Indigo Jo Blogs

Several points here. First, FGM pre-dates Islam and is not specifically Islamic. Nevertheless, control of female sexuality is a key feature of Islamic societies, and FGM persists longer there (97% in Egypt, for example).

My interpretation of both quotes is that they are about state authority, not managerial authority in a company.

Discrimination is still discrimination. If Muslims were barred from holding key offices in government here in the UK, there would be an outcry.

Most women are not confined to their houses in the Muslim world and never have been.

Nevertheless, a woman may be forbidden by her husband from leaving the house. In Saudi Arabia they must not go out or travel beyond a certain point unless accompanied by a Maharam (sp?).

The fact that there are still huge populations of Christians in Egypt and the Syria/Palestine area - isn't that evidence that their preferred to stay than to go?

The number of Palestinian Christians is seriously dwindling. Istanbul used to have many more Christians. Lebanon used to be majority Christian. Many Christians have fled these areas. Christians do not want to be dhimmis. This is a state of being no free person would want.

I hope you will allow this comment on your blog as it is civil in tone, and it is important to get the other point of view.

The number of Palestinian Christians is seriously dwindling. Istanbul used to have many more Christians. Lebanon used to be majority Christian. Many Christians have fled these areas. Christians do not want to be dhimmis. This is a state of being no free person would want.

In the case of Istanbul, they were expelled by Kemal Ataturk AKA Utter Jerk, who was not an Islamist but an anti-Islamic secular Turkish nationalist. A substantial population swap took place in the 1920s with Greeks in Turkey who had lived there for centuries being exchanged for Turks in Greece who had similarly lived there for centuries. (Most likely many of them were of Greek descent and their ancestors had adopted Turkish ways after becoming Muslims.)

In the case of the decline of the Christian community in Palestine, it could well be because of greater emigration to the USA where most of the Arab community is Christian. So there are more family links and thus more avenues for emigration. As for Lebanon, they have considerably more power there than anywhere else in the Muslim world; they are the general population in north Lebanon. Where would they have gone, other than Europe and the USA, where the money just happens to be better?

In the case of the decline of the Christian community in Palestine, it could well be because of greater emigration to the USA where most of the Arab community is Christian.

Sounds like the tail wagging the dog! Christians would not have left if they were satisfied being dhimmis. The greater prosperity of Western countries plays a role, but generally people do not emigrate without good reason.

Yusuf wrote: "Spencer seems to have a preoccupation with the idea of his own becoming a dhimmi, or non-Muslim subject of a Muslim state with all that entails."

This is something that I've noticed about a lot of Islamophobes who pick up on the idea of "dhimmitude." To me, it seems that they want to be considered "dhimmis," that they can say, "Oh, look, I'm a victim of the Muslims. Pity me (us)." While, of course, all of this is being said when they live in countries where Muslims are a minority of the population and don't control the government.

If I understand Robert Spencer right, he argues that the Islamist/Jihadist viewpoint is rooted in the Quran and that what he calls "moderate Muslim" will fail because the "extremists" can always cite justification in scripture. Female circumcision, purdah etc he does seem to acknowledge as cultural throwbacks but ones affirmed by Islamic religious authorities. In these areas alone (plus whether apostates should be put to death)is it unreasonable to insist on application of the Universal declaration of Human Rights?

Spencer documents persecution of other faiths by Muslims in authority. The question here is not whether this is Islamic or un-Islamic, it is a human rights question. These events either happen or don't.

Why the non-Muslim populations of the Middle East are falling is a moot point-this was happening before 9/11 and the attendant troubles. Reasons for emigration to America and Canada; for a better standard of living or to avoid being second class citizens, or in the case of Lebanon to avoid not being top dog any more-or any combination of these?

There was a huge decline of Jews in the Arab World after 1948 from 600,000+ to barely 20,000 today. Damascus and Alexandria were great cosmopolitan cities then, but no longer. Whether they were forced out or went to live in the newly founded state of Israel of their own accord is another debateable and debated point.

Well the term "dhimmitude" was invented by right wing Israeli extremist Bat Yeor. Unfortunetly for her, and the idiots who are always carping about this, the history of Islamic tolerance cannot be changed. I dont know any historian who uses such terms.

Spencer is really nothing more than a catholic version of jewish extremist Daniel Pipes. The fact that this guy goes out of his way to lie about Islam and Muslims shows clearly that he is no scholar or authority on any issue except shoddy christian polemicsm. The Church is going bonkers over the conversion statistics it seems.

I did always wonder why RObert Spencer refers to Reliance of the Traveller so often. Isnt that a Shafi book of fatawa, one among thousands of books of fatawa? My suspicion is is that he doesnt read Arabic so he only refers to books that are accesible to him. This limits his understanding of the Sharia most considerably.

This is what upsets me most about kafirs who try to understand Islam. They dont take a study of Islam very seriously because it isnt a "Western" religion. This is where I think race and culture has alot to do with thier lack of appreciation.

It should be mentioned however the Muslims arent a race. No Duh!

Old Pickler,

"If Muslims were barred from holding key offices in government here in the UK, there would be an outcry."

Muslims know they have no place in the government of the kafir.

"Nevertheless, a woman may be forbidden by her husband from leaving the house."

If a Muslims is following the Sunnah and isnt prone to extremism in his practice, the lifesyle of his wives or daughters will reflect that. Now since you arent in a position to deal with how a Muslim man should be towards his women folk, as exhibited by the Prophet Muhammed himself, I dont think you can speak so authoritatively on what a man may do towards his wife. The issue is what he is supposed to do. It always is, and that is the standard by which he will be judged on Qiyamah, or the day of reckoning.

"In Saudi Arabia they must not go out or travel beyond a certain point unless accompanied by a Maharam (sp?)."

What does this mean? What are you talking about, the bathroom door? ITs interesting the people who talk the most about how Saudi women live never been there and dont know anyone who has.

Old Pickler what is a dhimmi anyway? All the kafirs are obsessed with dhimmi.

I love to hear christo-nuts complaining about Palestinian Christians. The look on their faces when you tell them about how Christianity under Israel has drastically declined is priceless. Its ironic given that these so-called christians themselves have facilitated such Israeli terror throughout financial,military and moral support. Lets be real, these christian zionists care nothing for their co-religionists elsewhere, especially when it comes to fulfilling their wet dream of Armageddon through their extreme interpretation of Bible. They lie because history, culture and the truth are not their side. Palestinian Christians would not give the keys of the Church of the Nativity to the Muslims as they have for the past 800 years if they were being persecuted by them. The zionists have tried to create rifts between these two communities who have lived side by side in peace for centuries to complete their theft and plunder of the Palestine.

http://www.hcef.org/hcef/index.cfm/mod/news/ID/16/SubMod/NewsView/NewsID/841.cfm

The dhimma was a pact or treaty by which conquered peoples who belonged to the religions of the book were allowed by their Muslim conquerors to practise their religion. The dhimmis were treated as second class citizens to say the least, were forced to pay a punitive tax, banned from public displays of their religion and other humiliations.

Now since you arent in a position to deal with how a Muslim man should be towards his women folk, as exhibited by the Prophet Muhammed himself, I dont think you can speak so authoritatively on what a man may do towards his wife.

I can comment on it, though, and say that in my view, and in the West where women are free agents and equal to men, the idea that a woman should require her husband's permission to go out, even if the husband is kind and condescends to grant this, is utterly absurd and ludicrous.

I have not been to Saudi Arabia. I have no wish to visit a country that treats women worse than cattle.

Old Pickler,

I tell my wife where I am going all the time. I never leave home without telling her where I am going. And vice-versa, she informs me of where she is going. This is just common sense.

The question of seeking permission cannot enter the fray unless there has been instances of disagreement between the couple as to visiting a particular place. And in this case the man has the last say.

How do you know Saudi treats women worse that cattle? From where did you get this informataion?

unless there has been instances of disagreement between the couple as to visiting a particular place. And in this case the man has the last say.

Quite so. Totally unacceptable in the West, where men and women are simply equal with no limitations.

Do a bit of reading. Start with 'Princess' by Jean Sassoon. I would rather be dead than live as a Saudi woman.

Some miscellaneous points...

I don't know the statistics, but female circumcision is done among Muslims AND Christians in Egypt. If it's 97%, then many of the Christian women are circumcised, since they make up 10-20% of the population.

"If Muslims were barred from holding key offices in government here in the UK, there would be an outcry."

Doesn't the king or queen have to be in the Church of England? "Defender of the Faith" and all that?

Women in Saudi Arabia go out all the time without mahram - just go to a mall in Saudi and see. I get so sick of hearing this garbage about Saudi women. At least be accurate if you're going to discuss it. Being accurate would entail erasing from your brain anything you got out of the much-discredited book "Princess".(I read that piece of garbage, too. And I have been to Saudi - many times.)

Palestinian Christians are leaving because of the Israeli occupation. Iraqi Christians are leaving because of problems brought on by the American occupation. It's not as if any of them were living as "dhimmis" in an Islamic state anyway. I don't know of any country where "dhimmitude" exists - can you tell me one? I live in a Muslim country and Westerners live quite comfortably here. Not only do they pay no jizya, but they pay no taxes at all, which is one of the main reasons they come. In their own countries, they would be paying... I don't know... 20-30% of their income in taxes to the government? And here they pay ZERO%? So they're not complaining.

Palestinian Christians are leaving because of the Israeli occupation. Iraqi Christians are leaving because of problems brought on by the American occupation

And Muslims never, ever take responsiblility for anything. Palestinian Christians are fleeing to Israel, where they can avoid persecution.

'Princess' discredited? By whom? The testimony of someone who has witnessed Saudi atrocities discredited by those who have not.

Yes, the King/Queen has to be C of E, but there is nothing barring Muslims from holding any office, in fact there are laws in the workplace forbidding discrimination on religious grounds.

Just look at the direction of emigration. Arab Christians are finding it intolerable to live amongst Muslims, so they go to America, where they can live as free people.

Old Pickler

"...the idea that a woman should require her husband's permission to go out, even if the husband is kind and condescends to grant this..."

You call it ludicrous I call it honor.

A Muslim man has every right, along with a religious obligation to where and with whom his wife is treading with. It may seem crazy to you put since a marriage is an amana, or a trust that Allah (azawajal) has placed upon Muslim men and women, they must see to it that they protect the people that are under thier care.

You call it ludicrous I call it honor.

That's the difference between Islam and freedom.

Old pickler,

"totally unacceptable in the west" so what? As if the west is the reference for all of us to live by.

Whether it is acceptable or not in the west is not really our problem. Our religious guidelines is where we look not social conventions. We are family oriented people. Our husband, wives and children do not just go anywhere just because it is acceptable/unacceptable in the west. There are checks and balances in our religion to keep it that way.

Sorry, our pious women don't envy you for roaming the streets at night.

What a shallow argument, you are capable of?

DrM,

Actually if you read more widely you wouldn't be making claims about "Islamic tolerance"
It seems that dhimmis did fare better when the Caliph or ruler was the least Islamic and there are numerous examples of this from Spain to the the Indus. But when Islamic orthodoxy invariably reinserted itself oppression prevailed.

As far as Bat Yeor being a right-wing Israeli extremist.(Do you work for the BBC?) I always believed she was Egyptian born and held a French passport. As for her politics I am pretty familiar with her writings and nothing strikes me as being overtly "right-wing"

And those "idiots" who are always carping about this seem to be Arab Christians or oriental Jews who have long memories of how wonderful it was under Muslim rule.

I would love to continue,and I will, but my wife and I are going to an Iftar tonight.

Anonymous, Don't worry I will respond to your last post,I promise. I'll dig up some stories about Muhammad(using good strong hadiths) starting with his marriage to Aisha and the circumstances of how he met his jewish wife Safiya.

Salam,

The Christian emmigration from the Middle-East has been attributed to economic hardship imposed upon them and their Arab brethren by the Judeo-fascist Israeli occupation, educational and cultural restrictions imposed upon them by Israel, the lure of greater wealth accumulation in Western countries, and the fact that there are a few well established Christian Arab communitied in South, Central and North America.

http://www.cnewa.org/generalpg-ver1.aspx?pageID=138

And Muslims never, ever take responsiblility for anything. Palestinian Christians are fleeing to Israel, where they can avoid persecution.<<

Take responsibility for something we're not responsible for? What sort of crack have you been smoking kitty litter? Palestinian Christians are leaving Israel because of zionist terrorism, the sort you christofascists have supported over over 60 years. Those Iraqi christians I'm sure enjoy being bombed by their "brethren" from the US and UK. You prickler, are not only a hypocrite but a pathetic liar to boot. When you cant make a rational argument, you make things up. Typical typical typical of the backward christo-nutter mindset. So at odds with reality.

Anonymous, Don't worry I will respond to your last post,I promise. I'll dig up some stories about Muhammad(using good strong hadiths) starting with his marriage to Aisha and the circumstances of how he met his jewish wife Safiya.

Rest assured that any clichés you post about the Prophet (sall' Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam) and his wives (the Mothers of the Believers) will be deleted. Anyone who wants to read such material can read it at however many dozen other sites and you won't get to post it here.

Clichés? I've yet to see them refuted.

Clichés? I've yet to see them refuted.

See this article:

The Young Marriage of Aishah

That article doesn't dispute the fact that Aisha was nine; it confirms it. The issue is whether you think this is right or not.

That article doesn't dispute the fact that Aisha was nine; it confirms it. The issue is whether you think this is right or not.

duh! Me 'ol codger, you should stick to incredulity, suits you better than stating the bleedin' obvious. If you actually bothered to read it, you'd find that the article confronts the spurious moral questions that are raised around this issue; and it does so very comprehensively.

You can pursue this issue of your wish, but I warn you that - on the strength of that article alone - you'll end up looking foolish. If you’re still not convinced, think of the arbitrary limit on the age of consent in this country.

As others on this blog have more eloquently pointed out (hat-tip to anonymous and Ann), we don't hold your greco-roman-come-judeo-christian-come-post-modern-lets-just-make-it-up-as-we-go-along morality as any sort of ideal. I know this may be hard for your quaint old mind to comprehend but that's just the way it 'ez! The sooner you accept it the sooner you'll be able to post a worthwhile comment on these pages and the sooner I'll get a return on all the hard work I've put into securing your pension.

I remember asking an evangelist how old Maryam(a.s.) was when she gave birth to Prophet Isa(a.s.), he sheepishly said "18." I couldnt stop laughing, I'm sure her ID card was checked by Angel Gibrail. In truth she was in her early teens. Also theres nothing wrong with Prophet Suleiman(a.s.) having hundreds of wives or claiming that Prophet Dawud(a.s.) had relations with his daughters as found in the Bible? Strange indeed. Another fine example of lame christo-morons who understand nothing of semetic culture, so now its down to selectively protesting the young marriage of Hadrat Aisha. I could go on with the absurdity of this hypocritical christo-polemic, but I believe this link explains the facts in both a scholarly and civilized manner:

http://www.muslim-answers.org/aishah.htm

Good points Atticus, but keep in mind that its usually not possible to have a debate based on honestly and rationality with christo-fascist like prickler/generic kafir/kitty litter or whatever new troll persona the idiot comes up with. I always get a kick out of listening to the patrons of the most sexually charged, and might I add immoral societies on the planet lecture us on marriage, a sacred institution which they dont even have, much less define. The same mentality is at work when inventing mythical WMDs, and deriving sexual pleasure out of killing, torturing, and maiming innocents men, woman and children in Iraq and Afghanistan. Same excrement, same smell.

DrM, Could you please explain what the term christofascist means? You seem to enjoy in mudraking, an old Stalinist tactic by the way. I think your abuse of the word is trivializing the meaning, and in effect you are demeaning the sacrifice many of your fellow citizens made 60 years ago. Please refrain from using it.

I don't know the age of Mary, but I'm sure she was a lot older than nine, the age of Aisha when she married Muhammad(Sahih Al-Bukhari is filled with references (i.e. vols. 5:236, 7:64, 7:65, 7:88) to this inspiring ingredient of Islam that all Muslims must accept.) and I would bet that Joseph was quite shy of his mid-fifties. I did try to read Yusef's linked article from AbdurRahman R. Squires but after reading the second sentence a red flag went up. "Unfortunately, in this Neo-Colonialist Age of smart bombs, MTV, CNN and the Big Mac" I said to myself oh, oh a I think we have a former anti-globalist activist turned Muslim, I better stop reading.
I hate repeating the cliche from Kipling, you know East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet, but it really applies in this situation doesn't it.

[content snipped, as promised - Yusuf[

Brownwonder, "Muslims know they have no place in the government of the kafir."

No one is holding a gun to your head. Its simple if you don't like blighty leave. My wife was born in Shefield, however, she still qualifies for a Pakistani passport. Hint, hint.

In regards to the hemoraging of Christians from their homelands in the ME, particularly Israel. Some of you are indeed correct and many did flee Israel/Palestine during the 48 war. But the ones that stayed have generally prospered. In my community, I've met many Palestinian Christians and although they have no love for the Jewish state many still prefer it to anywhere else. I attended a West Bank university for a semester and I was surprised by the number of Palestinian Christians in the IDF. On one occasion at a checkpoint outside Ramallah I was verbally abused by a border guard sergeant who was scrutinizing my passport(I had a Muslim first name) Life for many Christians in the West Bank and the few still in Gaza has become progressivly worse since the IDF pulled out. I concluded many years later that while Christian and Muslim Arabs are culturally similar they are poles apart when it comes to religion. For instance there has never been a Palestinian suicide bomber.

Ann, I hardly belive that Iraqi Christians are leaving because of the 'occupation' it's not American grunts or British squadies who hassle and attack the christian community on a daily basis, the blame lies squarely with your co-religionists. Even the BBC and Independant would back that up. In regards to Saudi Arabia,the only thing I would demand of the desert kingdom is freedom of religion. Why can't Muslims reciprocate a bit and allow Christians and others to practice their religion, why can't we prosletize, in fact in Taliban-ruled Afganistan I believe it was a death sentance. There are dozens of Mosques in my city, Muslims are free to practice their faith, wear their costume and even spread their faith in our prison system and universites. Who is acting fascist here and how about a little quid-pro-quo.

"I concluded many years later that while Christian and Muslim Arabs are culturally similar they are poles apart when it comes to religion. For instance there has never been a Palestinian suicide bomber."

I really should preview my posts what I meant was: there has never been a Palestinian Christian suicide bomber.

There has never been a palestinian christian suicide bomber

spencerd,

What is your point? It's like saying there has never been a prolific non-catholic child molester.

What is your point?

Because 100 or so people blow themselves up out of desperation, what does that mean for 1 billion strong muslims who are alive.

Or because 200 or so catholic priests are caught in their perverse acts every year, what does that mean for all catholics.

You need to enter debates with more intellectual points as opposed to media fed analysis and artificial emotions.

Our deen is too grand for that, especially when you begin to see how the spiritual world manifest the material. All of this emotional appeal won't wash here with us. You are just torturing your mind. Go to church and calm yourself down. Follow your Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) and indeed he is our Prophet too, and you will be guided.

One can actually find out what the Christian Palestinians say for themselves, you know, rather than speaking for them. Having watched a number of feature interviews and documentaries with Palestinian Christians who have left or are leaving, the reason they give is ISRAELI VIOLENCE AGAINST THEM not some notion of "dhimmitude." But then again, letting the Pal Christians speak for themselves would mean allowing for a sliver of criticism against the Israelis, so that's not going to happen -- not from the secular anti-Muslims nor from the Christofascists who claim to love their Arab Christian brethren.

Just remember that "Princess" by Jean Sassoon is widely believed by publishing industry insiders, as well as Saudi watchers (the real kind) to have been a forgery. It is rife with errors about basic elements of everyday Saudi life -- the kind of errors that no Saudi would even think to make. There's a reason Sasoon was dropped by her publisher and went to self-publishing.

There has never been a Palestinian Christian suicide bomber, this is true. But throughout the 60's and 70's, Palestinian Christians were at the forefront of terrorist or revolutionary (whatever label you prefer) activity, in the guise of being "Socialists."

And anyone who says that about A.R. Squires doesn't know him... but whatever excuse you need to stay with your frame of mind... well, grab it, man. Stay in that comfort zone.

Yawn, well its obvious what christofascist is, spenturd. Go look in the mirror or turn to the TBN. Christofascists are terrorists and support it openly with their wet dream armageddonist fantasys. Yo nutters make Stalin look sane. Ever heard of GEORGE HABASH? Look up the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. The organization is considered terrorist and run by a Christian Palestinian. That being said, Palestinian will continue to use whatever means they have until they get planes, tanks and submarines, like the Israelis do. Dont talk to me about suicide bombing while you let the Israelis get away with murder, not to mention nuclear WMDs. I'm sure it would be a dream come true for you if the Palestinians were to simply get wiped out and not even attempt to defend themselves. Yeah, keep smoking that opium you're liberating in Afghanistan.

More examples of Christo-Fascism:

Christian Terrorists forcing Hindus to convert to Christianity in India:

http://www.indianexpress.com/fullstory.php?contentid=35560

Christian Terrorist "Lord's Resistance Army" (also known as "Uganda Peoples' Democratic Christian Army")

http://www.hrw.org/press97/sept/uganda.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord'sResistanceArmy

They've kidnapped over 20,000 children to use as child soldiers and sex slaves, they've massacred over 12,000 people in their Christian terrorist campaign to establish Biblical rule over Uganda. All in the name of Christianity.

Excellent points Zionist critic. Lets not forget the sex slave trade run in Israel using young girls kidnapped from poor east european countries and forced into a life of endless prostitution. But I guess Christian zionists are more concerned about being raptured to heaven then give a damn about their less fortunate co-religionists.

[Bikhair here]

Anonymous,

"Because 100 or so people blow themselves up out of desperation..."

Please dont make these kinds of excuses for a Muslim. They only harm them. What is wrong, deviant, jahil, etc, will always be the case no matter how "desperate" they are. In fact when they are in desperation they should especially have sabr as there is great reward and benefit.

"Follow your Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) and indeed he is our Prophet too, and you will be guided."

If the person that you are speaking about follows Esa ibn Maryam (alaihi salam) it will only lead him to tawheed in which case he should revert back to Islam, as that was the only message the Esa, like all the others prophets before and after him came with, wa Allahu alim.

[Bikhair here]

Spencred,

"Why can't Muslims reciprocate a bit and allow Christians and others to practice their religion, why can't we prosletize, in fact in Taliban-ruled Afganistan I believe it was a death sentance."

The only religion with Allah [azawajal] is Islam. False religions cannot be spread among Muslims. The Quran and the Sunnah makes this clear and we dont change for democracy. There is nothing about that system of religion that promises Jennah. Muslims should in fact fear for thier religion. Call it insecurity if you would like, but if Shaytan threatened to take your eman (faith) away from you and drag you into the fire you would feel a little uneasy as well.

Now, if Christians societies allow Muslims to give dawah than we will take advantage of it, in the event that Christian societies dont allow Muslims to give dawah, we will be patient and allow our adab (manners) to spread Islam.

Muslims should have good manners.

Leave suicide bombings for tha kafirs. This is not from our religion and we will not imitate them in anyway. Success is with Prophet Muhammeds (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) sunnah. Please lets not deviate from it.

Interesting points, brownwonder. However, there needs to be a clarification. Considering the hate and hostile attacks against Islam by Christians, I dont think they are in any position to demand access. They have no one but themselves to blame for their decline. I have yet to come across a book written by a Muslim defaming Prophet Isa(a.s)....oh but I forgot..we are his TRUE followers. Can these Christians say the same? Ofcourse not.

Bikhair,

Yes, I told him to follow Jesus (peace be upon him) because that will lead him back to Islam.

Just some general thoughts on the contributions here:

It is still a wonder for me as to why these so called "Christians" (such as Picker, spencer, etc) come here and start cursing down our beautiful religion of Islam or even sometimes the Prophet (peace be upon him). How can anyone entrust political authourity in the hands of such people. That is why secularism is a saviour for them.

Never will you see a muslim go around cursing down other people's religion, or Prophets; unless he is a loser.

Rather than come here to discuss or ask questions, they will rather speak some alcoholic eschatology -- telling us authoritatively why Islam is backward and "they" are enlightened. It amazes me! Imagine if the majority of the society were like these guys, it's scary.

May be they belong to the toilet as DrM has been saying.

Because, if you think about it, they are unable to distinguish between the mundane and the sacred. Everything is the same to them - like "bahahims" (in the words of the Koran).

One would think, at least they should be able to show some cultural sensitivity - granted that they want to reduce everything to anthropology.

Phew! I tell you, there are various degrees of ignorance.

So just to clarify - while demanding full rights in Western democracies to preach Islam, Muslims feel perfectly within their rights not to allow the preaching of Christianity.

Hypocritial or what?

To be honest i'm getting a tad bored of the endless twaddle being spewed from the likes of Old Pickler and spencerd as well. If you've got nothing worthwhile to say then shut-it. It's not our fault your extreme views on the pristine religion of Islam are based on sensationalist and fictitious reporting in the Zionist controlled media (News Corp stable) and on the actions of a few mis-guided individuals. If I was to judge christianity and judaism on the actions of a few people then you would have a lot to answer for. Weren't Jews the founders of modern day terrorism? (attacks against the British, assassinations and the bombing of the King David Hotel in the 1930s/40s).

Don't get me started on the role of Christians in the World Wars, Holocaust and the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Spencerd, as a convert/revert (whatever) to "smells and bells" catholicism what do you think of the Vatican's role during the Second World War and the Holocaust. Was this the "clincher" for you that attracted you to catholicism (said sarcastically).

Spencerd said "I would love to continue,and I will, but my wife and I are going to an Iftar tonight"

So, your wife still hasn't embraced catholicism then. What's the hold up? Is she still considering whether she wants to go to a church where the priest is homosexual, or one where they perform gay marriages. Or is she just making sure the priest doesn't have a murky past. She must be in a quandary, i really do sympathise with her.

It's not our fault your extreme views on the pristine religion of Islam are based on sensationalist and fictitious reporting in the Zionist controlled media

Do you realise how silly that sounds?

It is perfectly reasonable to ask why Muslims demand full rights to practise and preach Islam in Western democracies but deny those rights to Christians in Muslim countries. You presumably have no answer to this.

Old Pickler,

No, we don't think it is hypocrisy.

Let me go through some quick rough explanations...

For example, when a muslim presents his case to the authority on the requirements of his religion. The authority will weigh it up and see whether there is anything in his/her religion that is going to distabilise the political, social, moral, or even more subtle fabrics (e.g spiritual growth, psychological balance, eternal status, etc) of the society and the people of that society. In most places the spiritual/psychological implication of actions and practises doesn't seem to matter. However, in Islam it is of great importanct. Hence if there was an Islamic Caliphate, the authorities would consider whether the public practise of certain religion is in keeping with the spiritual principles which the government stands for and which it is trying to grow amongst its citizens.

If it is deemed to be detrimental, then such practises will not be afforded propagation. Because in Islam we have the principle that you can only propagate/enjoin something which is "good" in terms of spiritual development which agrees with monotheism.

However, the right of individual to pursue that course is never taken away, but rather restricted to individual practises. Like alcohol, homosexuality, etc... all these things Islam does not allow them to be propagated, but if you want you can do it in your house ...by the way, that doesn't make it virtuous, and I am not saying they are virtuous. I am trying to giving you here the logic of Islam in a gentle way.

Coming back to the subject. If the authority of a particular country/nation should find in Islam anything wrong or anything that goes against what such an authority stands for or the moral values or spiritual values it is trying to inculcate its people, then their law should inturn make Islam "non-propagatable"...but if the law doesn't make it "non-propagatable" it is not hypocrisy to enjoy the freedom afforded by such a law even if you deny a similar freedom from the pioneers of such law in a different setting.

It's like if we visit you in your house, we may offer you our halal food (as long as you are okay with it)...meaning organic blood drained meat, slaughtered separately from its kind, non-electrocuted, etc..... At the same time we may refuse to eat yours if you haven't cooked it to meet our dietary requirements...and we may even refuse you from bringing it into our house when you visit us. But we will never deprive you of the right to eat it yourself... we may give you hints...implicit or explicitly depending on your relationship to us.

How else could it be? If you see harm in something why would you allow it into your house.

It is nothing personal at all. It takes maturity and a careful thought to see this correctly.

It is about mutual respect and understanding. We don't believe in pretentious return of favours. If Western Democracies does not like Islam to be a public religion for "good" reasons, then they should outlaw it, it is as simple as that. Not that I would like to see that happen.

As for Christianity, this religion does not even accept anything short of salvation through Jesus christ and does not accept both the public of private face of any other religion, so how can christians be the guardians of peace? Only muslims/Islam can assume such a responsible role.

Sorry if I waffled, I just couldn't resist the opportunity to respond to a question when properly asked (which I am assuming) without hostility.

Old Pickler,

Having said that, you should know that Islam does not prevent Christians from practising their religion. It is evangelising and prosletysing that is restricted.

And Islam for its part is not an evangelical religion. Muslims historically were not known for carrying the Koran under their arms and lecturing people. Islam cannot be preached to people who don't have a need for it...or at least who thinks they don't have a need for it. The God of Islam (if we could use such term) is not looking for your head and limbs, he is looking for your hearts too. Everything!

Having said that, you should know that Islam does not prevent Christians from practising their religion. It is evangelising and prosletysing that is restricted.

Well that, obviously, is unacceptable to me. Regarding your other post, I'm afraid it is a straightforward case of double standards.

Well, you are entitled to see it that way.

Everyone will determine the public/social good according to their changing/unchanging principles.

Sometimes, there is room for bargaining such as in negotiating permitting a particular commercial farming practice, or the latest non-ecofriendly weather forecast satellite, and so on; As extensive ijtihad is required is such departments.

In other areas, there is little room for bargaining such as areas concerning spiritual and moral matters. These are founded on divine decrees which can be admitted with little ijtihad. Ijtihad is scholastic struggle to arrive at a rationally sound position about some matter.

Also come to think about it Pickler, how can you allow a religion (i.e. Christianity/Judaism) to be propagated when it does not recognise that there is any notion of truth in other religions?

As for Islam, our books talks about the Christians, the Jews, the Star Worshippers, the Zorostrians, .... i.e. viewing them with some dignity.

Here you have Judaism that tell us that they are the chosen people (indeed they were) and that the rest of us, Gentiles, are created from the loins of horses and donkeys. Have you read their books?

And have you read the Koran?

Comapare the two.

how can you allow a religion (i.e. Christianity/Judaism) to be propagated when it does not recognise that there is any notion of truth in other religions?

Simple. Christianity separates Church and State: render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. Thus, though most Christians believe theirs is the only true way to salvation in the next world, this is perfectly compatible with granting freedom to other religions in this world. Christianity must, of course, be freely chosen. Freedom of conscience is a prerequisite to choosing the right way. Enforced virtue is no virtue at all.

Mind you, this separation of church and state only started perhaps in the 15th century. All through the centuries people of all races (particularly muslims) have been sent to their death for not accepting Jesus (peace be upon him) as their personal saviour. This is why I will agree with you that secularism will serve the West better than Christianity.

And you know, Jesus (peace be upon him) never taught such separation, otherwise the Jews wouldn't have plotted to kill him. He was very vocal against the rulers and was consistently pointing out to them their iniquities, so he had a very strong interest in the politics of his time (peace be upon him).

Enforced virtue is no virtue at all.

But where do you start/stop?

For us, enforced belief is what is inappropriate and unacceptable? This is your freedom of conscience.

However, virtues connected with society sometimes have to be enforced otherwise the said freedom of conscience will be destroyed. The air needs to be kept clean for the conscience to roam around freely and being able to come up with original imagination.

Even here in my country, England, I see virtues such as honesty, peacefulness, being enforced in the society.

So, where do you draw the line?

You have the policeman going out to catch the theif, the rapist, the murder, etc. Why shouldn't people be left alone to realise that these things are wrong?

Well, I think it is because the world won't function like that. Certain things need to be tracked and monitored otherwise the heavens and the earth will be rent asunder. The challenge is in definining the boundaries and knowing where to interfere and where not to interfere. This is where divine guidance comes into the equation, because selfish man will always have his own agenda.

And you know, Jesus (peace be upon him) never taught such separation, otherwise the Jews wouldn't have plotted to kill him.

On the contrary. Jesus taught precisely that. As I said above, he said 'Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's'. He did not seek political power, and died persecuted and penniless.

Some things have to be enforced by law, but you cannot legislate against sin.

Isn't stealing a sin, yet we have legislation against stealing.

Murder, rape, terrorism, etc... these are all sins that affect the fabric of the society.

"Some things have to be enforced by law, but you cannot legislate against sin."

Sorry, but I don't understand your point... so there shouldn't be legislation against stealing or murder?

To put the issue of "proselytizing" in perspective, Old Pickler, many non-Muslim countries all over the world either prohibit or at least discourage proselytizing. Just to name a few: Israel, China, Mongolia, Russia, Romania, Greece (Orthodox Christians, in general, resent Roman Catholic and evangelical Protestants doing it), India, Monaco, Sri Lanka (the Buddhists were upset by proselytizing by Christians), Armenia, Nigeria, Nepal, France (they actually used this to ban the hijab in schools, by claiming that it was a form of proselytizing).

Some European countries (like Austria and Belgium) have lists of recognized religions and don't allow activities by others. The Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, are unwelcome in a lot of countries.

OK, I'm tired of looking... I knew about some of these countries, but I didn't realize there were so many countries that restricted this. It might be easier to list the countries that don't mind it...

But this is just so typical... we always hear that "Muslim countries prohibit proselytizing", and we're led to assume that all of the other countries freely allow it. As usual, not true.

Sorry, but I don't understand your point... so there shouldn't be legislation against stealing or murder?

Stealing and murder are crimes. There is a difference between a crime and a sin. Homosexual acts between consenting adults are not now, and should not be, a crime, because they hurt nobody else. 'Marriage' of a 40 year old man to a 13 year old girl is allowed in Islam, but it would be a crime in the West because the 13 year old is not in a position to consent.

So, in Greece, the Orthodox Church 'resents' the Catholic Church? Not quite like Muslim countries, where, on the admission of posters above, preaching is actually illegal and should be. Is it?

"Thou shalt not steal".

Stealing is a sin.

Any crime against humanity is a sin against God.

[Bikhair here]

Old Pickler,

Please girl! "Christianity separates Church and State: render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."

Christians seperated Church and State and rending under Ceaser what is his speaks about paying taxes. How did you guys turn this up on its head? You guys misinterpret your own theology in order to justify your secularism.

"Some things have to be enforced by law, but you cannot legislate against sin."

You dont make a lick of sense sometimes. Isnt your society based on socalled Judeo Christian values, and if that is the case how do you not legislate against sin? Theft, murder, etc, these are all sins but for the sake of your secular soceity they have been turned into illegalities.

"Marriage' of a 40 year old man to a 13 year old girl is allowed in Islam, but it would be a crime in the West because the 13 year old is not in a position to consent."

And this has everything to do with legal and societal opinion and nothing to do with biological or theological opinion or fake. Just because life has been prolong and children can now be children instead of having a life expectancy of 40 doesnt mean that 13 years olds cant consent.

Judeo-christian?! Since when did this weird term become a legitimate word in the English vocabulary? Since the 1967 Arab_Israeli war, which christo-fascist nutter think is part of the prophecy to rapture them up to heaven. Zionist Jews are so desperate for cash and support that they'll gladly play along with armagedonnist charade, even though they get to be fried in the process unless they convert to Christianity. "Judeo-Christian" indeed, what a crock. Anybody got a Talmud handy?

Old Pickler,

hmmm...

Actually, I see the point you are making. I think?

Islam (or Religions) does not legislate against "sins" (I use the word "sins" here as opposed to "punishable social vices"). But this is a VERY loaded statement.

When does a social-vice becomes a sin (against God)?

When does a sin (against God) becomes a social-vice?

Shariah-wise, in Islam, a social-vice is a sin - it could be a small sin, or big sin, it depends; but not necessarily vice-versa. A sin may not necessarily be a social vice, hence cannot be legislated against directly.

If the sin/action was unwitnessed, done secretly, concealed, etc, then there is no chance of it posing a vice to the society (outwardly speaking).

If it is deemed a social-vice, it is immediately a sin - because God does not like people to wreck havoc in the society they live in!

It is perhaps more convenient and easy to say that (religious-derived) legislation is there to discourage "sins" (as opposed to legislate against it). And certainly to prevent "social vices".

If you read your bible well, if we can believe the narrations there, Jesus (peace be upon him) spoke alot about governments and how they represent his "Father's" authority on earth. And he repeatedly asked people to submit to the legislation of their governments. He is encouraging legislation against sins/vices, isn't it? I think this is throughout the first 5 Gospels, I think...

Bikhair- Christianity does separate Church and state. The above quote was not just about paying taxes, it has wider implications. Again: render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's, not 'pay taxes to Caesar'.

13 year olds cannot 'consent' to 'marrage' to 40 year olds. It is rape.

"So, in Greece, the Orthodox Church 'resents' the Catholic Church? Not quite like Muslim countries, where, on the admission of posters above, preaching is actually illegal and should be. Is it?"

Sorry, Old Pickler... wrong again. (Just some friendly advice: you seem to have plenty of computer time, so you could prevent embarassment on these kinds of topics by using Google once in a while.)

In Greece, proselytizing is illegal unless it involves trying to convince someone to become a Greek Orthodox. "...anyone wishing to operate a place of worship must first obtain two permits: one from the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs, and the other from the local bishop of the Greek Orthodox Church." (from Religious Tolerance on Greece)

Greece is pretty well-known for shutting down and prosecuting those who break this law. According to the U.S. State Department, "police regularly detained Mormons and members of Jehovah’s Witnesses (on average once every 2 weeks)".

I'm surprised that you hadn't heard this before, but then we've already noticed that your view of the world is a little skewed. A few years ago, though, there was quite a bit of news coverage when the Greek Orthodox church objected to the government's plan to take religion off of the national ID cards. The church won that battle, I think.

Just because they need a permit does not mean that it is illegal.

Try preaching Christianity in Saudi Arabia. And look what happens to the Copts in 'moderate' Egypt.

Regarding 13 year old girls 'consenting' to marry 40 year old men, don't make me laugh.

And Muslims never, ever take responsiblility for anything. Palestinian Christians are fleeing to Israel, where they can avoid persecution

Christians fleeing into Israel??? I think not actually.

Obviously Old Pickler has not heard of the Jewish- Christian mixed marriage family that was granted asylum in France only last week precisely because of Israeli persecution by virtue of being half-Christian.

If needed, I'm happy to send the link to the story any time.

Don't have the time to go into the details of the case but you can read it for yourself.

"Marriage' of a 40 year old man to a 13 year old girl is allowed in Islam, but it would be a crime in the West because the 13 year old is not in a position to consent."

And this has everything to do with legal and societal opinion and nothing to do with biological or theological opinion or fake.

More likely due to the introduction of compulsory education to 16, in my view...

Bikhair- Christianity does separate Church and state. The above quote was not just about paying taxes, it has wider implications. Again: render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's, not 'pay taxes to Caesar'.

Actually, the teaching you are referring to was directed at people who did not have political power, as was the case with the early Christians, who lived under a Jewish king who was a Roman puppet - an oppressed group within an oppressed group. When the teaching reached Europe and became established, it did so without much of the Jewish legal legacy which did contain political teachings. So European norms were substituted. But it's a myth that Christians (until very recent times) considered their religion to be apolitical. The Roman, Greek, Anglican, Presbyterian and Lutheran churches all either are or have been state churches.

The Roman, Greek, Anglican, Presbyterian and Lutheran churches all either are or have been state churches.

A 'state church' is not the same thing as a theocratic state. The C of E, for example, has political power, for example bisops in the House of Lords. However, it is a separate body from the Queen, from Parliament and so on. Church and State are separate entities, and the existence of a state church in no way argues against that.

Of course, in the past, politics and Christianity were more intertwined, with disastrous results. The Muslim world might learn the lessons learned by Christianity.

I am surprised that Muslims living in the West are not in favour of secularism, in the sense of separation of Church and State. Muslims are beneficiaries of this, as they are able to practise their religion freely. If Christianity controlled the State, perhaps the dead letter blasphemy law might be enforced, as blasphemy laws are enforced in Muslim countries against hapless Christians.

Salaam alaikum guys,

There are some educated Muslims (and some non-Muslims, I think?) here making some very good points that I hadn't thought of so thank you for responding to Old Pickler. Sister Ann, you're a wealth of knowledge. I didn't know that the Greek church had that much control. Thank you everyone for your responses for they were very helpful. :-)

I didn't know that the Greek church had that much control.

However much 'control' the Greek Orthodox Church may be perceived to have, as a member of the EU, Greece must meet certain minimum requirements regarding human rights. These requirements are met by no Islamic country in the World. The closest is Turkey, which still falls far short of being in the same league as Western countries.

When Muslim countries treate women and non-Muslims on anything like an equal footing with male Muslims, then will be the time to start lecturing non-Muslims about freedom of conscience, democracy and human rights.

I note quite a lot of contradiction in the above comments. Ann takes the view of 'Ah, but the West isn't perfect.' Well no, it isn't but this is a bit rich coming from someone who lives in a country that only gave women the vote last year. Other posters say that it would be quite wrong for Christians to have the same freedom to prosletyze as Muslims, because Islam is right. Which is it, then? Are Muslims right to deny Christians the freedoms that they expect? Or not?

How can I make this any clearer? Proselytizing is illegal in Greece except when it's done by Greek Orthodox.

It's illegal in a lot of other places, too. And many countries limit approved religions to a few that are officially recognized.

I'm just curious... do you welcome Jehovah's Witnesses who knock on your door and try to get inside to try to convert you?

I think George makes a good point. Where girls don't go to school, it's normal for them to marry after they reach puberty. I know we've had this same discussion on this blog before, so I don't want to rehash it. But young women waiting to marry for years after puberty is something unique to this day and age (and even now, it's not true everywhere).

Also, in traditional Islamic (and other)societies, brides aren't isolated in their own homes. They live with an extended family, and the husband's family is often related to their family anyway. So they're moving in with people that their families know and approve of, and with whom they're comfortable.

I'm just curious... do you welcome Jehovah's Witnesses who knock on your door and try to get inside to try to convert you? .

They are entitled to ask. I've argued with them before. They are not trying to force anyone to convert.

Whatever you say about the Greek Orthodox Church, it does not have the power over people's lives that Islam has, where Islam regulates all aspects of a person's life. In Iran, Saudi Arabia, women can be beaten for showing too much ankle.

As a member of the EU - do a bit of googling yourself - there are minimum standards regarding liberty of conscience that countries have to meet. No Muslim country comes close.

Regarding marriage - yes, education has a lot to do with it. Education in the West is far ahead of that in Muslim countries.

One final point I'd like to make - it's late - is to thank Yusuf for allowing my comments here, even though they are very much against the prevailing thinking.

If nothing else, it has made a dent in the stereotype about Muslims not allowing debate or criticism, which I am now realising is not the case.

George Carty,

"More likely due to the introduction of compulsory education to 16, in my view..."

... are, by the way, always welcomed and unique.

Old prickler really suffers from delusions of granduer. The superiority complex of this guttersnipe is nothing but the rantings of euro-fascist mantra. I guess for a people who are so mentally and morally diseased they have nothing better than to do. Its a good thing that the european population is declining, being replaced by their betters.

Old pickler,

After spending so much time here, you are still unable to separate Islam from Muslim ineptitudes. Women oppression, etc takes place everywhere, amongst muslim, christians, hindus, jews, but not in Islam. Do you get it?

anonymous,

You are a fountain of knowledge Ma sha Allah.

One question tho': Why do you keep reffering to Old Pickler as a Christian when all the evidence (his posts)points to him being a Zionist Jew?

Greece has continued to ignore the views of the EU human rights bodies and courts on this issue. Look it up.

I certainly do believe is the West is not perfect. (That's an understatement.) And neither are any of the countries that are considered Muslim, because none of them is actually ruled Islamically. You talk about the treatment of the Copts (which I'm sure you also know little about), but do you know how many Muslims are being tortured in Egyptian prisons? Do you know that the most popular organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, is outlawed? Do you know that Egyptian men are under suspicion if they so much as grow a beard? It's not a matter of an Islamic society where Muslims treat Christians as "dhimmis"; it's a corrupt government - propped up by the U.S. - where the President has the job for life, despite the fake elections they have from time to time. (Until this year, there was only one candidate.) And now he's trying to set up his son to take over.

But my main goal here is to correct the false statements that you keep making. For one thing, please stop telling us what it's like in Saudi Arabia, until you've been there. How many Iranian or Saudi women do you know who have been beaten for showing their ankle? Really, it's so ridiculous! I'm sure I've said this before, so I apologize for repeating myself, but I've visited Saudi many times. In the Eastern province areas around Dammam/Dhahran/Al-Khobar, it wasn't unusual to see foreign women with their hair uncovered, wearing jeans. There is no national law in Saudi that women have to be covered from head to toe.

This is getting tired... you state things as fact that are completely false, which I attribute to pure ignorance, but then when your statements are corrected, you start twisting things...

I find the Zionists'agenda of projecting onto Muslims things that they (Zionists) actually believe in and Muslims don't to be quite hilarious at times: Consider the notion of double-speak, something which I am sure Old Pickler, being a Zionist Jew, is more than familiar with. Jonathan Sacks, the chief rabi in England writes a book in which he openly praises his people for having developed two kinds of "languages": one for Jews and one for non-Jews. Can anyone imagine a Muslim leader saying this even as a joke, let alone writing about it in a book? Not in a million years, and the reason is simple: it is not something that exists in Islam. Muslims are required to tell the truth at all times, no double-speak is allowed. And yet, our leaders are accused of it, this is what the John Wayne panorama programme tried to do to the Islamic Foundation.

Old Pickler must also be familiar with the Talmudic Law which states: there must be two laws, one for Jews, and another for inferior non-Jews. How very civilised.

One question tho': Why do you keep reffering to Old Pickler as a Christian when all the evidence (his posts)points to him being a Zionist Jew?

Hahaha! I'm not a 'him', I'm a 'her'. That's for starters.

Ann, you know as well as I do how brutal the religious police are in both Iran and Saudi Arabia. And can you deny that people are stoned to death in these countries?

Muslim Brotherhood outlawed? So it should be. All terrorist organisations should be outlawed.

DrM, the vacuity of your arguments is matched only by the poverty of your vocabulary.

Old Pickler must also be familiar with the Talmudic Law which states: there must be two laws, one for Jews, and another for inferior non-Jews. How very civilised.

No, sorry, Old Picklovitz/Pickelstein is a putz and a schlemiel and doesn't know that one.

Do you realise how silly you sound mit da stereotypes?

OP said

Do you realise how silly you sound mit da stereotypes?

That's quite rich coming from you...I want to laugh but can't 'cos I feel a bit weak today and want to conserve my energy.

Alhamdulillah for people like you. If only you realised how the ridiculous, punch-in-your-face type of untruths told by you and your kind about the prestine religion of Islam and Muslims generate first fear and then curiosity among non-Muslims causing thousands of people, MOST OF THEM WOMEN to discover Islam every year. So Alhamdulillah for your work. And here's the proof:

http://www.islamicity.com/m/news_frame.asp?Frame=1&referenceID=23111

I pray that Allah (God), The Most Gracious, Most Merciful guides you. Amen.

My God is already guiding me, thank you very much. His Son is, anyway.

Anyone who disagrees with a Muslim must be a 'Zionist Jew'.

Enough kvetching already.

...I was talking about the number of women in the West that are converting to Islam. I see you've chosen to ignore that.

How do you feel about it? To what do you attribute this phenomenon?

Don't you ever wonder that if all the bad things you say about Islam and especially its treatment of women were true, then women in the West wouldn't touch it at all? I honestly do not wish to start a meaninless fight with you...I am only trying to find out your views on the matter. Any chance we could talk about your beliefs for a change? Why do you believe Jesus (peace be upon him) is the Son of God? I'm interested to know that's all.

Old Pickler,

Is your God also guiding Joseph Kony, terrorist Christo-Fascist extraordinaire, a savage who has just ordered the murders of three aid workers in Uganda? Is he imbued with the Holy Spirit? If not, why not? All the atrocities he and his band of Christian Terrorists are committing are to be found in the Bible as well! He is fighting to establish Biblical rule in Uganda, wouldn't you call him a Christo-Fascist?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4383150.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3019838.stm

Old Pickler,

"Ann, you know as well as I do how brutal the religious police are in both Iran and Saudi Arabia. And can you deny that people are stoned to death in these countries?"

People arent stoned to death in Saudi Arabia because of the religious police.People are stoned to death in Saudi Arabia when it has been proven that they have commited adultery. This can take place with or without the religious police. What is a religious police in a religious state anyway?

Robert Spencer tries to carefully hide his background. If you look at his work, its like he appeared out of nowhere in 2002.

His family were orthodox christians from the middle east. His cristian "faith" was so strong that he first abandoned the his own church when some Evangelicals got hold of him in college. Then he talked to an Episcopal Preist who converted him to that church where he spent a year doing social work. Then some Catholics got ahold of him and converted him to Roman Catholic. Four churches in four years of college. He wrote his masters thesis about why the Catholic Church is the only true church and why Orthodox & Episcopal Churches are not real churches.

This is a guy whose christianity is so weak that he has had three or four conversions in his life already. And thinking about it, the guy is so religiously weak that he probably does need to fear being converted to Islam.