Today I was having a quick skim through a 120-page PDF booklet released by the University of Melbourne’s Centre of Excellence for Islamic Studies entitled "Learning From One Another: Bringing Muslim Perspectives into Australian Schools." Link here: http://www.islammonitor.org/uploads/docs/LFOA.pdf I got to near the last section, "Misconceptions and stereotypes" and here's an excerpt from one of the so called "misconceptions" Muslims have to face. ... Islam condones terrorism and the killing of innocents Islam only allows a just war, often in self-defence. Any offensive should be for the greater good. Islam absolutely prohibits the killing of non-combatants, including women, children and the elderly. Muslims who commit acts of terror believe that the ‘ends justify the means’. However, in traditional Islamic law, both the objectives and the means must be in accordance with Islamic principles. ... It's focusing on Islamic wars of rule here, but why do people never go into the fact that according to Sharia law Islam orders the deaths of: Homosexuals Apostates Blasphemers Adulterers Rapists I've never heard anyone defend the KKK by saying "The KKK is peaceful and prohibits the killing of innocents. They kill black people but black people are inherently guilty so it is OK." or "The Nazis were peaceful and prohibited the killing of innocents. They killed millions of people including Jews, Poles, Slavs, Gypsies, handicapped people, homosexuals and many more. Those groups were all guilty so it is fine that they were killed." So why do people never question this line used by people defending Islam?
That's what has always puzzled me about muslims. If killing people, having sex with children and mutilating babies with razor blades is anti-islamic why do they spend so much time telling us and so little time telling those actually doing it? Surely they would want to stop it, wouldn't they? Or do they not want to stop it and instead just want to distance their religion from practices they actually fully support?
What does these classes of people have got to do with the line "Islam condones terrorism and the killing of innocents"? Since the context is about war and combatants, why are you erecting a straw man argument of something unrelated to the context at all?
Islam allows the killing of homosexuals - ergo, the killing of innocents - by being homosexual one isn't harming ANYONE. A homosexual rapist, sure - a homosexual murderer, yup - but not just by being something other than straight. How is this unrelated? Or are homosexuals not innocent in your mind? What about porn peddlers? Are they innocent? I'm sad this came out of my country. Sigh.
It looks like the ragheads found nineteen civilians, six members of parliament, five security personnel and two hotel workers "not innocent" in a Mogadishu hotel yesterday. But I guess this is what we've come to expect from the "Religion of Propaganda."
Will, you totally missed what happened there. They weren't innocent because they weren't good enough Muslims. Or didn't have enough wives. Or hadn't bombed enough buildings. You see? They were in fact terribly flawed individuals!