Islamic protest march planned for Wootton Basset

Gaidin109 said:
[..]
Christianity does, Leviticus it states " "And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." now we do not take that to its literal meaning in christianity do we, why should we expect Muslims to within their religion.

Corinthians states "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. " which is pretty pervasive in meaning. there are many more. Again its about interpretation. With a more modern view of each religion this is apparent.
Click to expand...

You're quoting two inaccurate translations from the Jewish section of the Christian bible, which can be ignored by Christians in a way consistent with their own religion(*). Your point is therefore much weaker than it might at first seem.

This, for example, is the literal meaning of the thing forbidden verse you quote from Leviticus:

And with a man you shall not lay lyings of a woman.

It isn't an abomination, either. That translation is also wrong. It does carry the death penalty though, like so many other things in the OT. It's also in a section about other religions, which has led some people to translate it as forbidding the ritual sex that occured in some temples in some religions in the early days of Judaism (bearing in mind that this passage is Jewish, not Christian). Others translate it as forbidding men to have sex with each other in a woman's bed, which isn't as silly as it sounds today. There's a lot in the OT about what can be done where.

You'd be quite hard pressed nowadays to find Christians advocating death for homosexual men. There's the Westboro Baptist Church, but they're so vile that they've been formally disowned by other churches.

It's not the same situation.


* There is a lot of scope for Christian debate on what to do with the essentially Jewish Old Testament, but my point is that it is internally consistent within Christianity to consider it superseded by the New Testament.
 
Tefal said:
Were as the pope lying about the effectiveness of condoms against HIV to uneducated Africans has lead to no deaths whatsoever...


Religion really works a small level (local church doing community work for example) but fails massively once it becomes a large organization.
Click to expand...

I think the issue is power more than size (although the two are usually linked). A large but powerless religion wouldn't be anywhere near as harmful and a small but powerful one could be very harmful.

There are variations between religions, too, although I'm inclined to think that sufficient power would corrupt all of them. Look at Christianity, a religion which tells its followers to love everyone, explicitly including their enemies. Add power and it became a tyranny awash in hatred, blood and death.
 
Angilion said:
You're quoting two inaccurate translations from the Jewish section of the Christian bible, which can be ignored by Christians in a way consistent with their own religion(*). Your point is therefore much weaker than it might at first seem.

This, for example, is the literal meaning of the thing forbidden verse you quote from Leviticus:

And with a man you shall not lay lyings of a woman.

It isn't an abomination, either. That translation is also wrong. It does carry the death penalty though, like so many other things in the OT. It's also in a section about other religions, which has led some people to translate it as forbidding the ritual sex that occured in some temples in some religions in the early days of Judaism (bearing in mind that this passage is Jewish, not Christian). Others translate it as forbidding men to have sex with each other in a woman's bed, which isn't as silly as it sounds today. There's a lot in the OT about what can be done where.

You'd be quite hard pressed nowadays to find Christians advocating death for homosexual men. There's the Westboro Baptist Church, but they're so vile that they've been formally disowned by other churches.

It's not the same situation.


* There is a lot of scope for Christian debate on what to do with the essentially Jewish Old Testament, but my point is that it is internally consistent within Christianity to consider it superseded by the New Testament.
Click to expand...


There is more than one occasion in more than one book where such things are stated. But the example was just to highlight that The Bible can be Mis-Interpreted as easily as the Quran,
Your translation is incorrect however . I'm not sure where you get the translation "And with a man you shall not lay lyings of a woman." from?

The King James Bible states: Leviticus 20:13

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

The latest Translation in the World English Bible:

"'If a man lies with a male, as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

these are the latest translations of each version, so are not inaccurate.

Its plainly advocating the death penalty for Homosexuality. I am not saying that modern christians follow the literal meaning of the Bible, just that it can conceivably be interpreted in an extreme fashion as can the Quran. And not so hard pressed if there is the Westboro Baptist Church, which as you say has been denounced by moderate Christian churches, as Islam4uk has been by the moderate Muslim council of Britain which represents British Islam. There are many Chritian and Neo-Nazi and far-right groups who advocate death for Homosexuals. We are talking of Moderate Christians who do not, As Moderate Muslims do not.

I must also point out that these are not my beliefs either, I do not advocate murder or hatred for any reason before you accuse me of such instead of admitting your mistake.

Read this to get a better understanding of the differences within Islam, not unlike other major religions.

http://www.islamfortoday.com/fundamnetalism.htm
 
Last edited:
BNP to block Islam4UK March

The three highest publicly elected British National Party officials, GLA member Richard Barnbrook and MEPs Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons, have vowed to physically block the road in Wootton Bassett should the authorities permit the threatened Islamist march in that town proceed.

In an official statement, the BNP announced that it would “defend Wootton Bassett and the memory of our fallen heroes. Nick Griffin MEP, Andrew Brons MEP and Richard Barnbrook AM will block the path of the Muslim fanatics.”

The statement said that the party had warned the authorities after the Luton incident that unless militant Islamism was curbed in Britain, the problem would grow worse.

“Do you remember the outrageous scenes in Luton when our returning soldiers were abused and spat on by fanatical ‘British’ Muslims?,” the statement said.

“The British National Party stated then that this was only the beginning of such vile displays as militant Islam flexes its muscles on our streets.

“We warned the authorities that unless the Government took firm action against these evil haters of all things British, they would become more provocative.

“Well, now as predicted, it’s happened. It has just been announced that the organization ISLAM4UK, (a platform for the fanatical Al Muhajiroun group) led by Mr. Anjem Choudary and a mob of at least 500 Islamic extremists plan to defile the memory of our dead soldiers by marching their hatred through Wootton Basset.

“This is the town through which the flag-draped coffins of our fallen servicemen and women are brought home. It is where families go to pay their respects to our glorious dead as they make the solemn journey to their final resting place. The thought of 500 hateful Islamists desecrating this place and spitting in the face of every true British citizen and the grief-stricken relatives of the dead is truly beyond the pale.

“It must be stopped! We will not have this! They shall not pass!

“The British National Party is under increasing pressure to bring thousands of our angry members onto the streets to stop this outrage.

“However, we are mindful of the sensitive nature and dignity of Wooton Basset and do not wish to add to the problems now faced by the good people of that town, or the families of our fallen soldiers.

“With this in mind, the British National Party WILL take a stand in defence of our heroes by having our two MEPs and our London assembly member use their own bodies to physically block the street and any attempt by Muslim fanatics to insult the memory of our fallen soldiers .

“We appeal to the authorities to do the right thing and arrest these traitorous Muslim fanatics. We are at war. Our men and women are being killed on a daily basis and we are expected to put up with this gross outrage and insult to the families of the fallen. Make no mistake, we are earnest on this issue.

“If the authorities lack the courage and moral fibre to confront this disgusting Muslim march of hate, we believe that the presence of our three highest-profile elected politicians in a peaceful yet highly symbolic defiance of the Muslim mob, will force the government to ban this vile march.

“If they do not, the PR consequences for them and public support for us will be immeasurable,” the BNP statement concluded.
Click to expand...
lol is all I have to say. Both of these facist parties should be banned tbh. http://bnp.org.uk/2010/01/bnp-leaders-vow-to-physically-block-islamist-wootton-bassett-march/
 
Maybe they could have a fight and wipe eachother out.

I completely disagree with this march, but I also dont support the BNP for one second. They are both as bad as eachother.
 
“If they do not, the PR consequences for them and public support for us will be immeasurable,” the BNP statement concluded.
Click to expand...

So why do you want them to do anything?
 
The BNP threatening to turn up with 1000s of supporters will make the police stop the Islam4UK protest march.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom