Vanity - Aren't the Iranians insulting the prophet?

Vanity | September 23, 2010 | DManA

[DManA]

First the Iranians said they would release the imprisoned hiker

"as an act of clemency to mark the end of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. " In other words an act of compassion in the name of the prophet.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/7998887/Irans-chief-prosecutor-says-American-backpacker-to-be-freed-on-500000-bail.html

Then they said this "compassion" has a price of $500,000. No money, no compassion.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/7998887/Irans-chief-prosecutor-says-American-backpacker-to-be-freed-on-500000-bail.html

Check me if I'm wrong but isn't this transparent venality in the name of Islam an insult to Mohammad? If not why not? If so where's the Muslim outrage?

[DManA]

Don't see this mentioned in any articles so I thought I'd bring it up myself.

[fso301]

Taqiyya gives the mohammedan free reign to say or do anything to an infidel so long as the objective is the advancement of islam.

[Honorary Serb]

.....isn’t this transparent venality in the name of Islam an insult to Mohammad?....

IMHO, no. They seem to be extorting jizya.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya

[downtownconservative]

Any venality towards infidels is perfectly fine under any set of circumstances if they can rationalize “in the furtherance of islam”. Lies are also encouraged as “tacquia” (sp?) in the same way.

If you can kill an infidel just because he is an infidel, anything lessor is not just permitted, but encouraged by the unholy koran. Dhimmies (infidels who seek to coexist without conversion to islam) deserve nor receive any respect from mooselimbs.

[DManA]

My my. This is what Mr. Obama would call a “teachable moment”.

[SECURE AMERICA]

the koran gives explicit permission for them to lie to us (infidels) in fact it wants them to lie to us (infidels)
So they can say whatever they want to us and change it and it doesn’t matter because that is what their religion wants of them..

[antiRepublicrat]

Still, compassion is compassion, regardless of who the person is. I think the author is right. It appears they framed the release as sadaqah, charity even to non-believers on the orders of Mohammed (zakat charity is for Muslims). To promise it and then not deliver sounds pretty bad within their framework of faith.

[downtownconservative]

Okay, but that begs the question: is izlam a religion that changes people’s hearts and makes them better appreciate positive values such as honesty, integrity and felicity? I think not. Instead, izlam changes them more to be idiosyncratic, selfish, angry, reactionary, and finally violent. That’s the progression of jihad.

[antiRepublicrat]

Okay, but that begs the question: is izlam a religion that changes people’s hearts and makes them better appreciate positive values such as honesty, integrity and felicity?

It would depend on how you followed it. The interpretation of holy books that most people have is based on their own tendencies in the first place. Good people concentrate on the good, bad people concentrate on the bad, violent on the violent, etc. People see what they want to see.

First, you'd have to disregard all Hadith (the source of most Sharia and brutality). After that good values are required in the Quran, you'd have to basically disregard the bad stuff. You know, it's like how Jesus allowed Christians to ignore much of the bad stuff in the Bible.

[downtownconservative]

... how Jesus allowed Christians to ignore much of the bad stuff in the Bible.

Interesting end to your post. You may want to do a bit of your own research here antiRep. You've gone a bit into the weeds, methinks.

[antiRepublicrat]

Interesting end to your post. You may want to do a bit of your own research here antiRep.

Unless you'd like to re-introduce stoning, I'd go with Jesus allowing you to ignore the bad parts.

[downtownconservative]

I’m not a seminarian, but I don’t seem to recall the Old Testament condoning stoning...just that it did occur in ancient societies.

And Jesus didn’t condemn stoning per se, he said let him who is without sin throw the first rock. His comment wasn’t about stoning, it was about hypocrisy.

[DManA]

He didn’t tell us we could ignore the “bad stuff”. He provided an alternative path to God other then the Law (which was an impossible path).

[antiRepublicrat]

He didn’t tell us we could ignore the “bad stuff”. He provided an alternative path to God other then the Law

Semantics, same effective outcome. You still don't have to stone the adultress.

[DManA]

“Danny,

I’ve sent boys your age to the gas chamber. I didn’t want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.” - Judge Smails.

[antiRepublicrat]

I’m not a seminarian, but I don’t seem to recall the Old Testament condoning stoning...just that it did occur in ancient societies.

IIRC, Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Numbers stated most of the stoning offenses. Interestingly, stoning is not in the Quran at all.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

Islam gives religious sanction to murder, rape, robbery, extortion, false truces, and every other evil you can think of. This is why it is so popular with the criminal element in our prisons.

In the Phillipines, and other Asian, African places, robber bands take to islam because they believe if they are killed while commiting crimes they will still go to the moslem heaven with all its sensual rewards.