The unimportant news thread

[Ken B]

Islamaphobes misrepresent what Sharia is. But Sharia is integral to Islam. And you can be for sharia without being for executing apostates.

You are so wrong about my argument concerning Mr. Mansur. It's actually a simple one: that he supports the platform of the party for which he is a candidate. That platform is explicitly anti-immigrant  and implicitly anti-Moslem. He supports the platform, therefore he is anti-immigrant and anti-Moslem.

That is NOT what you said a few posts ago. This new claim is also wrong but I will simply repeat that you are interpreting now, not simply stating facts as you claimed. I mean just as a simple example being anti immigration is not the same as being anti immigrant. It's like saying a choir director is anti chorister just because he doesn't accept new auditions.

[Florestan]

Jesus seems to have questioned the right to impose penalties by anyone who was themself not free of sin.

What does halacha say in this respect? Who is really free of sin?

He gave the woman forgiveness, not innocence.

Of course. He was God, so He forgave the woman. She was a grown up woman and a whore, therefore not innocent.

And if Jesus did reject the death penalty, later Christians did not

If you call Christians people who by their deeds and teachings implicitly rejected Jesus Christ's own deeds and teachings as recorded, then what do you call people who by their deeds explicitly followed in the footsteps of Muhammad's own deeds and teachings as recorded? Muhammadians?

[SimonNZ]

The stoning laws in Leviticus have been implicitly yet strongly rejected by Jesus Christ Himself.

Plus: neither Jews nor Christians have been noted for stoning people in the last millenium, while stoning people is common practice right now as I'm typing this in any number of Islamic states.

Is it common? It seems less used than the death sentences elsewhere and also widely decried by Muslims in those countries.

But my point was that the laws of the countries of immigration already have laws forbidding it just as they do with Christian faith motivated gay beatings or abortion clinic pipe bombings.

[JBS]

That is NOT what you said a few posts ago. This new claim is also wrong but I will simply repeat that you are interpreting now, not simply stating facts as you claimed. I mean just as a simple example being anti immigration is not the same as being anti immigrant. It's like saying a choir director is anti chorister just because he doesn't accept new auditions.

You are being mendacious. Mansur is a candidate for a party that is, to use your terms, both anti-immigrant and anti-immigration.
I am not saying anything different. Your claims of what I said are not accurate.
Or are you so cynical that the idea that a politician supports his own party's platform just doesn't register with you?

[SimonNZ]

If you call Christians people who by their deeds and teachings implicitly rejected Jesus Christ's own deeds and teachings as recorded, then what do you call people who by their deeds explicitly followed in the footsteps of Muhammad's own deeds and teachings as recorded? Muhammadians?

Do you reject all of old testament law and the acts of its prophets then?

[Florestan]

So you've upgraded from ignorance to bigotry, since you are saying that both Islam and Judaism "have no place in" Western society.

I'm saying nothing of the sort. What I am indeed saying, and maintaining, is that insofar as both halach and sharia impose the death penalty on homosexuals they have no place in the legal framework of any Western society. And I really want to believe that Islam and Judaism are not limited to sharia and halacha --- yet you do your best to prove me wrong

You remain my friend,

So do you.

but please understand that you seem to know a lot less on this topic than you think you do.

but please understand that so long as you'll sweep under the carpet any discussion, under pretext of my being ignorant and bigotted, or the discussion being too long, you run the risk of losing credibility in my eyes.

[Florestan]

Do you reject all of old testament law and the acts of its prophets then?

I reject all that Jesus Christ rejected implictly or explicitly.

[Ken B]

You are being mendacious. Mansur is a candidate for a party that is, to use your terms, both anti-immigrant and anti-immigration.
I am not saying anything different. Your claims of what I said are not accurate.
Or are you so cynical that the idea that a politician supports his own party's platform just doesn't register with you?

I do not accept your characterization of the party. I was working ad arguendo. You are the one making hostile characterizations.
I reject the charge of mendacity.

[SimonNZ]

I reject all that Jesus Christ rejected implictly or explicitly.

And how does that align with the leaders of your faith? Are you responsible if they still advocate laws you personally reject?

[Florestan]

And how does that align with the leaders of your faith? Are you responsible if they still advocate laws you personally reject?

The leader of my faith is Jesus Christ. If the Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church, who is no Pope anyway, would ever advocate laws contrary to Jesus Christ's own teachings and deeds, let him be anathema! (cf. Galatians 1:8 ) As of today, he's in no such danger.

[Ken B]

The leader of my faith is Jesus Christ. If the Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church, who is no Pope anyway, would ever advocate laws contrary to Jesus Christ's own teachings and deeds, let him be anathema! (cf. Galatians 1:8 ) As of today, he's in no such danger.

Lucky you're not an Anglican!

[JBS]

The Rabbis have made the imposition of capital punishment by a beis din practically impossible because of the standard of proof: Two reliable witnesses who independently saw the violation first-hand.  This is almost never able to be found.  Also there is a quote in the Talmud to the effect it is better to allow [some large number] of guilty men go free (due to a lack of sufficient proof) than to convict/kill one innocent man.

The Rabbis decided it was best to leave to G-d matters of putting sinners to death.

I don't know if Sharia law has the same restraint.

More complicated than that.

Actually, the same source requires murderers who could not be convicted because of those rules, but whose guilt was clear, to be imprisoned and a given a diet that was meant to result in their death soon after. And kings had a residual right to impose death sentences despite verdicts if not guilty.

[Florestan]

Lucky you're not an Anglican!

[Florestan]

Actually, the same source requires murderers who could not be convicted because of those rules, but whose guilt was clear, to be imprisoned and a given a diet that was meant to result in their death soon after. And kings had a residual right to impose death sentences despite verdicts if not guilty.

Do you support those requirements and rights?

[drogulus]

Do you support those requirements and rights?

     Nothing is made wrong by someone telling you. The point was made by Plato in the mouth of Socrates. I kind of hate those guys but it was the greatest statement in human ethics ever so I have to swallow my pride.

     Socrates: Do the gods love good action because it is good, or is good action good because it is loved by the gods?

     Me: Right, it's on me, thanks a lot, asshole.

[Florestan]

   asshole.

Nice signature.

(Sorry, couldn't resist.)

[JBS]

Do you support those requirements and rights?

Of course I do.  But the halachic process is actually a good deal more flexible than you seem to think
https://morethodoxy.org/2012/01/11/homosexuals-in-the-orthodox-community-by-rabbi-zev-farber/

[JBS]

I do not accept your characterization of the party. I was working ad arguendo. You are the one making hostile characterizations.
I reject the charge of mendacity.

The party platform calls for heavy restrictions on immigration, and an end to multiculturalism. It mimics the anti immigration and anti immigrant rhetoric of Trump's supporters.
If you think that is not proof that it is anti-immigrant and anti-immigration, then you have a weird definition of anti-immigration  and anti-immigrant.

[Florestan]

Of course I do.  But the halachic process is actually a good deal more flexible than you seem to think
https://morethodoxy.org/2012/01/11/homosexuals-in-the-orthodox-community-by-rabbi-zev-farber/

It doesn't matter how flexible or not it is. What matters is that you support a doctrine which, given enough flexibility, and more importantly, enough political power, would result in death for homosexuals.

Now, I am opposed to gay marriage, gay adoptions and so forth, but killing homosexuals is just that: killing.

[JBS]

It doesn't matter how flexible or not it is. What matters is that you support a doctrine which, given enough flexibility, and more importantly, enough political power, would result in death for homosexuals.

Now, I am opposed to gay marriage, gay adoptions and so forth, but killing homosexuals is just that: killing.

And you support a doctrine which, given enough flexibility, and more importantly, enough political power, would result in death for homosexuals.

In fact, has resulted in death for homosexuals and plenty of others.