Whereas you only seek out the bad stuff because you have a preconceived notion in your noggin to satisfy your Islamophobic bigotry.  None of the things you just quoted negate the points the Wikipedia article said.   Sometimes it better to go to a general article which provides a broad overview of a topic than it is to seek out specific examples.  It allows you to understand the concept, rather than just focus on examples.   Having an open mind also helps.  However, we know in your case that isn't possible.   

Erudite, honest Danish intellectuals, and academics, spanning 176 years, from Søren Kierkegaard, to, at present, Lars Hedegaard and Tina Magaard, have openly expressed forthright truths about Islam. It is only now, in our sad era, that the free expression of such honest wisdom has been threatened by the mutually abetting totalitarian scourges of cultural relativism, and Islamic supremacism.
http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2013/02/25/kierkegaard-hedegaard-magaard-and-is...

Karnal wrote on Sep 14^th, 2014 at 2:45pm:


No.

[quote]Here is a list of the most important of those laws, from Sharia for Dummies:
[...]
•It is obligatory to obey the commands of the Caliph, even if he is unjust.

•A Muslim who leaves Islam must be killed immediately.

•A Muslim will be forgiven for murder of (1) an apostate;  (2) an adulterer;  (3) a highway robber.

•A Muslim will not get the death penalty if he kills a non-Muslim.

Does Islam really allow the killing of innocent unbelievers?

This is one misunderstanding that keeps rising up against Islam.   Islam does not in anyway allow for the killing of any innocent soul.  I have gathered some of the Noble Verses that I am aware of that deal directly with war and peace to shed some light upon my readers.

Noble Verses that order the killing of the enemies:

Let us look at Noble Verses 9:28-29 "O ye believe! Truly the pagans are unclear; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque.  And if ye fear povery, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, For Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the last day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, from among the people of the book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Let us look at Noble Verse 9:5 "Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."

As we clearly see in the above Noble Verses, the laws of killing the unbelievers or the pagans were for particular and specific times, and not for all times and all places.  Notice the quotes "...after this year..." and "...when the sacred months have passed...".

It is important to know that when Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him started preaching Islam, he had to deal with 360 Arab pagan tribes at first, and he and his followers had to go through a lot of battles that were imposed upon them by the pagans who were threatened by the new System and Wonderful Religion of Islam.

•Sharia dictates death by stoning, beheading, amputation of limbs, flogging and other forms of cruel and unusual punishments even for crimes of sin such as adultery.

•Non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims and must comply to Sharia if they are to remain safe. They are forbidden to marry Muslim women, publicly display wine or pork, recite their scriptures or openly celebrate their religious holidays or funerals. They are forbidden from building new churches or building them higher than mosques. They may not enter a mosque without permission.

•It is a crime for a non-Muslim to sell weapons to someone who will use them against Muslims. Non-Muslims cannot curse a Muslim, say anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam, or expose the weak points of Muslims.

[quote]Here is a list of the most important of those laws, from Sharia for Dummies:
[...]
•The testimony of a woman in court is half the value of a man.

•A woman loses custody if she remarries.

•To prove rape, a woman must have four male witnesses.

•A Muslim woman must cover every inch of her body, which is considered Awrah — a sexual organ. Some schools of Sharia allow the face to be exposed, others don’t.

•A Muslim man is forgiven if he kills his wife caught in the act of adultery.

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 14^th, 2014 at 6:45pm:


So what is the arabic word for rape, is it zina which means unlawful intercourse or does that word apply to adultery and rape?

Yes the quote is right and as usual you are wrong, if the man does not confess to rape the woman needs 4 male witnesses to prove she has been raped.

Evidence Required

Obviously, it would be a horrible injustice for an innocent man to be falsely accused of a capital crime such as rape. To safeguard the rights of the accused, the crime must be proven with evidence in court. There have been various historical interpretations of Islamic law, but the most common legal practice is that the crime of rape may be proven by:

    Witness testimony - The testimony of four witnesses to the act itself is traditionally the requirement to prove adultery under Islamic law. Most Islamic scholars, however, recognize that adultery is voluntary while rape is coerced. Thus they have moved beyond requiring this evidence alone to prove sexual assault.
    Confession - The full and complete confession of the perpetrator is accepted as evidence under Islamic law.
    Physical evidence - Even in early Islamic history, many Islamic jurists accepted physical evidence to prove a woman's lack of consent. As forensic science becomes more adept at providing physical evidence of sexual assault, such evidence is more commonly accepted.

These strict evidence requirements are needed for rape to be considered a capital offense . If the sexual assault cannot be proven to such a degree, Islamic courts may have discretion to find the man guilty but order a less severe punishment, such as jail time or monetary fines. According to several classical interpretations of Islam, the victim is entitled to monetary compensation for her loss as well, in addition to the state asserting its right to prosecute.

    confession
    witness
    Qusameh (قسامه)
    oath
    Certainty of judge
[...]
Reference of law

According to the no. 5 one way of certainty of judge is the certificate of Iranian Legal Medicine Organization.

Being raped can be proved for judge by any method that can ensure the judge. in such cases the raped woman can ask for legal certificate from the local office of Iranian Legal Medicine Organization and use it at court. this organization makes different tests and investigations from cloths and body of woman and issues the official assessment. this is the usual procedure in such cases in Iran.

The four witnesses mentioned in Quran is for accusation of adultery to a chaste woman which is a different case.

If you think you are right you should bugger off over to the UAE and tell them they are doing it all wrong, women get jailed if they don't produce 4 male witnesses when reporting being raped-
https://www.google.com.au/?gws_rd=ssl#q=rape+victim+jailed+uae

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 14^th, 2014 at 7:48pm:


Like i said if you think they are wrong you should bugger off over there and set it right instead of bullshitting to everyone here.

I will take reality with the law of the land over your spineless apologetics.

|dev|null wrote on Sep 14^th, 2014 at 11:20am:



Here you are:


There is just one historically relevant meaning of jihad despite the surfeit of contemporary apologetics. Dr. Tina Magaard—a Sorbonne-trained linguist specializing in textual analysis—published detailed research findings in 2005 (summarized in 2007) comparing the foundational texts of ten major religions. Magaard concluded from her hard data-driven analyses:

The texts in Islam distinguish themselves from the texts of other religions by encouraging violence and aggression against people with other religious beliefs to a larger degree [emphasis added]. There are also straightforward calls for terror. This has long been a taboo in the research into Islam, but it is a fact that we need to deal with.

For example, in her 2007 essay “Fjendebilleder og voldsforestillinger i islamiske grundtekster” [“Images of enemies and conceptions of violence in Islamic core scriptures”], Magaard observed,

There are 36 references in the Koran to expressions derived from the root qa-ta-la, which indicates fighting, killing or being killed. The expressions derived from the root ja-ha-da, which the word jihad stems from, are more ambiguous since they mean “to struggle” or “to make an effort” rather than killing. Yet almost all of the references derived from this root are found in stories that leave no room for doubt regarding the violent nature of this struggle. Only a single ja-ha-da reference (29:6) explicitly presents the struggle as an inner, spiritual phenomenon, not as an outwardly (usually military) phenomenon. But this sole reference does not carry much weight against the more than 50 references to actual armed struggle in the Koran, and even more in the Hadith.

Consistent with Magaard’s textual analysis, the independent study of Australian linguist and renowned Arabic to English translator, Paul Stenhouse, claimed the root of the word jihad appears forty times in the Koran. With four exceptions, Stenhouse maintained, all the other thirty-six usages in the Koran, and in subsequent Islamic understanding to both Muslim luminaries—the greatest jurists and scholars of classical Islam—and to ordinary people, meant and means, as described by the seminal Arabic lexicographer, E. W. Lane: “He fought, warred or waged war against unbelievers and the like.” A concordant modern Muslim definition, relevant to both contemporary jihadism and its shock troop “mujahideen” [holy warriors; see just below], was provided at the “Fourth International Conference of the Academy of Islamic Research,” at Al Azhar University— in 1968, by Muhammad al-Sobki:

[T]he words Al Jihad, Al Mojahadah, or even “striving against enemies” are equivalents and they do not mean especially fighting with the atheists . . . they mean fighting in the general sense.
http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2014/09/11/911-and-jihad-terror-a-legacy-of-ove...