Why anti Muslim bias is so profound among Hindutva supporters?

[RexRex]

Dude I don't know how to get through to you. Its like saying the same thing over and over and over again and it has no impact whatsoever. You just WANT TO, NEED TO believe that Sharia is the most cruel and ugly and "insert all other negative adjectives here" thing ever. You are not even willing to consider that there are several interpretations and what may be passed as Shariat in some cases could not be a correct or accepted interpretation.

I listed to a scholar called Javed Ghamidi sometimes and he believed blasphemy laws have no place in Shariat. So what does that mean?
You also claimed that the punishment for blasphemy is death in "ALL FOUR SCHOOLS" post #1951, and that was a lie or incorrect statement. I have included the following interpretations, and look at what the Hanafi school says.

So my point is there are so many variations and I am myself learning more about this. There is no clear and undisputed law here in my take. Yes there are definitely supporting voices for the death penalty, I cannot argue about that but to say they are DE FACTO Shariat is incorrect.

We simply don't seem to have consensus. At best, this is to be reviewed on a case by case basis. I have not seen enough to convince me otherwise so far. Now that could change in future and when it does, I guess you will be labelling my a sly fox again, you sly Hindu atheist.

Hanafi school confirms death for blasphemy if they do not repent, in your article. Can't you read ?

No bluffing please. There is no multiple interpretations amongst the 4 major schoools of Islamic jurisprudence on these four topics below. They are unanimous in their interpretation. Let me reiterate :-

Adultery - Death
Gay - Death
Apostasty - Death
Blasphemy - Death

If you don't believe me, ask sharia expert @LordJames

 

[Stewie]

Maybe an introspection is needed by Muslims I guess. You dont hear talk of Christianphobia, Hinduphobia, Judaphobia etc etc. Why is it only Islamophobia ? Everyone is wrong except us victim mentality..

There is no introspection needed here. If we want to focus on the Hindu Muslim dynamic, the issue is more complicated, I agree. but in the grander scheme of things, Islamophobia is directly a result of a number of factors some within and some out of Muslim people's control. The average Muslim cannot be held responsible for the actions of a few radicalized bad apples, and what we seriously need to remain focused on the source of this radicalization as well. Where it came from in the larger world.
Don't the average Muslims suffer and die due to these radicalized movements? I bet you more Muslims have died in places like Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, etc than any Hindus, Christians, Jews, or non-Muslims combined.

So what introspection do you refer to? The one we should be doing about not dying at the hands of these radicals?

 

[Champ_Pal]

So you understand that, good, the outliers exist everywhere. We feel the same way about Hindutva supporters. No matter how you guys frame yourselves, it seems like the whole ideology is architected to marginalize Muslims. I am great we are making some headway on this discussion now.

We have (as in the peace loving "moderate" muslims) disavowed extremism, the idea of imposing Sharia in the west, the blasphemy law (I have personally looked at it all and believe it has no place for it, etc). All these are "reactions" or "behaviors" we are lead to believe are expected of us as human beings wherever we live, Muslims, non Muslims alike living in the west or east.

So will the sensible and educated Hindutva guys (if there is any such thing) stand up and forsake the Islamophobic and anti-muslim rhetoric and narrative and practice what they preach?

Anti Muslim rhetoric is a political tool. Just like caste politics, anti upper caste issues in India.

Hindus is only limited to India. If someone is advocating beef ban and blows himself up in the west in the name of Ram or Krishna and calling westerners as Malech, then you have a case.

I don’t care what laws Muslims follow in Arab countries and other south Asian Islamic countries. But if someone comes and demands his way of life and beliefs to be imposed in the larger secular masses, it causes apprehensions and leads to phobia.

 

[Stewie]

Hanafi school confirms death for blasphemy if they do not repent, in your article. Can't you read ?

No bluffing please. There is no multiple interpretations amongst the 4 major schoools of Islamic jurisprudence on these four topics below. They are unanimous in their interpretation. Let me reiterate :-

Adultery - Death
Gay - Death
Apostasty - Death
Blasphemy - Death

If you don't believe me, ask sharia expert @LordJames

You can keep widening your scope based on your own whims and fancies but we were debating the blasphemy law. Let us stick to that first. Did you read the link I posted. Apart from one, most of them are not always death for blasphemy. But of course why would you care to read. it goes against the narrative you want to stick to. Anyhow, this is not even the point of the conversation anymore. We have moved away from the Shariat topic. Nobody here I see is advocating for it.

 

[Stewie]

Anti Muslim rhetoric is a political tool. Just like caste politics, anti upper caste issues in India.

Hindus is only limited to India. If someone is advocating beef ban and blows himself up in the west in the name of Ram or Krishna and calling westerners as Malech, then you have a case.

I don’t care what laws Muslims follow in Arab countries and other south Asian Islamic countries. But if someone comes and demands his way of life and beliefs to be imposed in the larger secular masses, it causes apprehensions and leads to phobia.

well when it starts happening widespread, you will have a valid concern. However, that does not answer the question if Islamophobia within India now does it?

 

[RexRex]

You can keep widening your scope based on your own whims and fancies but we were debating the blasphemy law.Let us stick to that first. We have moved away from the Shariat topic

Blasphemy law is part of Shariat, it is not a separate topic lol.

 

[Stewie]

Blasphemy law is part of Shariat, it is not a separate topic lol.

the topic here is not Shariat and the blasphemy law you keep harping about is also incorrect. But if you want to open a separate thread, we can discuss it there. I have given you enough reading material but of course why would you want to read it?

 

[deltexas]

There is no introspection needed here. If we want to focus on the Hindu Muslim dynamic, the issue is more complicated, I agree. but in the grander scheme of things, Islamophobia is directly a result of a number of factors some within and some out of Muslim people's control. The average Muslim cannot be held responsible for the actions of a few radicalized bad apples, and what we seriously need to remain focused on the source of this radicalization as well. Where it came from in the larger world.
Don't the average Muslims suffer and die due to these radicalized movements? I bet you more Muslims have died in places like Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, etc than any Hindus, Christians, Jews, or non-Muslims combined.

So what introspection do you refer to? The one we should be doing about not dying at the hands of these radicals?

If you believe no introspection is needed, you cant force others to consider their thoughts or opinions if they dont agree with you. Thats the crux of the issue. Every religion introspected over time to be in the modrn era except Islam. If its in the book - its holy gospel truth even if its irrational

 

[deltexas]

the topic here is not Shariat and the blasphemy law you keep harping about is also incorrect. But if you want to open a separate thread, we can discuss it there. I have given you enough reading material but of course why would you want to read it?

You try to confuse with Sharia law, but i am guessing a lot of folks here are talking about basic Islamic laws. Sharia laws is an extreme version of Islamic laws ala Taliban style

 

[RexRex]

I have given you enough reading material but of course why would you want to read it?

I read it and it confirms everything I said to you. What some random liberal pak scholar like Javed Ghamidi say means nothing. He can't change the word of God. The word of God is final.

The main authorites describing Islamic law are these four schools of jurisprudence.

"According to the Hanafi school, blasphemy is considered a severe offense. The general ruling is that a Muslim who commits blasphemy should be punished by death. However, there is an allowance for repentance. If the individual repents sincerely, the punishment can be waived"

 

[deltexas]

well when it starts happening widespread, you will have a valid concern. However, that does not answer the question if Islamophobia within India now does it?

What do you mean widespread ? Every religious religious conflict, violence or wars are all pretty much Islamic. A look at the banned religious terrorist outfits worldwide will show they are 99& Islamic. Coincidence. I dont think so

 

[Stewie]

I read it and it confirms everything I said to you. What some random liberal pak scholar like Javed Ghamidi say means nothing. He can't change the word of God. The word of God is final.

The main authorites describing Islamic law are these four schools of jurisprudence.

It is funny you mention the word of God. The word of God is Quran and Quran does not carry any punishment for blasphemy.

LOL. shows how much you know about this stuff.

 

[deltexas]

You can keep widening your scope based on your own whims and fancies but we were debating the blasphemy law. Let us stick to that first. Did you read the link I posted. Apart from one, most of them are not always death for blasphemy. But of course why would you care to read. it goes against the narrative you want to stick to. Anyhow, this is not even the point of the conversation anymore. We have moved away from the Shariat topic. Nobody here I see is advocating for it.

Just an FYI. Stoning in Islam for adultery

Stoning in Islam - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Stewie]

What do you mean widespread ? Every religious religious conflict, violence or wars are all pretty much Islamic. A look at the banned religious terrorist outfits worldwide will show they are 99& Islamic. Coincidence. I dont think so

By widespread I mean the widespread demand of implementing shariat in foreign lands.
But funny you mention religious wars of conflicts. Will you care to share how many wars in recent times are truly due to religion? Even Israel/Palestinian conflict is not due to religion its a political war at the end of the day.

The so-called war on terror is also not a religious wars. Both Pakistan and SA assisted western forces in rooting out Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Was Soviet/Afghan war religion based? Was the destruction of Iraq religion based?

Was the war in Syria religion based? It is very important for the educated people to understand the nature of these conflicts. If you start behaving like an average high school level educated RW website frequenting guy in the west, then God help us all.

 

[Stewie]

Just an FYI. Stoning in Islam for adultery

Stoning in Islam - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

once again.. stick to blasphemy law. we are not debating the rest. go read the review of the blasphemy law in the four schools I posted earlier.

 

[deltexas]

By widespread I mean the widespread demand of implementing shariat in foreign lands.
But funny you mention religious wars of conflicts. Will you care to share how many wars in recent times are truly due to religion? Even Israel/Palestinian conflict is not due to religion its a political war at the end of the day.

The so-called war on terror is also not a religious wars. Both Pakistan and SA assisted western forces in rooting out Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Was Soviet/Afghan war religion based? Was the destruction of Iraq religion based?

Was the war in Syria religion based? It is very important for the educated people to understand the nature of these conflicts. If you start behaving like an average high school level educated RW website frequenting guy in the west, then God help us all.

The demands starts when hey start becoming the majority. Again , Islamic laws and if extreme Sharia laws. Don confuse by saying Sharia all the time.

Religious wars meaning ethnic religious wars . Was supposed to be ethnic instead of religious twice. But you know what I mean. All the ME conflicts- Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and ethnic ones elsewhere are all pretty much in Islamic nations.

LOL Pak assisted ? GW Bush and Rumsfeld told Musharraf that they would bomb Pak back to the stone age if they didnt cooperate and send their troops which Musharaff openly admitted.. And again , your accusing is reflective of your educated status I guess.

 

[deltexas]

once again.. stick to blasphemy law. we are not debating the rest. go read the review of the blasphemy law in the four schools I posted earlier.

Why so ? Why only to blasphemy law ? Topic of the thread is Anti Muslim bias. I am OK if the mods say not to discuss and just accept everything as its a Pak based forum - I will have no issues. I would respect their wishes and for allowing the opportunity to atleast have a discussion.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

So you understand that, good, the outliers exist everywhere. We feel the same way about Hindutva supporters. No matter how you guys frame yourselves, it seems like the whole ideology is architected to marginalize Muslims. I am great we are making some headway on this discussion now.

We have (as in the peace loving "moderate" muslims) disavowed extremism, the idea of imposing Sharia in the west, the blasphemy law (I have personally looked at it all and believe it has no place for it, etc). All these are "reactions" or "behaviors" we are lead to believe are expected of us as human beings wherever we live, Muslims, non Muslims alike living in the west or east.

So will the sensible and educated Hindutva guys (if there is any such thing) stand up and forsake the Islamophobic and anti-muslim rhetoric and narrative and practice what they preach?

The reason the hindutvas on these boards want to focus on the handfuls of placard waving trolls of Islam who live in the west, is because they themselves want to deflect from the rampant Islamophobia which courses through their veins regardless of where they live. Inside and outside of India.

Why else would you want to reference videos from years ago when Al Muhajiroun content wasn't banned because they hadn't been proscribed? By presenting Muslims as extremists, it justifies Islamophobia in @Champ_Pal own words.

 

[Stewie]

Why so ? Why only to blasphemy law ? Topic of the thread is Anti Muslim bias. I am OK if the mods say not to discuss and just accept everything as its a Pak based forum - I will have no issues. I would respect their wishes and for allowing the opportunity to atleast have a discussion.

The topic of the thread is anti-Muslim bias as it relates to Hindutva. Can you tell me if you have all these laws in India? If not, why do you want to discuss them is my question.

Unless your claim is these laws are related to the anti Muslim bias within Hindutva supporters?

 

[Stewie]

The reason the hindutvas on these boards want to focus on the handfuls of placard waving trolls of Islam who live in the west, is because they themselves want to deflect from the rampant Islamophobia which courses through their veins regardless of where they live. Inside and outside of India.

Why else would you want to reference videos from years ago when Al Muhajiroun content wasn't banned because they hadn't been proscribed? By presenting Muslims as extremists, it justifies Islamophobia in @Champ_Pal own words.

funny thing is they want to reference all the global conflicts as well which have nothing to do with religion and they make it sound like as if India itself has been a victim of all these conflicts. India has had no problems of that nature. All the conflicts in the middle east involving Muslim nations have had nothing to do with Hindu-Muslim relations.

They keep bringing these issues up and barking up the wrong tree. When you point it out to them they go off on a tangent. There are people here complaining about Muslims in foreign lands. It seems to me reading their thoughts here that Hindus in foreign lands have more problems with Muslims than the actual people living on those foreign lands.

They just keep on compiling stacks and stacks of evidence for us to look at supporting their extreme hatred of us and our faith. This is the only logical conclusion one can draw from all this.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Hanafi school confirms death for blasphemy if they do not repent, in your article. Can't you read ?

No bluffing please. There is no multiple interpretations amongst the 4 major schoools of Islamic jurisprudence on these four topics below. They are unanimous in their interpretation. Let me reiterate :-

Adultery - Death
Gay - Death
Apostasty - Death
Blasphemy - Death

If you don't believe me, ask sharia expert @LordJames

Hanafi school of thought dates back to the 8th century, none of those punishments would seem out of place then. Is there any footage of Muslims calling for any of those punishments to be carried out in the west? I doubt it because they would be locked up.

 

[Stewie]

The demands starts when hey start becoming the majority. Again , Islamic laws and if extreme Sharia laws. Don confuse by saying Sharia all the time.

Religious wars meaning ethnic religious wars . Was supposed to be ethnic instead of religious twice. But you know what I mean. All the ME conflicts- Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and ethnic ones elsewhere are all pretty much in Islamic nations.

LOL Pak assisted ? GW Bush and Rumsfeld told Musharraf that they would bomb Pak back to the stone age if they didnt cooperate and send their troops which Musharaff openly admitted.. And again , your accusing is reflective of your educated status I guess.

I am guessing the extreme concerns you have about that are due to rising Muslim population in India. don't worry its still way way behind

and yes we assisted and we have been assisting their war efforts since the Soviet invasion. It was a bad decision and we should have avoided it at all costs fighting someone else's war.

 

[Stewie]

The reason for Islamophobia given to us now by Hindus is the punishment for non Muslims for various things in sharia. LOL.


Makes you wonder if they are living under such laws to have such strong feelings of resentment about it.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

What do you mean widespread ? Every religious religious conflict, violence or wars are all pretty much Islamic. A look at the banned religious terrorist outfits worldwide will show they are 99& Islamic. Coincidence. I dont think so

This is partly true, but often the only reason Islamic nations are at war is because non-Muslim nations have invaded and attacked those Muslim countries. The whole world for example declared war on Iraq. The invasion of Afghanistan was led by non-Muslims. It was non-Muslims who ethnic cleansed Bosnia and Myanmar. It was non-Muslims who nuked entire cities in Japan.

And so on.

 

[Champ_Pal]

The reason the hindutvas on these boards want to focus on the handfuls of placard waving trolls of Islam who live in the west, is because they themselves want to deflect from the rampant Islamophobia which courses through their veins regardless of where they live. Inside and outside of India.

Why else would you want to reference videos from years ago when Al Muhajiroun content wasn't banned because they hadn't been proscribed? By presenting Muslims as extremists, it justifies Islamophobia in @Champ_Pal own words.

There are enough Terrorist attacks in the West as well as India to put fear and doubt in peoples minds. They may be Islamic Trolls for you. For others, they still represent Islam.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

There are enough Terrorist attacks in the West as well as India to put fear and doubt in peoples minds. They may be Islamic Trolls for you. For others, they still represent Islam.

Fair enough. Likewise for us, the admiration hindus share for Modi represents the barely concealed hatred that hindutvas worldwide share for Muslims. This is confirmed with their support of the israeli genocide of Palestinians.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Fair enough. Likewise for us, the admiration hindus share for Modi represents the barely concealed hatred that hindutvas worldwide share for Muslims. This is confirmed with their support of the israeli genocide of Palestinians.

As long as the hate is confined to feelings and not physical harm, it is acceptable. There is no rule that you have to love every group.

I know you are a secular fellow and world needs all Muslims to be like you.

 

[Stewie]

As long as the hate is confined to feelings and not physical harm, it is acceptable. There is no rule that you have to love every group.

I know you are a secular fellow and world needs all Muslims to be like you.

Is it though?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

As long as the hate is confined to feelings and not physical harm, it is acceptable. There is no rule that you have to love every group.

I know you are a secular fellow and world needs all Muslims to be like you.

Feelings of hate are fine, but once they become voiced and spread on social media, it becomes hate speech which can lead to violence. We see this already in the subcontinent in countries such as India and Myanmar so let's not brush it under the carpet. Deliberate misinformation can cause real damage as we saw in the riots which were led by non-Muslims in the UK against minority Muslims who were blameless.

 

[Stewie]

As long as the hate is confined to feelings and not physical harm, it is acceptable. There is no rule that you have to love every group.

I know you are a secular fellow and world needs all Muslims to be like you.

India's Hindu extremists are calling for genocide against Muslims. Why is little being done to stop them?

At a conference in India last month, a Hindu extremist dressed head-to-toe in the religion's holy color, saffron, called on her supporters to kill Muslims and "protect" the country.

amp.cnn.com

Delhi, India(CNN)At a conference in India last month, a Hindu extremist dressed head-to-toe in the religion's holy color, saffron, called on her supporters to kill Muslims and "protect" the country.

"If 100 of us become soldiers and are prepared to kill 2 million (Muslims), then we will win ... protect India, and make it a Hindu nation," said Pooja Shakun Pandey, a senior member of the right-wing Hindu Mahasabha political party, according to a video of the event.

Her words and calls for violence from other religious leaders were met with a roar of applause from the large audience, a video from the three-day conference in the northern Indian city of Haridwar shows.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Sorry to interrupt your civilized discussions. But that law is called personal law available for every minority atleast in South Asian states

There cannot be two laws in a secular Democracy. One country one law.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Is it though?

What is worse is that these hindutvas want to use a handful of loons waving placards as representative of majority Muslim thought, yet the reality is that they themselves have voted and approved of bhuddist/hindutva massacre of minorities in HUGE numbers which ARE representative of the feelings of their own population.

 

[RexRex]

Hanafi school of thought dates back to the 8th century, none of those punishments would seem out of place then.

Sharia is the final revelation of Allah, Prophet M is the final prophet ..so the message is for all eternity. How can you say it is only applicable to the 8th century ?

 

[Champ_Pal]

India's Hindu extremists are calling for genocide against Muslims. Why is little being done to stop them?

At a conference in India last month, a Hindu extremist dressed head-to-toe in the religion's holy color, saffron, called on her supporters to kill Muslims and "protect" the country.

amp.cnn.com

Delhi, India(CNN)At a conference in India last month, a Hindu extremist dressed head-to-toe in the religion's holy color, saffron, called on her supporters to kill Muslims and "protect" the country.

"If 100 of us become soldiers and are prepared to kill 2 million (Muslims), then we will win ... protect India, and make it a Hindu nation," said Pooja Shakun Pandey, a senior member of the right-wing Hindu Mahasabha political party, according to a video of the event.

Her words and calls for violence from other religious leaders were met with a roar of applause from the large audience, a video from the three-day conference in the northern Indian city of Haridwar shows.

That article in the link you provided looks like a full on propaganda to malign Hindutva. The first 5 lines was about the alleged hate speech and the rest of it was trashing Savarkar and Hindutva movement.

We have to take CNN's reporting as truth here. If indeed the killing of Muslims was said, then the person should be arrested for hate speech. Can you find a video of that pls?

Also, look at the names of the people reporting the article. Rhea Mogul. She is a Hongkong based freelance Journalist who works for South China Morning post and also other leftie outlets in US. Very credible person.
The other clown is Swati Gupta who is also a freelance Journalist and works for Washington Post, NY Times etc. She graduated from the great Columbia university which has seen the brunt of protests and University encampments in recent times. Shows they are part of woke mob and hate rightwing politics and nationalism.

Some very credible people. A little bit of research about the clowns reporting shows what the true intentions of the article are. That is to bad mouth BJP and Hindutva.

Now don't get me wrong that I don't believe anything they said in the article about the hate speech. They might very well have said it. But looking at the credibility of reporters, it is only fair to ask for a video evidence of the hate speech.

 

[Champ_Pal]

What is worse is that these hindutvas want to use a handful of loons waving placards as representative of majority Muslim thought, yet the reality is that they themselves have voted and approved of bhuddist/hindutva massacre of minorities in HUGE numbers which ARE representative of the feelings of their own population.

Hindutva has nothing to do with Myanmar Rohingya issues. Now regarding the massacres you are talking about Hindutva, you may be referring to Gujarat riots. It was a full blown riots after a train carrying Hindi pilgrims was set on fire by Muslim mobs.

 

[Stewie]

That article in the link you provided looks like a full on propaganda to malign Hindutva. The first 5 lines was about the alleged hate speech and the rest of it was trashing Savarkar and Hindutva movement.

We have to take CNN's reporting as truth here. If indeed the killing of Muslims was said, then the person should be arrested for hate speech. Can you find a video of that pls?

Also, look at the names of the people reporting the article. Rhea Mogul. She is a Hongkong based freelance Journalist who works for South China Morning post and also other leftie outlets in US. Very credible person.
The other clown is Swati Gupta who is also a freelance Journalist and works for Washington Post, NY Times etc. She graduated from the great Columbia university which has seen the brunt of protests and University encampments in recent times. Shows they are part of woke mob and hate rightwing politics and nationalism.

Some very credible people. A little bit of research about the clowns reporting shows what the true intentions of the article are. That is to bad mouth BJP and Hindutva.

Now don't get me wrong that I don't believe anything they said in the article about the hate speech. They might very well have said it. But looking at the credibility of reporters, it is only fair to ask for a video evidence of the hate speech.

When brother @Champ_Pal quotes CNN= Muslims are terrible, they want Sharia on everywhere how non secular of them they want to kill us all.

When poor Stewie quote CNN=Anti-hindu propaganda



buhat ala Champ Lal ...

 

[deltexas]

The topic of the thread is anti-Muslim bias as it relates to Hindutva. Can you tell me if you have all these laws in India? If not, why do you want to discuss them is my question.

Unless your claim is these laws are related to the anti Muslim bias within Hindutva supporters?

What laws ? Laws in Ind are all secular as Ind has a secular democratic constitution. An FYI. Ind has had 80% plus Hindu majority for 70 years now and in the majority and the laws are still secular. What does it say ? A Hindu majority still wants secular laws and not Hindu laws. If it was a Muslim majority country anywhere - the Muslim majority would want Islamic laws and not secular ones. And you say, you are OK then as thats what the majority wants. Therein lies the difference between Muslim majority countries and non-Muslim majority countries. And that would be my personal preference as well.

 

[deltexas]

India's Hindu extremists are calling for genocide against Muslims. Why is little being done to stop them?

At a conference in India last month, a Hindu extremist dressed head-to-toe in the religion's holy color, saffron, called on her supporters to kill Muslims and "protect" the country.

amp.cnn.com

Delhi, India(CNN)At a conference in India last month, a Hindu extremist dressed head-to-toe in the religion's holy color, saffron, called on her supporters to kill Muslims and "protect" the country.

"If 100 of us become soldiers and are prepared to kill 2 million (Muslims), then we will win ... protect India, and make it a Hindu nation," said Pooja Shakun Pandey, a senior member of the right-wing Hindu Mahasabha political party, according to a video of the event.

Her words and calls for violence from other religious leaders were met with a roar of applause from the large audience, a video from the three-day conference in the northern Indian city of Haridwar shows.

This is hate speech and should be booked as a law and order issue and offenders punished strictly. Should be the same for all irrespective of religion. No place for hate speech in a secular nation.

 

[deltexas]

India's Hindu extremists are calling for genocide against Muslims. Why is little being done to stop them?

At a conference in India last month, a Hindu extremist dressed head-to-toe in the religion's holy color, saffron, called on her supporters to kill Muslims and "protect" the country.

amp.cnn.com

Delhi, India(CNN)At a conference in India last month, a Hindu extremist dressed head-to-toe in the religion's holy color, saffron, called on her supporters to kill Muslims and "protect" the country.

"If 100 of us become soldiers and are prepared to kill 2 million (Muslims), then we will win ... protect India, and make it a Hindu nation," said Pooja Shakun Pandey, a senior member of the right-wing Hindu Mahasabha political party, according to a video of the event.

Her words and calls for violence from other religious leaders were met with a roar of applause from the large audience, a video from the three-day conference in the northern Indian city of Haridwar shows.

She made another hate speech and an FIR was booked against her in UP and she was dealt with by law which is how it should be. Heres the link :

UP: Right-Wing Leader Booked for 'Promoting Enmity' Between Religious Groups

FIR filed against right-wing leader Pooja Shakun Pandey in Uttar Pradesh's Aligarh for alleged controversial remarks against a particular community, the police said. Pandey had allegedly written a letter in blood against Friday prayers.

www.thequint.com

 

[Stewie]

Sharia is the final revelation of Allah, Prophet M is the final prophet ..so the message is for all eternity. How can you say it is only applicable to the 8th century ?

Incorrect as in it doesn't apply to all situations.. I may have agreed with you until a few days ago but my eyes have been opened wide now thanks to you and other Hindu posters. You guys forced me to research this whole issue and I have discovered some stuff.
I will share with you why I feel your statement is incorrect:

Source: https://www.americanprogress.org/article/understanding-sharia-law/

Sharia is the crucial fault line of Islam’s internecine struggle. On one side of the divide are Muslim reformers and authentic moderates… whose members embrace the Enlightenment’s veneration of reason and, in particular, its separation of the spiritual and secular realms. On this side of the divide, Sharia is a reference point for a Muslim’s personal conduct, not a corpus to be imposed on the life of a pluralistic society.

What is Sharia?
The CSP report defines Sharia as a “legal-political-military doctrine.” But a Muslim would not recognize this definition—let alone a scholar of Islam and Muslim tradition. Muslim communities continue to internally debate how to practice Islam in the modern world even as they look to its general precepts as a guide to correct living and religious practice.

Most academics studying Islam and Muslim societies give a broad definition of Sharia. This reflects Muslim scholars struggling for centuries over how best to understand and practice their faith.

But these specialists do agree on the following:

• Sharia is not static. Its interpretations and applications have changed and continue to change over time.
• There is no one thing called Sharia. A variety of Muslim communities exist, and each understands Sharia in its own way. No official document, such as the Ten Commandments, encapsulates Sharia. It is the ideal law of God as interpreted by Muslim scholars over centuries aimed toward justice, fairness, and mercy.
• Sharia is overwhelmingly concerned with personal religious observance such as prayer and fasting, and not with national laws.

 

[Stewie]

so the bottom line is its applied on individuals who are Muslims at a personal level. When you derive laws based on Shariat, that's not Shariat, that's Islamic laws and laws can vary based on interpretation. We are using the wrong terminology.

Sharia is divine, Islamic laws are not. The article communicated that demarcation beautifully.

 

[Champ_Pal]

When brother @Champ_Pal quotes CNN= Muslims are terrible, they want Sharia on everywhere how non secular of them they want to kill us all.

When poor Stewie quote CNN=Anti-hindu propaganda



buhat ala Champ Lal ...

Did I quote CNN anywhere?

Anyways, leftie outlets are all pro Palestine. Reuters, AP, AFP, CNN, Washington Post, NY Times, MSNBC, ABC are all heavily left leaning.

 

[Stewie]

Did I quote CNN anywhere?

Anyways, leftie outlets are all pro Palestine. Reuters, AP, AFP, CNN, Washington Post, NY Times, MSNBC, ABC are all heavily left leaning.

are you denying that a Hindutva leader issued that statement? Simple Yes or no question

 

[Champ_Pal]

Incorrect as in it doesn't apply to all situations.. I may have agreed with you until a few days ago but my eyes have been opened wide now thanks to you and other Hindu posters. You guys forced me to research this whole issue and I have discovered some stuff.
I will share with you why I feel your statement is incorrect:

Source: https://www.americanprogress.org/article/understanding-sharia-law/

So there is no agreement on Sharia then. Looks like your faith people cannot agree on anything.

 

[Stewie]

So there is no agreement on Sharia then. Looks like your faith people cannot agree on anything.

It is open to personal interpretation based on Hadith you consider authentic and follow but one thing is for sure. Sharia is for "personal" guidance. If leaders, scholars, experts refer to it to derive national legislation, that is not considered Sharia. That is just considered man made laws because they have been subject to interpretation. That's where the difference comes from.

I will give you an example: Some scholars would argue that Islam extends full protection to non Muslims and that includes freedom of speech and hence they are protected from Blasphemy laws which apply on Muslims only. Some scholars argue that blasphemy laws apply on non-muslims as well. Then there are further difference of opinions on the penalties.

So I would say yes, there is no hard and fast central guideline to be implemented in a nation that's directly derived from the divine word of God. Its a mixture of Quran and Sunnah (Prophet's actions)

Quran, by the way, has no mention of punishment for blasphemy that I am aware of.

 

[Champ_Pal]

are you denying that a Hindutva leader issued that statement? Simple Yes or no question

I don't know. If it was said in a big gathering, then there definitely be video evdence. I asked you to present it.

How did that Rhea Mogul who sits in Hongkong know about this News? Perhaps the woke Swati Gupta told her? If Swati Gupta indeed was a reporter, she would've recorded the speech. Its not difficult. But we have to take these people at their face value.

Hence I asked for video evidence. Not hard these days especially for a Reporter who works for Woke Western media.

 

[Stewie]

What laws ? Laws in Ind are all secular as Ind has a secular democratic constitution. An FYI. Ind has had 80% plus Hindu majority for 70 years now and in the majority and the laws are still secular. What does it say ? A Hindu majority still wants secular laws and not Hindu laws. If it was a Muslim majority country anywhere - the Muslim majority would want Islamic laws and not secular ones. And you say, you are OK then as thats what the majority wants. Therein lies the difference between Muslim majority countries and non-Muslim majority countries. And that would be my personal preference as well.

pragmatically speaking, I would not not be ok because there is far too much complication with it and I think that's why most muslim states borrow bits and pieces and have not fully implemented Islamic laws based on Sharia. Even in majority if it comes to a vote I would go for non religious laws (if there is any such thing). Sharia laws or guidance is for me to uphold at a personal level and I will make all efforts to do that but I realize and accept the futility to apply them in a modern pluralistic society in perfection.

 

[Stewie]

She made another hate speech and an FIR was booked against her in UP and she was dealt with by law which is how it should be. Heres the link :

UP: Right-Wing Leader Booked for 'Promoting Enmity' Between Religious Groups

FIR filed against right-wing leader Pooja Shakun Pandey in Uttar Pradesh's Aligarh for alleged controversial remarks against a particular community, the police said. Pandey had allegedly written a letter in blood against Friday prayers.

www.thequint.com

that's wonderful to hear. As long as the right actions are taken. But it doesn't change the fact that there are concerns about such rising sentiment in India. This may not be at the same scale as islamic radicalism but the nature of it is very similar.

 

[Stewie]

I don't know. If it was said in a big gathering, then there definitely be video evdence. I asked you to present it.

How did that Rhea Mogul who sits in Hongkong know about this News? Perhaps the woke Swati Gupta told her? If Swati Gupta indeed was a reporter, she would've recorded the speech. Its not difficult. But we have to take these people at their face value.

Hence I asked for video evidence. Not hard these days especially for a Reporter who works for Woke Western media.

well you way behind on times. Apparently she was arrested so she did say those things.

 

[Champ_Pal]

It is open to personal interpretation based on Hadith you consider authentic and follow but one thing is for sure. Sharia is for "personal" guidance. If leaders, scholars, experts refer to it to derive national legislation, that is not considered Sharia. That is just considered man made laws because they have been subject to interpretation. That's where the difference comes from.

I will give you an example: Some scholars would argue that Islam extends full protection to non Muslims and that includes freedom of speech and hence they are protected from Blasphemy laws which apply on Muslims only. Some scholars argue that blasphemy laws apply on non-muslims as well. Then there are further difference of opinions on the penalties.

So I would say yes, there is no hard and fast central guideline to be implemented in a nation that's directly derived from the divine word of God. Its a mixture of Quran and Sunnah (Prophet's actions)

Quran, by the way, has no mention of punishment for blasphemy that I am aware of.

The final message of God and still it is open to personal interpretation. Hmm!!

If Sharia is only for personal guidance like you are suggesting, then the stoning for adultery and punishment for LGBT by Taliban are all wrong? They are all misguided and don't know their religion? May be Maulana Stewie can help them.

Regarding punishment for blasphemy, it is derived from Authentic Sahih Hadith.

 

[Stewie]

The final message of God and still it is open to personal interpretation. Hmm!!

If Sharia is only for personal guidance like you are suggesting, then the stoning for adultery and punishment for LGBT by Taliban are all wrong? They are all misguided and don't know their religion? May be Maulana Stewie can help them.

Regarding punishment for blasphemy, it is derived from Authentic Sahih Hadith.

its not the final message of God. We never claimed it was. It is based on the word of God "Quran" and "Sunnah" which is based on Hadith and that par is open to interpretation and not the word of God.

 

[Champ_Pal]

well you way behind on times. Apparently she was arrested so she did say those things.

What was she arrested for?

If there is video evidence of what was said, she could've distributed it to her woke commie masters in US. It takes a few seconds to do that. Again, there should've been video evidence of it if this Swati Gupta person attended that Hindutva gathering.

 

[Stewie]

The final message of God and still it is open to personal interpretation. Hmm!!

If Sharia is only for personal guidance like you are suggesting, then the stoning for adultery and punishment for LGBT by Taliban are all wrong? They are all misguided and don't know their religion? May be Maulana Stewie can help them.

Regarding punishment for blasphemy, it is derived from Authentic Sahih Hadith.

You can caste as much puns about that stuff as you want, but it betrays your still poor understanding of the concept.

The Sharia laws are not intended to be applied in a state. Islamic laws derived from the guidance that is Sharia itself is not Shariat but Islamic laws (please refer to the link above).
And yes, the stoning laws are all wrong. The Taliban are some of the worse criminals and have distorted view of Islam and it is not just I but an overwhelming majority of Islamic scholars say the same.

 

[Champ_Pal]

its not the final message of God. We never claimed it was. It is based on the word of God "Quran" and "Sunnah" which is based on Hadith and that par is open to interpretation and not the word of God.

Holy Quran clearly asks the believers to obey both Allah and his prophet. How do you obey Prophet? By follow Sunnah. How do you do that? By following Hadith and Seerah.

The punishment for Blasphemy and Adultery is based on authentic Hadiths. The Hadiths that Islamic scholars like Imam Bukhari spend their entire life in compiling. The punishments are derived from the Hadiths which are very clear what Holy Prophet ordered.

 

[Champ_Pal]

You can caste as much puns about that stuff as you want, but it betrays your still poor understanding of the concept.

The Sharia laws are not intended to be applied in a state. Islamic laws derived from the guidance that is Sharia itself is not Shariat but Islamic laws (please refer to the link above).
And yes, the stoning laws are all wrong. The Taliban are some of the worse criminals and have distorted view of Islam and it is not just I but an overwhelming majority of Islamic scholars say the same.

I have to shake my head in disbelief. You are throwing all and sundry under the bus to win an argument on internet.

Here is the Hadith for Stoning.
'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and said:
Verily Allah sent Muhammad (ﷺ) with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.

Sahih Muslim 1691a - The Book of Legal Punishments - كتاب الحدود - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)

Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (saws) in English and Arabic

sunnah.com

Here is the punishment for blasphemy by Ibn Ishaq.
Abu Afak was a Jewsih poet who used to write poetry against Prophet.
"The apostle [Muhammad] said, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" Whereupon Salim b. Umayr, brother of B. Amr b. Auf, one of the "weepers", went forth and killed him."

Abu 'Afak - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ibn Ishaq collected oral traditions about the life of Muhammad, some of which survive through the writings of Ibn Hisham and Ibn Jarir al-Tabari.
He narrates that in response to the killing of Abu Afak, Asma recited

Asma bint Marwan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The punishment for Blasphemy was recorded by Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hisham while recording the life of Prophet PBUH.

 

[Stewie]

I have to shake my head in disbelief. You are throwing all and sundry under the bus to win an argument on internet.

Here is the Hadith for Stoning.
'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and said:
Verily Allah sent Muhammad (ﷺ) with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.

Sahih Muslim 1691a - The Book of Legal Punishments - كتاب الحدود - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)

Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (saws) in English and Arabic

sunnah.com

Here is the punishment for blasphemy by Ibn Ishaq.
Abu Afak was a Jewsih poet who used to write poetry against Prophet.
"The apostle [Muhammad] said, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" Whereupon Salim b. Umayr, brother of B. Amr b. Auf, one of the "weepers", went forth and killed him."

Abu 'Afak - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ibn Ishaq collected oral traditions about the life of Muhammad, some of which survive through the writings of Ibn Hisham and Ibn Jarir al-Tabari.
He narrates that in response to the killing of Abu Afak, Asma recited

Asma bint Marwan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The punishment for Blasphemy was recorded by Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hisham while recording the life of Prophet PBUH.

Well that is your opinion just like the one about Sun being motionless and not having an orbit. Doesn’t make it right.

And we will be alright. Pakistan has survived all these years without all or some of these laws. So have a lot of other Muslim countries. It’s not a requirement to being a Muslim and as has been evidenced: open to interpretation. Most of the Hadith you quote have a massive context behind them.

Go back and find those and open a separate thread and we can spend another few months doing the old back and forth

 

[Stewie]

Holy Quran clearly asks the believers to obey both Allah and his prophet. How do you obey Prophet? By follow Sunnah. How do you do that? By following Hadith and Seerah.

The punishment for Blasphemy and Adultery is based on authentic Hadiths. The Hadiths that Islamic scholars like Imam Bukhari spend their entire life in compiling. The punishments are derived from the Hadiths which are very clear what Holy Prophet ordered.

Oh yeah sure now I need a Hindu to tell me how to live as a Muslim

 

[Champ_Pal]

Oh yeah sure now I need a Hindu to tell me how to live as a Muslim

Denial.
Anyways you know the truth in your heart of hearts.

Have a good day.

 

[Stewie]

Denial.
Anyways you know the truth in your heart of hearts.

Have a good day.

That’s pretty rich coming from someone who denies a piece on Hindutva by an international news network calling it propaganda. Don’t know who is truly in denial here.

 

[Champ_Pal]

That’s pretty rich coming from someone who denies a piece on Hindutva by an international news network calling it propaganda. Don’t know who is truly in denial here.

I didn’t ask for much. Just some video evidence of the speech.

If some Hindu says that someone like Imran khan has said Pakistan is bad, wouldn’t you ask for video evidence or you will just go by the reporters face value?

I have provided to you the background of the 2 reporters that wrote the news article. Not very credible.

Now, I have always provided authentic Islamic sources as evidence to everything I said here. Now if you deny sources like Sunnah.com or Bukhari, I give up.

 

[Stewie]

I didn’t ask for much. Just some video evidence of the speech.

If some Hindu says that someone like Imran khan has said Pakistan is bad, wouldn’t you ask for video evidence or you will just go by the reporters face value?

I have provided to you the background of the 2 reporters that wrote the news article. Not very credible.

Now, I have always provided authentic Islamic sources as evidence to everything I said here. Now if you deny sources like Sunnah.com or Bukhari, I give up.

You conveniently forgot to add the context and background in each case. Because I’m sure the bigger picture doesn’t fit your narrative, you slyly dodge it.

Just like you dodge the fact the woman in the video was actually arrested for those comments and she actually felt emboldened to even make those remarks in a public speech.

 

[Champ_Pal]

You conveniently forgot to add the context and background in each case. Because I’m sure the bigger picture doesn’t fit your narrative, you slyly dodge it.

Just like you dodge the fact the woman in the video was actually arrested for those comments and she actually felt emboldened to even make those remarks in a public speech.

If she was arrested for the comments, then at least the police had evidence. Good on Indian police. Hate speech must never be tolerated.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Sharia is the final revelation of Allah, Prophet M is the final prophet ..so the message is for all eternity. How can you say it is only applicable to the 8th century ?

I didn't bring up Hanafi school of thought re Sharia law. you did. If you want to discuss relevance of Sharia law and punishments proscribed in it, I think there are more suitable threads already running, maybe you should continue the discussion there as it's not really relevant here.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Hindutva has nothing to do with Myanmar Rohingya issues. Now regarding the massacres you are talking about Hindutva, you may be referring to Gujarat riots. It was a full blown riots after a train carrying Hindi pilgrims was set on fire by Muslim mobs.

You were justifying Islamophobia by presenting old videos from western countries of small handfuls of extremists waving placards for Sharia. So when hindus use global incidents to justify their own Islamophobia then you have taken moral stance on israeli and Rohingya massacres. Pointless denying it since most of you defend the massacres on several threads on here openly.

 

[Technics 1210]

26 pages, and instead of the Hindutva crew accepting the hate for Islam within their ideology, they are trying to either sugarcoat or woefully justify their hate!

 

[DeadlyVenom]

26 pages, and instead of the Hindutva crew accepting the hate for Islam within their ideology, they are trying to either sugarcoat or woefully justify their hate!

They are experts on Quran, Hadith and Islamic Jurisprudence but feign ignorance when anyone asks about their religion.

 

[Theanonymousone]

26 pages, and instead of the Hindutva crew accepting the hate for Islam within their ideology, they are trying to either sugarcoat or woefully justify their hate!

May be if you start a page on Islamists hating Hindus, it wouldn't take even 2 pages to conclude that, Islamists hates Hindu religion

 

[Stewie]

If she was arrested for the comments, then at least the police had evidence. Good on Indian police. Hate speech must never be tolerated.

Great at least you are accepting that and not going to Indian police asking for proof from them as well. LOL

 

[Stewie]

May be if you start a page on Islamists hating Hindus, it wouldn't take even 2 pages to conclude that, Islamists hates Hindu religion

I believe that's the point of the thread, and you are absolutely correct. Hindutva and Islamist radicals are two sides of the same coin.

 

[Technics 1210]

May be if you start a page on Islamists hating Hindus, it wouldn't take even 2 pages to conclude that, Islamists hates Hindu religion

It is no secret, Monotheism is the exact opposite of Polytheism. Forget hate, the two fundamentally oppose each other, which is why Muslims and Hindus will never get along on one land. Meanwhile you can weep and wallow over the Mughals what not.

Move on.

 

[Theanonymousone]

I believe that's the point of the thread, and you are absolutely correct. Hindutva and Islamist radicals are two sides of the same coin.

Yes the extremists are the same. But the impact is quite different.

You dont see Hindutva’s taking arms and killing people in the name of god relatively like Islamists.

Even leave that topic. The proportion of Hindus turning to extremism is far lesser than that of Muslims turning towards extremism.

I wonder why Islam, the so called religion of peace, have produced so many extremists to spread Islam.

While you have claimed that blasphemy laws don't have a place in Quran, the events happening around the world (even Pakistan has blasphemy laws) make it difficult to believe.

1. Trust me, I have some of the most pleasant people I have met from Muslim community. It also gets me perplexed as to what drove people from certain regions to be so aggressive towards other religious communities??

2. With Pakistan, I understand the hatred towards Indians as so much of blood is already shed in both countries. But if you can notice one key difference which is India is fighting for Kashmir (as we believe its our territory and our people, but not for religion) while Pakistan always brings up the religion. You can see the hatred from few poster like @sweep_shot a Bangladeshi with no bad blood with India, yet has deep hatred for India.

The same case with Israel vs Palestine issue and others. I am not sure people here understand but, in India support for Palestinian suffering is quite huge even among non-muslims. Reason, people are humans first. Some may see Israel’s actions initially as a retaliation effort but most people doesn't supports the on-going war.

But what becomes difficult to understand is that, every thing has to be looked with religious lens for muslims. And people get sick of it eventually. Why this has to be the case with Muslims?

3. I understand spreading Islam is part of your beliefs. But if the religion itself asks for people to do this, wont the followers be brainwashed to follow it aggressively? Why do muslims have to showcase their religion in every aspect?

Just think of it as what over marketing exposure does to products. People praying on roads, demanding special rights for prayers, etc. How justifiable is this?

4. I have read quite a few times here people claiming that, Islam teaches their religion is only true religion. Doesn't that mean, other religions are not true? I mean look at the above post from @Technics 1210 . He already decided that, muslims and Hindus cannot co-exist on one land.

Hinduism didn't teach that, other religion is wrong. But if Islam teaches it, I wonder with whom the issue lies with?

 

[Theanonymousone]

It is no secret, Monotheism is the exact opposite of Polytheism. Forget hate, the two fundamentally oppose each other, which is why Muslims and Hindus will never get along on one land. Meanwhile you can weep and wallow over the Mughals what not.

Move on.

Only someone living in the past would care much about Mughals. All you do is to score some points to boost your ego, but a common man like myself lives in the present looks for the future with hope

So much for all the talk about “Islam teaches to respect all religions”.
We Indians, didn't have a problem living with Muslims neither in the past nor in the future. I live in Hyderabad which has a good chunk of Muslims. Leaving some extreme Islamists and its followers, Hyderabad will continue to grow. So, keep your delusions to yourself as I feel, even the Muslims in India don't support your view

And as a request, focus on value-addition to discussion, rather than cheap point scoring to boost your low self-esteem

 

[HalBass9]

Only someone living in the past would care much about Mughals. All you do is to score some points to boost your ego, but a common man like myself lives in the present looks for the future with hope

So much for all the talk about “Islam teaches to respect all religions”.
We Indians, didn't have a problem living with Muslims neither in the past nor in the future. I live in Hyderabad which has a good chunk of Muslims. Leaving some extreme Islamists and its followers, Hyderabad will continue to grow. So, keep your delusions to yourself as I feel, even the Muslims in India don't support your view

And as a request, focus on value-addition to discussion, rather than cheap point scoring to boost your low self-esteem

I know many Hyderabadi Muslims who are living fulfilling lives with their families outside of India, yet they remain critical of the Indian government for its treatment of Muslims within the country.

 

[Stewie]

yes the extremists are the same. But the impact is quite different.

You dont see Hindutva’s taking arms and killing people in the name of god relatively like Islamists.

Even leave that topic. The proportion of Hindus turning to extremism is far lesser than that of Muslims turning towards extremism.

I wonder why Islam, the so called religion of peace, have produced so many extremists to spread Islam.

Hindu extremists are not trained militants and have not been engaged in warfare. That's the main difference. Before the Soviet war in Afghnistan, there was no such threat as Islamists. Unfortunately, that war gave rise to a lot of modern day issues, mostly with extremism and terrorism. US weaponized the religiosity of Muslims to fight the soviets because they did not want to engage them. They trained them, provided them weapons. If you go back in time, you will find the word "Mujahideen" during the 80s was romanticized by the west and they were considered heroes. Then after the war, they wanted the American forces out of their lands and got wise to their acts, the land grab and oil siphoning schemes and that resulted in the modern day mess we have. If you remove the influx of weapons from the war in these lands, primarily Afghanistan, the radicalized thinking that was used to turn them from mullas into guerilla fighters, you will find they were as benign as your modern day Hindutva activist.

While you have claimed that blasphemy laws don't have a place in Quran, the events happening around the world (even Pakistan has blasphemy laws) make it difficult to believe.

That is actually not merely a claim: its a fact. Quran itself does not include any punishment for blasphemy or even mentions blasphemy as a crime. Source: https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/... of the,punishments for adulterers or thieves.

The primary sources of the Sharia – the Quran and Sunna – disapprove of blasphemy and condemn apostasy. The Quran, however, does not provide any criminal sanctions for apostates or blasphemers in the manner that it sanctions punishments for adulterers or thieves.

1. Trust me, I have some of the most pleasant people I have met from Muslim community. It also gets me perplexed as to what drove people from certain regions to be so aggressive towards other religious communities??

2. With Pakistan, I understand the hatred towards Indians as so much of blood is already shed in both countries. But if you can notice one key difference which is India is fighting for Kashmir (as we believe its our territory and our people, but not for religion) while Pakistan always brings up the religion. You can see the hatred from few poster like @sweep_shot a Bangladeshi with no bad blood with India, yet has deep hatred for India.

The same case with Israel vs Palestine issue and others. I am not sure people here understand but, in India support for Palestinian suffering is quite huge even among non-muslims. Reason, people are humans first. Some may see Israel’s actions initially as a retaliation effort but most people doesn't supports the on-going war.

But what becomes difficult to understand is that, every thing has to be looked with religious lens for muslims. And people get sick of it eventually. Why this has to be the case with Muslims?

3. I understand spreading Islam is part of your beliefs. But if the religion itself asks for people to do this, wont the followers be brainwashed to follow it aggressively? Why do muslims have to showcase their religion in every aspect?

Just think of it as what over marketing exposure does to products. People praying on roads, demanding special rights for prayers, etc. How justifiable is this?

4. I have read quite a few times here people claiming that, Islam teaches their religion is only true religion. Doesn't that mean, other religions are not true? I mean look at the above post from @Technics 1210 . He already decided that, muslims and Hindus cannot co-exist on one land.

Hinduism didn't teach that, other religion is wrong. But if Islam teaches it, I wonder with whom the issue lies with?

My previous argument about the spread of extremism and radicalization thanks to the Soviet war and American policies, will probably answer #1.

#2- Pakistani governmental policies are not indicative and should not be held representative of Islam as a religion or Muslims as its followers. Unfortunately, and I take no pleasure in saying this, we have totally screwed the pooch in our approach to religion and its involvement in the country. So as Pakistanis, that blame does fall on us.
#3- once again is a direct result of the radicalization but hard not to hold ourselves accountable for some of the ugliness. Everything viewed from a religious lens has become the culture and its very detrimental indeed.
#4- I honestly do not see anything wrong with what you are insinuating is "bad". All religions or most religions teach they are the one true religion and everything else is false. The key is to keep it at a personal level and not lose sight of the overall human connection. Christians believe the same thing. They will tell you if you don't choose Jesus as your lord and savior, you are doomed.

 

[RexRex]

Is there any footage of Muslims calling for any of those punishments to be carried out in the west? I doubt it because they would be locked up.

Let's just say .. you can find numerous films/tv on Jeus Christ, Hindu Gods etc. But find me one about Islam's prophet. You can't, coz filmmakers around the world know they will be dead in a week. That is indirectly a form of sharia.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Let's just say .. you can find numerous films/tv on Jeus Christ, Hindu Gods etc. But find me one about Islam's prophet. You can't, coz filmmakers around the world know they will be dead in a week. That is indirectly a form of sharia it can be argued.

We are not responsible for the lackadaisical approach of others towards their religion.

They are comfortable mocking their gods. We aren't comfortable with our holy people being mocked for cheap laughs.

 

[RexRex]

We are not responsible for the lackadaisical approach of other towards their religion.

^ Oh .. so you see no problem in filmmakers living in fear of their lives. Thanks for confirming what I just said.

 

[Stewie]

Let's just say .. you can find numerous films/tv on Jeus Christ, Hindu Gods etc. But find me one about Islam's prophet. You can't, coz filmmakers around the world know they will be dead in a week. That is indirectly a form of sharia.

The Message (1976) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Message_(1976_film)

 

[RexRex]

The Message (1976) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Message_(1976_film)

50 years ago ... that too no potrayal of the prophet in that film. Also read all the controversies that came with the film.

Try making one today. Nobody will.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Yes the extremists are the same. But the impact is quite different.

You dont see Hindutva’s taking arms and killing people in the name of god relatively like Islamists.

Even leave that topic. The proportion of Hindus turning to extremism is far lesser than that of Muslims turning towards extremism.

I wonder why Islam, the so called religion of peace, have produced so many extremists to spread Islam.

While you have claimed that blasphemy laws don't have a place in Quran, the events happening around the world (even Pakistan has blasphemy laws) make it difficult to believe.

1. Trust me, I have some of the most pleasant people I have met from Muslim community. It also gets me perplexed as to what drove people from certain regions to be so aggressive towards other religious communities??

2. With Pakistan, I understand the hatred towards Indians as so much of blood is already shed in both countries. But if you can notice one key difference which is India is fighting for Kashmir (as we believe its our territory and our people, but not for religion) while Pakistan always brings up the religion. You can see the hatred from few poster like @sweep_shot a Bangladeshi with no bad blood with India, yet has deep hatred for India.

The same case with Israel vs Palestine issue and others. I am not sure people here understand but, in India support for Palestinian suffering is quite huge even among non-muslims. Reason, people are humans first. Some may see Israel’s actions initially as a retaliation effort but most people doesn't supports the on-going war.

But what becomes difficult to understand is that, every thing has to be looked with religious lens for muslims. And people get sick of it eventually. Why this has to be the case with Muslims?

3. I understand spreading Islam is part of your beliefs. But if the religion itself asks for people to do this, wont the followers be brainwashed to follow it aggressively? Why do muslims have to showcase their religion in every aspect?

Just think of it as what over marketing exposure does to products. People praying on roads, demanding special rights for prayers, etc. How justifiable is this?

4. I have read quite a few times here people claiming that, Islam teaches their religion is only true religion. Doesn't that mean, other religions are not true? I mean look at the above post from @Technics 1210 . He already decided that, muslims and Hindus cannot co-exist on one land.

Hinduism didn't teach that, other religion is wrong. But if Islam teaches it, I wonder with whom the issue lies with?

Only someone living in the past would care much about Mughals. All you do is to score some points to boost your ego, but a common man like myself lives in the present looks for the future with hope

So much for all the talk about “Islam teaches to respect all religions”.
We Indians, didn't have a problem living with Muslims neither in the past nor in the future. I live in Hyderabad which has a good chunk of Muslims. Leaving some extreme Islamists and its followers, Hyderabad will continue to grow. So, keep your delusions to yourself as I feel, even the Muslims in India don't support your view

And as a request, focus on value-addition to discussion, rather than cheap point scoring to boost your low self-esteem

These two posts contradict each other. In the first one you are talking about how Islam produces far more extremists than Hinduism, yet in the next one you are saying the Muslims of India don't support this view. How do you reconcile this?