Whats sad is if you do even a gogole search, there are thousands of Imans and Moslems who speak out against the terrorists, ISIL, and attacks committed in the name of Islam

as an example http://thinkprogress.org/world/2016/0...

overall : https://www.google.com/search?q=islam...

Why would most atheists go through the B.S. by pronouncing their lack of religion. To at least a third to a half of the persons in this country it would automatically mean that they were not, nor could they ever be, a good person. Radical Muslims, on the other hand only seem to proclaim their views while in the midst of slaughtering others. So...how will you ever know?

Error in logic by generalization with a small sampling... you are quoting an ex-PLO propogandist (terrorist therfor former radical)?

https://www.quora.com/Sharia-law-stat...

Sharia law is not forced upon anyone : https://www.quora.com/What-do-Muslims...

http://www.virtualmosque.com/islam-st...

I believe in the Golden Rule. If a Muslim is willing to let me live the way I do, I'm willing to let him alone as well. The problem is that most Muslims, unfortunately, aren't willing to live and let live: https://youtu.be/g7TAAw3oQvg. That's a huge problem IMHO.

"tolerance of the Muslim religion might increase when more Muslims (or anyone) are explicit in their acceptance that initiation of the use of physical force is always wrong."

Well said indeed.

Bwahaha! As Wednesday Addams said in the sequel after trashing a once respectable summer camp, "My work here is done."

Must...

poke...

out...

mind's...

eye...

Sure, they can believe that the Constitution is the law of the land now, but ask them which they prefer and they will say Sharia every time. Sharia dictates corporal punishment for adultery, homosexuality, theft, marital disputes, appropriate attire, etc. and all according to a judicial system run by religious personnel - a stark contrast to the secular court system under the Constitution with elected judges, a jury of peers, and a First Amendment right to speech and belief. I simply state the facts: the two are mutually exclusive.

BTW, I've talked to Muslims, including an ex-PLO propagandist. He was very honest in what the Qu'ran says and it's compatibility with Western laws and thought. I also spoke with an Iranian family who was desperately trying to leave - even twenty years ago. The wife had put makeup on and two boys - not even teenagers - slashed her face with razor blades held between their knuckles. Were those boys punished? No. They were applauded.

Want a more recent example? Not more than 90 miles from my home a seven-year-old and ten-year-old stripped a mentally handicapped five-year-old girl naked in a laundry room and peed all over her while a fourteen-year-old videotaped the entire thing. All three perpetrators were Muslim refugees. And with kids that young doing those things, you know what is being taught certainly isn't respect for Constitutional authority.

Then it would be appropriate to draw attention to the fact that an atheist, Buddhist, Hindu, etc. would receive the same protection under US Law as a follower of the Abrahamic religions. What allows such practice to occur without conflict? According to the right wing, it is that these religions follow Christian or Abrahamic law. According to the left wing, it is that these religions represent distinct but equal cultures and not supernaturalism. According to Libertarians, it is the non-aggression principle. According to the Objectivists, it is the refusal to initiate the use of physical force. According to your statements above, which attempt to draw a clear line between radical and non-radical Muslims, and this Objectivist principle, it would be most probable that tolerance of the Muslim religion might increase when more Muslims (or anyone) are explicit in their acceptance that initiation of the use of physical force is always wrong.

It doesn't.

I do think the media favors just what makes them money; not truth. I look at what they are doing to Trump constantly, while letting Hillary off the hook on everthing she has done. Personally I know only one muslim, and he seems ok to me. It does bother me that I dont hear more of the muslims coming out against terror. Perhaps they need to get together and take out ads to present their case better.

No Islamic ebliever believe that all followers of Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity etc) are followers of the same God (alalh) therefor it is not exclusive to Muslims

Despite the belief by the religious, 'atheist' just means without a belief in god. Then, since it is just a lack of belief where there is no positive belief to be countered, the idea of 'atheism' which is a hypothesis as to the non-existence of a nothing is brought up which would be irrational except that many positive statements are made by religions which believe in the existence of various gods so that some atheists find it necessary to counter those positive statements. I do not bother with that but do bother with the nonsense you spout about some kind of practice of an atheist's non-religion. Most atheists probably do not give their non-god related beliefs much thought until some theist knocks on the door to introduce you to Jesus whom somehow you have never heard of before. Then you are put on the spot by those others who make sure you know that they are somehow married to Christ. Why is it so important to try to convert an atheist? I just got a hand written letter from a woman who said she did not find me at home and wants to introduce me to Jesus. The last Jehovah Witness, who stopped by twice, after some discussion and when he was leaving, I told him I like talking to him. That must have been too much for him, he has never returned.

I am not sure if it is a translation difference, but in the standard English, it does not make sense to say a religion can be offended. A person can be offended due to a perceived (real or unreal) threat to his or her beliefs about religion, but does it offend religion when an atheist or pagan denies it? In light of this, therefore, I do not believe a religion as such can be offended. The one foreseeable assumption that makes it possible to offend a religion is if members of that religion have an exclusive relationship with God. Do Muslims believe this?

I never had a problem being around an atheist as long as the same respect I showed him was returned.

Since raisins are dried up grapes, imagine what must wait in a martyred Muslim's bed on his first night in a most peculiar paradise.

Thank you very much for providing that video.

Never read it.
Must be radical Muslim propaganda.
Old dino had been hearing and reading about those silly 72 virgins for years and years and years.

Can you point out where in the Koran it states 72 virgins?
http://www.justislam.co.uk/product.ph...

AND folowers of Islam believe the Constitution is the LAW of the United States ... understand what Sharia is and is not before going ballistic:
https://www.quora.com/What-do-educate...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...

And I would agree that the radical Islamists should be treated that way, because that is what they believe ... ALL of Islam should not be treated the same way

It is against the koran to kill anyone except in self defense ... "to kill one human is to kill all of humanity" ... what is scary is the lack of press coverage ofthe outrage within the Islamic community over the highjacking of the religion by the nut cases. The outrage is there but just quickly covered and glossed over.

I did what you are talking about, I looked at both sides with open eyes and understood the oftquoted religionofpeace site and others are ridiculous hatemongers. Wait until they accuse factual statements about ISlam and the Koran to be Taqiyya (another term the hatemongers have bastardized lol.)

Thanks. Inspired by Ian Anderson on the Aqualung album "Up to Me" and "Wind Up". My little brother and I had similar experiences. He actually more than me. He was/is very direct about this.

I wish! . atheists deserve the respect afforded to the
religious, per our constitution. . may it come true! -- j
.