abu_rashid wrote on Aug 31
st, 2009 at 10:37pm:
Quote:I addressed your main point
You clearly have a different understanding of the term "addressed" than I do.
Quote:They remained, in their own minds and own words, Muslims
And here is the major flaw in your argument. Nowhere have I claimed they're not Muslims. A Muslim doesn't cease being a Muslim because he commits a crime. Actions do not take one outside of the fold of Islam. But it's quite clear their behaviour doesn't emanate from the Islamic viewpoint of life, which is that drinking and illicit sexual acts are crimes. Whilst in Western culture, these things are not crimes. So the only crime they commit in the West, is not having consent to do it.
So according to Islam, they've committed a capital offense, whilst according to the West, they're just a coupla rowdy lads, but since they're Muslims, we'll throw away the key. If the Skaf brothers were Aussies, it's quite clear they wouldn't have gotten anywhere near the sentence they did. In fact I think only the Anita Cobby gang rapist murderers got a similar kind of sentence... Remember those good little Christian boys who mutilated and tortured that poor girl to death, whilst repeatedly raping her (3 brothers, along with others, one of whose name was John, and another Michael, ie. Biblical names, and a name of an Apostle no less!!).
Quote:that they act as Muslims.
As I've clearly pointed out to you, their acts are more Western style activities, than Islamic style activities. Their actions are completely alien to Islam, and as with the case from England you mentioned, his family disowned him, because of the despicable unIslamic character of his actions.
Yet whilst the extent (and lack of consent) of their actions are outlawed in the West, the underlying actions of drinking and illicit sex are not.
Quote:like the Skaf gand boasted to their victims about 'Leb-style'
Leb != Muslim.
Leb can be Muslim, Christian, Druze, Jew, Communist, Secularist, Atheist whatever you like. So I think comparing "Leb style" to "Vatican style" just highlights the desperation in your argument.
These guys have not given up their Muslim identities. Some of them vocalised it while committing the crime, others brought it up as an excuse during their trials. Whatever the orthodox view of these crimes is (and I do not for a moment argue that rape is permitted
within Muslim communities) these criminals identify themselves as muslims. Some use Islam as their excuse or as their justification. Not a few, like the Khan brothers, insist on blaming thei non-muslim victims for not ccnforming to their Mulism perception of correct behavior. Scandinavia, England, France, Germany are full of Mulsim rapists who routinely attack their victims in court as being tempters and excuse their own behaviour as if they were the injured, wronged party. And they draw these ideas from Islamic teachings which excuse the Muslim cats and blame the uncovered infidel meat.
Now, in so far as they are Muslims in their own heards, you are responsible for them. You are not responsible for their acts. But you, as a Muslim, share the blame for their ideas which excuse them as Muslims, justify them as Muslims, and on occasion send them forth as Muslims.
You ccould do much worse than putting your jihadi effiorts into civilising these straying Muslims. I will put my efforts into civilising straying secular citizens.
Leb style - are you saying that Mohammed and Bilal all of a sudden had a multicultuiral, western nationalistic view of themselves where Christian, Druze. Jew and Communist are all fused into one, non-specific, non-muslim rainbow identity of 'Leb'? I mean, what motivates you for trying on such patent nonsense. You know it, I know it that they did and do identify as Muslims. Not Druze, not Jew, not Wacko Jacko rainbow.
What they think of as thei identity is not a flaw in my argument but the jist of it. And as your example of the horrific Cobby case illustrates, in a western court the cultural or religiouss backgrounds of the perpetrators ccounts for nothing. And get this - nobody is making slippery excuses for Jamison and the Murphy brothers, or whatever their names are. Yet you drag it all into the argument.
If the Muslims stray, it is your respnsibility. If they do good, I will credit you as well.