The state protection of Islam is a blatant violation of the separation of religion and state.


It is notable for its association with the sealing of Magna Carta
I maintain that the fundamental relationship is based on the hatred and enmity of muslims towards non-mulims as Koran 60:4 dictates.
manfred wrote:1 to 5 describe demonstrable facts. So we all must deny facts?
you can interpret those mentioned punishments as the less punishment as long its can stops those crime.
QS. 5:32. whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely
Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.
Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,
QS. 24:2. The [unmarried] woman or [unmarried] man found guilty of sexual intercourse - lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day.
manfred wrote:"less" of a punishment? Do tell that to someone who had his hand and foot cut off.
manfred wrote:This is the whole verse :
manfred wrote:And lashing someone in public is "liberal" to you?
sum wrote:Hello Garudaman
There have been over 33,000 known jihad attacks in many different countries.
Do you condemn them all or perhaps just some or perhaps none at all?
These attacks are the reason why there is rapidly increasing Islamorealism.
sum
He dismisses "Islamophobia" for what it is - political coinage.No, Islamophobia is not the new anti‑Semitism
Brendan O’Neill
Editor
It is historically illiterate to compare criticism of Islam with hatred of Jews.
Anti-Muslim prejudice unquestionably exists, but Islamophobia is an invention. Don’t take my word for it. Take the word of the Runnymede Trust, one of Britain’s leading race-equality think-tanks. It openly boasts that it is ‘credited with coining the term Islamophobia… in 1997’. And what does this term Islamophobia mean? It doesn’t mean racial hatred. Runnymede’s definition of Islamophobia, which has been adopted by the Metropolitan Police, includes any suggestion that Islam is ‘inferior to the West’, and even the belief that Islam is sexist. If you think Islam is ‘unresponsive to change’, you are Islamophobic. And, get this, if you ‘reject out of hand’ ‘criticisms of the West made by Islam’, you’re an Islamophobe. So even to ridicule Islam’s view of the West is apparently to be infected with the ‘cancer’ of this so-called racism.
These are criticisms of religion. In a free society they ought to be entirely legitimate views, subject to no punishment whatsoever. And yet the police actually say in their internal documents that the ideas listed above count as ‘Islamophobia’. That is chilling. Anti-Muslim prejudice is out there, yes. But ‘Islamophobia’ is an elite invention, a top-down conceit, designed to chill open discussion about religion and values and to protect one particular religion from blasphemy.
sum wrote:Hello Garudaman
When they shout Allahu-Akbar while committing the atrocity then I would claim that it is jihad.
Do you agree and so condemn these atrocities?
sum
Police Defend Thousands of Hours Spent Investigating ‘Hate Incidents’ Amidst Crime Epidemic
Police across 30 forces have wasted thousands of hours reviewing 11,236 ‘hate incidents’, figures have revealed, while crime and violence surge in Britain and the vast majority of robberies go unsolved.
The National Police Chiefs’ Council defended the protocol as “vital” after the 2015-16 figures were revealed, which included such ‘hate incidents’ – acts too trivial to be classed as crimes – as people complaining of barking dogs and of receiving “racist looks” from strangers.
Since the government’s release of an action plan in which success is defined as maximising the number of ‘hate’ complaints, police have proactively solicited reports of such incidents from the public and are required to record and investigate each one by sending an officer or making telephone calls.
According to the Daily Mail, which notes that even just 15 minutes spent looking into each incident would have taken up 3,750 hours of officers’ time, the reports included people offended by newspaper cartoons and a student claiming to have been refused drinks in a bar due to alleged racism.
Such incidents are upgraded to a ‘hate crime’ if a law is found to be broken.
A “non-conforming-gender-specific lesbian” reported being the victim of a so-called hate incident when a man stood “intimidatingly” close to her wheelchair, while another complainant alleged the barking of a man’s dog was “racist”.
One in 20 of the reported incidents related to posts made on social media, the Mail reports, with one case involving a woman informing police that someone on Facebook had told her she bore a physical resemblance to the character of Peter Griffin from the cartoon Family Guy.
A National Police Chiefs’ Council spokesman said: “By recording and reviewing reports of hate incidents, police forces play a vital role in helping prevent hate crime.
“Officers can often use these reports as an indication of where and when tensions could escalate into violence. Victims and those feeling vulnerable should report any incident of hate crime to the police.”
Labour-controlled Hackney council is sending 'Enforcement Officers' to mosques to encourage them to report "hate crimes".
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests