I recently stumbled upon this interesting article about rights on non-muslims in a islamic state.

You can read the article here: http://answering-islam.org/NonMuslims/rights.htm

What are you perceptions of this article?

...

What'd the difference between the two?


Extreme Coder

Very interesting, ive read similar before. Though whats in practice varies between most countries and sects.

As an atheist i beleive that already qualifies me as being banned from Saudi Arabia

brandx you are obviously a Bush-loving, FoxNews watching, Sean Hannity worshipping, right wing whacko conservative being you posted negative propaganda lies about Muslims. You are one of those people who believe Saddam was responsible for 9/11.

Zimmis are not allowed to build new churches, temples, or synagogues. They are allowed to renovate old churches or houses of worship provided they do not allow to add any new construction. "Old churches" are those which existed prior to Islamic conquests and are included in a peace accord by Muslims. Construction of any church, temple, or synagogue in the Arab Peninsula (Saudi Arabia) is prohibited. It is the land of the Prophet and only Islam should prevail there. Yet, Muslims, if they wish, are permitted to demolish all non-Muslim houses of worship in any land they conquer.

2)
Zimmis are not allowed to pray or read their sacred books out loud at home or in churches, lest Muslims hear their prayers.

3)
Zimmis are not allowed to print their religious books or sell them in public places and markets. They are allowed to publish and sell them among their own people, in their churches and temples.

4)
Zimmis are not allowed to install the cross on their houses or churches since it is a symbol of infidelity.

5)
Zimmis are not permitted to broadcast or display their ceremonial religious rituals on radio or television or to use the media or to publish any picture of their religious ceremonies in newspaper and magazines.

6)
Zimmis are not allowed to congregate in the streets during their religious festivals; rather, each must quietly make his way to his church or temple.

7)
Zimmis are not allowed to join the army unless there is indispensable need for them in which case they are not allowed to assume leadership positions but are considered mercenaries.

Piling ad-hominem upon ad-hominem does not make your argument stronger, especially when you just make shit up without any justification. Trying to look honestly at a topic and not finding it to prove conclusively that Islam is unilaterally a "religion of peace" does not render anybody a "Bush-loving, FoxNews watching, Sean Hannity worshipping, right wing whacko conservative" any more than finding some of the commands God issued to the Israelites* in the Bible to be questionable renders one an antisemite.
___
*Like Mitzvots 33-35 as Maimonides numbered them:

• To burn a city that has turned to idol worship Deut. 13:17
• Not to rebuild it as a city Deut. 13:17
• Not to derive benefit from it Deut. 13:18

More right wing talking points. Hate. Hate. Hate. Its not Muslims we need to worry about, its Bush who is getting everyone killed. If you didn't let Rush Limbaugh tell you how to think, you'd know that.

EDIT: nevermind. This isn't going to go anywhere productive or interesting.

Ah come on, lets hear it.

If that is not ad hominem, i do not know what is. This is why landefor backed away... You could say this without insulting the people that were posted, and without claiming they have certain opinions?

If you insist. Care to tell me how pointing out that ad hominem isn't a valid form of argumentation or refutation is a "right-wing talking point"? Perhaps reason and logic are now the sole provinces of conservatives? God forbid.

How is honestly trying to say that Islam might not be a unilateral (for your reference: unilateral: having one side/aspect) religion of peace and tolerance a right-wing talking point?

Where did I say/imply I hated Islam/Muslims?

One last thing: I hate neoconservatism. I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh nor do I support the policies of GW. If you're going to attack me or my political views on a personal basis, at least get my views right. I'm a philosophical anarchist and a minarchist when I'm feeling pragmatic.

...

...

Apparantly you like Sean Hannity, so isn't more like the pot calling the kettle black. Your blog entry for everybody to see.

Self-composed » Politics

actually I think he was being sarcastic.

He thought Brandx was sharing his opinion and is going to be flamed by the evil lefties like me and you.

So he set up this fake flame.


What bothers me is that the moderators/admins seem a little bit more encouraged stopping the "defamation" of their own kind.

At least he can't come back on me for giving fake information considering that is own blog.

I wouldn't bet on that! :P

Doh! I think you could be right. I may have misread the post. I probably could have been a little less intense in my post.

Either way, whether in jest or in earnest, it didn't come across as the nicest of posts. Humor can be difficult to convey in text when discussing thing across multiple cultures, especially with participants who do not share the same primary language. Let's all be more careful out there (me included).

My entire post was satire. It is also a culmination of responses towards me in other threads. And had I posted the same information brandx did, I'd have likely been called all those things as well as a racist. Sorry to have fun at the new guy's expense. And sorry to get Matthew riled up.

Back on topic:

As I understand it, those laws aren't of the fringe Islamofacists - those are pretty standard in the Muslim world. It is also worth pointing out that the free world is as war with people who want to put you under such laws or worse - no matter how tolerant, open-minded, and liberal you think you are.

Prediction: Someone will bring up "Well Christians blah blah blah." There's plenty of Christian-bashing threads. Go there. This thread is about Islamic law.

Edited after reading PM.. But it still pissed me off, because I think Bush is a complete waste of time and has done nothing good for this country in his terms.