 8000 years ago. it is a validated reliable source of accurate archaeology- proven time and time again to be exceedingly accurate to archaeologists in locating ancient sites.

[The_Sadukar]

whoo, Edric, you sure konw how to start monsters

[quoudam72]

::) Whatever Emprwrm you are just like those Christians who use these one Bible verse statements to prove some kind of point. All Muslims do not beat their wivies on a day to day basis. LOL You only speak like I said before of regimes like Taliban maybe the light needs to go on in your head. As far as your reading of the Qu'ran goes maybe you should read the entire book and you might learn something.

[emprworm]

quondom72: you falsely accuse me. I never said all muslims beat their wives. i merely corrected your innaccurate statement that implied only extremist "taliban" muslims beat their wives. This statement is false. Wife-beating in islam is not restricted to only extremists. It is a common practice carried out by many "average" muslims. I didn't say all, quondom72- i just prevent you from putting a spin on a fact of islam. It is a huge problem in that religion. Wife beating is rampant and unfortunate, yet that does not mean all. Got it?

[emprworm]

As far as your reading of the Qu'ran goes maybe you should read the entire book and you might learn something.

i have read about 60% of it. I have problems when i read verses like:

"Seek out your enemies relentlessly." (Surah 4:104)

"Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends." (Surah 5:51)

and especially

"Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued. The Christians say: The Christ is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them." (Surah 9:29-30)

yes i did learn something: islam was spawned in violence. Muhammad (bbuh) lifted the sword, brought it down, and blood was spilt. I learned that Muhammad married a 9 year old girl named Aisha (something we call here in the US as child rape- and dont even try to tell me he didn't pork her once he was married to her)

From Abu Dawud, Hadith, Vol. 2, #2116:

"Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old." (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years."). "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old."

From Bukhari vol. 7, #65:

"Narrated Aisha that the prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: "I have been informed that Aisha remained with the prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).""

Bukhari vol. 7, #88:

"Narrated Urwa: "The prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).""

I also learned that he had at LEAST 9 wives (many scholars put it at 15-25- which is most likely) when the MAXIMUM you can have is 4 in Surah 4:3. (he cant even follow GOd's own rules). Oh yea,....he gets "special circumstances". lol.

I learned that Muhammad (bbuh) killed unbelievers by the tens of thousands and instituted the death penalty for reversion. I compared Muhammad to Jesus and saw a violent, sexually perverted man and a peaceful, nonviolent man. I learned that there is really no comparison. I learned a lot of things.

[quoudam72]

Then you should also read the Bible and you will find the same things in it also but for the sake of space here let's stick with the subject about Bin Laden's letter. You and I have plenty of time to discuss within the subject of the threads. I welcome your challanges with open arms, you make a most worthy debater (even if I disagree with your tunnel-vision). Although your intelligence is some what limited to western thoughts that usually play to unrealistic perceptions of the West being some sort of savior for the world when it is one of the biggest practitioners of just the opposite. You Emprwrm show alot of potential. :)

[emprworm]

i have read the bible and I do not find the same things in there regarding the supreme example that all christians should follow. The bible talks about all kinds of sinners and evil. The bible does not then say "Now see this evil guy here? I want all of you to say PBUH and follow him and consider him your ultimate example."

What is the Supreme Example for all Muslims to follow? Muhammad. He is the ultimate human role-model. The man that all muslims should be inspired by, and strive to become like. And Muhammad was a terrorist- killing ppl by the tens of thousands, having sex with 9 year old girls, marrying 15-25 wives while telling his followers they can have only 4. Teaching that men receive even MORE SEX in heaven - even virgins! There is no such example in Christianity so please dont even try to tell me the Bible says the same thing. Ghandi, the Hindu prophet is light years a superior man than Muhammad (bbuh) and I'm not even Hindu. Siddharta Guatama, the Buddah- the supreme example for Buddhists- he too was a superior example than the murderous muhammad. Even YOU...yes YOU QUONDAM are a far better man than Muhammad.

[Edric O]

Out of all the prophets/role-models of other religions, the Buddah was by far the kindest and most noble. I think that if he would have ever met Jesus, he would have followed Him. Their teachings were extremely similar.

Ace:

I said our culture is suffering from a horrible case of moral decay, but that doesn't mean Muslim fundamentalists are moral! I was only talking about us alone, not comparing us to them.

And my argument is the same as the one presented by Emprworm. Moral relativism and Hedonism are taking over our civilization, sinking us deeper and deeper into immorality.

[Dude_Doc]

So, if I'm a nazi, and I believe strongly in what Hitler and his nazis did in the Second World War was right, and I am prepared to die for it, do you respect me? Do you respect the palestinians that kills children and older people? Yes, I would die, knowing that I will save people. But to die for your religion is just over the top. So, did Allah come down, personally, to the earth, telling all muslims that they must kill HIS own creations by himself? And people believe even in these days? Sure if I were born when the Crusaders defended Europe and etc. But today? Yes, I do believe in God. But what about my prime minister, that rules Sweden? I hate him. Still I don't kill him. Others think he does right. So you see. What will they believe in 100 years? That all except the 1000 believeres that still believe, are evil?

[quoudam72]

You do not understand what the Arabian pennisula was before Islam but I will save that for another time. As far as what you say about Muhammand that is your opinion. Personally I strive to be like no other man, I am my own man if I am similar to another what can be said I know my character.

What do you really care about the Muslim world when you sit half way across the world behind your computer everything is fine in your part of the world. In other parts of the world everything is not well but I know what you would say TOUGH that is just the way that is some times. You can say whatever you want about Islam and Muslims I know you do not care and that is the difference. Yes their are alot of things wrong in the Islamic world but there are those trying to right the wrongs. Wishing blood apon Muhammad will never get you the peace that you act like you are really projecting. That makes you as bad as the ones you attack. If you are angry with the fact that I will not listen to you then attack me meet me head on no beating around the bush. I do not fear your philosophical view, your idealism nor do I fear you. Can we stop this and get back to the subject of the letter it is a waste of time Emprwrm.

[Edric O]

But to die for your religion is just over the top.

But I suppose dying for your country is okay, isn't it? ::)

To die for your religion is noble. Unless you die to kill other people, like terrorists do, in which case it is no better than dying for your country while killing the enemy who also dies for his country... in other words, madness.

Yes, I would respect even nazis for their courage. And in the next second, shoot them in the head. :) Just because I have respect for them doesn't make them any less evil in my eyes.

[emprworm]

What do you really care about the Muslim world when you sit half way across the world behind your computer everything is fine in your part of the world.

everything is not fine here. what happens in the muslim world affects us all. the muslim world IS part of my world- it represents about 20% of all people on earth.

In other parts of the world everything is not well but I know what you would say TOUGH that is just the way that is some times.

i dont say "TOUGH" for people suffering. I say TOUGH for Palestinians who demand their own state. Just like I say TOUGH for anyone else who demands liberation and is unable to muster up enough support to oust the government they want to uproot. Isreal will allow the palestinians to live under an Israeli state as Israeli citizens. Only in the case that Israel is persecuting the palestinians AFTER this conflict is over, will I rise up and speak out against what Israel is doing.

You can say whatever you want about Islam and Muslims I know you do not care and that is the difference.

of course i care. i care about the aghanistani women being beaten. I wanted the UN to take out the taliban LONG ago. But due to all the european and middle eastern panzies in the world who get mad every time the US does something, we were unable to take them out until we (finally) had a good excuse. What we did to Afghanistan should have been done LONG ago. But if we did, then all those stupid UN panzies would be whining about the American Empire. I care. I just dont care about Islamic wife-beaters. Honestly, I dont really care about them all that much. Maybe that is a flaw of me, I am willing to admit that is a flaw that I have.

Wishing blood apon Muhammad will never get you the peace that you act like you are really projecting.

i speak the truth. Everytime I hear a Muslim say "peace be upon him" i laugh silently. Muhammad ranks right up there with the Mongols as one of the most masterful, yet ruthless warlord to have ever walked the earth. He never saw a day of peace in his life. Islam is all about war. It is peaceful ONLY for those who are Islamic. For the Kafir, it is about bloodshed, forced conversion, and/or abolishment. I hear Muslim scholars try to propogate the "self defense" argument. Well that is hogwas because Islam CONQUERED it didnt win its converts by Ghandi-style missionaries. If spilling blood by self-defense only, then how in the world did Muslims invade Europe and push all the way into spain? LOL. Some "self-defense" And besides, I thought this was all on topic. The letter addresses issues against america as certain "facts" by making it sound like the poor little muslims are the victims. I am disputing those facts and exposing that the muslim nations are the victimizers, not the victims.

[quoudam72]

Maybe you are right about what we discuss is not off the subject. I wish you would stop acting as if I am protecting the wife-beaters and such because I do and am not.

You are the typical American that has all the answers because you think you do. Americans can solve all of the world's problems but can not even solve the problems of America. They will travel half way around the world to attack human rights but let their own citizens (African-Americans) have a problem and they ignore it or say that is not true. You talk of the Afganistan women you never knew those women and you never cared until yesterday but better late than never. How many conferences have you been to in America for womens-rights? Bet you can not even name one that you attended. LOL What type of American womens liberation will you bring them burning their bras in the streets of Kabual. BAH!! That is not what the women of Afganistan need. Do not get me wrong I am glad America got rid of the Taliban punks (I spit on their name) but let us remember who helped to put them in power. America has made a habit of coming to be the savior when in fact it is due to some of it's foreign policies (or lack of) that made these things in the first place (can you say Iraqi).

Do not get me wrong America is still the best place on the earth to live but America really needs to look in the mirror and realize the pain and suffering that it has caused directly and indirectly. America has always been about double-standards let's just face that fact look at America and it treatment of it's own ethnic groups.

[Anathema]

Emp, please state that paticular Qu'ran verse. The Qu'ran does state however, that to Allah, men and woman are equal.

Anyway, the biblical story of Adam and Eva served for centuries as a justification to put men above woman.

Off topic: There's an interesting part in God Emperor of Dune,

[hide] in wich the emperor Leto II, who has memories of people that go back to the first people, tells that in fact Adam ate the apple of the tree of knowledge and blamed Eva, and that tht was how the human traditon of lying started.[/hide]

[emprworm]

quran says they are equal? O really? Where?

I know plenty of sources that say otherwise, however.

Women are inferior to men

"...and women shall have rights similar to the rights against them...but men have a degree over them..." Surah 2:228

Women are less than equal to men in at least two major areas

First, in inheritance: a woman's share is half that of a man.

" To the male a portion equal to that of two females..." Surah 4:11

Second, in court witness: the witness of two women equals the witness of one man.

"...and if there are not two men, then a man and two women such as you choose, for witness..." Surah 2:282

wow. what equality! Takes 2 women to equal the testimony of one man. THIS *IS* the law as practiced in muslim nations, btw.

Women's mind is deficient

Mohammed said, " The witness of a woman is equal to half of that of a man because of the deficiency of the woman's mind" Hadith vol. 3:826

A husband may punish his wife by beating her or abstaining from sexual relations with her

" women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them, refuse to share their beds, beat them. Surah 4:34

Women should veil themselves when they are outside their homes.

" (Women) should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad)."Surah 33:59

so now i ask you earthnuker: where o where does the quran say they are equal? and funny how muslims don't practice it

[nemafakei]

I do not support the attacks on Sept 11. But thay are neither an excuse for continued assault on whomsoever Bush deems fit.

Remember also that 3,000 died in the world trade centre on one day, once. Yet, every single day, 30,000 die purely because of infected and bad water supply. Failure to act where it were possible is also an action in of itself; why has the most capable country in the world acted not in favour of helping? I would say it were good if those 3000 died (this being the requirement) to draw the US's attention to helping stop further deaths.

Just a little perspective reminder that things could be a lot worse in islamic countries.

[emprworm]

But thay are neither an excuse for continued assault on whomsoever Bush deems fit.

no they are not. thats why Bush isn't doing any such thing. however they are an excuse for an assault on whomever our nation and the united nations deems fit.

and 30,000 die of starvation so that means that doing ANY GOOD THING other than feeding a human being is wrong.

what kind of logic is that?

[Andrew]

surely they can better themselves without the need of the u.s. with exceptions of education and structural support for a while until they can support themselves. then if they cant feed themselves then we can not be blamed.

[Anathema]

I don't have a copy of the Qu'ran here (my parents would be really confused about that anyway), but I'm pretty sure the Qu'ran says that men and women should live different sort of lives but that neither is better in the eyes of Allah.