Islam, is it a religion of peace or war?

[Purple Tiger]

I’ve enjoyed reading your posts with the other guy on ignorant. Its entertaining for me to fill in the other half of the conversation in my mind. I’m not going to look but I bet I am not far off.

Just the usual from rexy. Make an incorrect statement, quote 15 other posts in his replies, quadruple down on his error with 20 line posts, ignore what anyone writes in reply and quote random Bible verses that have nothing to do with the subject.

 

[Orange_Vol1321]

They love London, they just hate the Christians and Jews they have to share it with.

 

[UT-Rex]

Jesus was an outsider. There is nothing about Him or His teachings that indicate he was an "insider."He was poor, He wasn't a Pharisee or a Saducee nor was He a tax collector or politician. If you read the Beatitudes, Jesus said He came for outsiders...the poor, the meek, the downtrodden. His own people condemned him to death. Jesus and his followers were largely people who existed on the fringe of society.

excerpts

Jesus was not an "outsider" << he was Jewish, of the Tribe of Judah (so, most definitely, he was in "insider" << He was one of them << Hebrews 7:14, "For it is evident that our Lord has sprung out of Judah," (nasb) / Matthew 1: "In all, then, there were fourteen generations from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Christ.").

The reference to Lydia in Acts occurs after Jesus' death, by the way.

Thank you for bringing up my Divinity degree. Using my studies as a reference, I can tell you no major theologian since 100 CE has ever referred to Jesus as an insider. To suggest otherwise is to completely misread and misinterpret the Gospels. Read the Sermon on the Mount and the Beatitudes and see if Jesus is preaching to the insiders of Judea. If Jesus wasn't such an outsider, more people would have thought He was the Messiah. Crowds of His own people would not have called for His execution. As an insider He would have been wealthy and politically influential and not a carpenter/craftsman.

I believe you think that by saying Jesus was an outsider, it demeans Him in some way. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Your blathering makes absolutely no sense. We are talking about Jesus, not Abraham, Moses or Zechariah. I would say stop before you embarrass yourself but it is too late for that now.

I’ve enjoyed reading your posts with the other guy on ignorant. Its entertaining for me to fill in the other half of the conversation in my mind. I’m not going to look but I bet I am not far off.

Have you forgotten that I’m Jewish.

Re: Jesus was an outsider. There is nothing about Him or His teachings that indicate he was an "insider."

Slice, for better perspective of your opinion on the actual subject: are you considered "outsider" or "insider" (and, considered such by whom)? As per Leviticus 12, are you "an outsider" or "an insider"?

Note: "an outsider" is not my terminology, so I'm simply utilizing "an insider" to show Purple's error in saying "an outsider" (and you've joined the conversation, and you ought to be able to shed some light on the significance of Leviticus 12).

Purple, you're thinking is skewed (on this matter -- skewed for some purpose, but you're simply exhibiting non-Biblical logic (you're logic is contrary to the OT "law of the Lord" in Leviticus 12) <<>> you're not taking into account the nature of the birth of Jesus, as Jew << DEFINITELY "an insider" even while some/many of his own countrymen rejected Him and His message(s)).

Proof, that Jesus was "an insider" (Luke 2:21-25 (See Leviticus 12) --

"And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.
And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;
(As it is written in the law of the LORD, Every male that opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord
And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons."

Purple: Luke 2:21-25 shows that you and those theologians have no Biblical justification in labeling Jesus "an outsider." Think on that / think on Luke 2:21-25 (Lev 12).

cont'd,

Shown: both parents of Jesus were Jewish (when Jesus was born, they traveled to Jerusalem to honor "the law of Moses" according to ALL of the other "insiders") ; born of the Tribe of Judah ; Jesus studied in the temple as early as 12 ; as an adult, Jesus taught in the synagogue(s) and temple, and was baptizing ; his followers called him "Rabbi" ; Jesus believed in God and in Himself as Son of God.

Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Zechariah, John the Baptist << also "insider".

Just as they killed Zecheriah (2 Chronicles 24), they killed Jesus.

Jesus was just as much "insider" as was Moses (John 5: "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?").

Jesus was a believer in the prophets ; the prophets spoke of Him ; if one is not a believer, then the Bible describes the person as an "outsider" ("This is My SON; Listen to Him") --

Eph 2:19
God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ ... That is why you are no longer foreigners and outsiders but citizens together with God's people and members of God's family ... built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself as the cornerstone.

1 Cor 14:23
Suppose everyone in your worship service started speaking unknown languages, and some outsiders or some unbelievers come in. Won't they think you are crazy?

Here is Jesus, speaking to the "outsiders" (point: these men were not believers of the prophets)

John 18
"You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

 

[Roustabout]

Moses and Abraham: I would say neither of these men was "an outsider." Neither was Jesus (there's simply zero reason to describe any as such). They were all right there in the midst/middle of the Jewish people (Abraham being the father of ; Moses being the deliverer of ; Jesus being the Messiah of (Jesus taught in the temple and synagague / was definitely not "an outsider").

Let's back up, to get another view of your logic (in addition to what the theologians are teaching you) --

Question: would you categorize Zechariah as "an outsider" or "an insider" ? Please explain what makes him that.

Per 2 Chronicles 24, Jehoiada was the priest / high priest / priest of the temple and brother-in-law to King Ahaziah -- essentially, we can say he was Jewish ("Throughout the days of Jehoiada, burnt offerings were presented regularly in the house of the LORD") << in this context of calling Jesus "an outsider" I believe it's safe to call Jehoiada "an insider."

Zechariah was Jehoiada's son -- Zechariah's mission was similar in many ways to portions of the ministry of Jesus (Zechariah descended from Jewish parents ; Zechariah was sent by God to the people ; Zechariah had direct access to speaking to/teaching the people and religious leaders of Israel/Judah/Jerusalem ; the Holy Spirit "came upon" Zechariah and told him what to say ; Zechariah delivered God's message(s) ; the decision-making-religious leaders / officers of Israel rejected his message / they conspired against him and killed Zechariah).

2 Chron 24
... to Jehoiada to make with it the articles for the house of the LORD.
Throughout the days of Jehoiada, burnt offerings were presented regularly in the house of the LORD.
Jehoiada died. The people then began to worship idols ("after the death of Jehoiada, however, ... They abandoned the house of the LORD, the God of their fathers, and served the Asherah poles and idols. ... Nevertheless, the LORD sent prophets to bring the people back to Him and to testify against them; but they would not listen. ... Then the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah son of Jehoiada the priest, who stood up before the people and said to them, “This is what God says: ‘Why do you transgress the commandments of the LORD?" ... But they conspired against Zechariah, and by order of the king, they stoned him in the courtyard of the house of the LORD. Joash killed Jehoiada’s son. As he lay dying, Zechariah said, ... ).

Go hash this out on your Bible thread.
I mean good grief, you’re laying out endless paragraphs of out of context scripture arguing that Jesus wasn’t an outsider. Of course he was. He did not arise within the priestly order or among the religious elite. He chose even bigger outsiders as his inner circle. You’d argue with a fence post.

 

[UT-Rex]

Jesus was an outsider. There is nothing about Him or His teachings that indicate he was an "insider."He was poor, He wasn't a Pharisee or a Saducee nor was He a tax collector or politician. If you read the Beatitudes, Jesus said He came for outsiders...the poor, the meek, the downtrodden. His own people condemned him to death. Jesus and his followers were largely people who existed on the fringe of society.

I’ve enjoyed reading your posts with the other guy on ignorant. Its entertaining for me to fill in the other half of the conversation in my mind. I’m not going to look but I bet I am not far off.

As a follow-up: the temple received the offering from Joseph and Mary, on behalf of their son.

I.E. There is NO Biblical indication that the temple denied the offering (please show otherwise) ; logically then (and if we have any rabbi's in here to dispute this logic, please do), the "nation of Israel" received Jesus of Nazareth into this world as "an insider" (in refuting your terminology "Jesus was an outsider") ; how they treated Him in Jerusalem 33 years later, cannot change the fact.


Proof, that Jesus was "an insider" (Luke 2:21-25 (See Leviticus 12) --

"And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.
And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;
(As it is written in the law of the LORD, Every male that opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord
And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons."

Purple: Luke 2:21-25 shows that you and those theologians have no Biblical justification in labeling Jesus "an outsider." Think on that / think on Luke 2:21-25 (Lev 12).

 

[UT-Rex]

Go hash this out on your Bible thread.
I mean good grief, you’re laying out endless paragraphs of out of context scripture arguing that Jesus wasn’t an outsider. Of course he was. He did not arise within the priestly order or among the religious elite. He chose even bigger outsiders as his inner circle. You’d argue with a fence post.

That you refer to Luke 2:21-25 as "out of context" is your opinion. The topic was brought up in here. I'm arguing with you (argue, in the context of presenting evidence).

 

[Purple Tiger]

As a follow-up: the temple received the offering from Joseph and Mary, on behalf of their son.

I.E. There is NO Biblical indication that the temple denied the offering (please show otherwise) ; logically then (and if we have any rabbi's in here to dispute this logic, please do), the "nation of Israel" received Jesus of Nazareth into this world as "an insider" (in refuting your terminology "Jesus was an outsider") ; how they treated Him in Jerusalem 33 years later, cannot change the fact.


Proof, that Jesus was "an insider" (Luke 2:21-25 (See Leviticus 12) --

"And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.
And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;
(As it is written in the law of the LORD, Every male that opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord
And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons."

Purple: Luke 2:21-25 shows that you and those theologians have no Biblical justification in labeling Jesus "an outsider." Think on that / think on Luke 2:21-25 (Lev 12).

You are not proving anything. Of course Jesus was circumcised and dedicated in the Temple. He was Jewish and his parents were Jews. This was the custom. But that does not mean he was an insider. John 1:11 says "He came to what was his own and his own people did not accept him." Sounds like the fate of an outsider to me.

 

[UT-Rex]

Go hash this out on your Bible thread.
I mean good grief, you’re laying out endless paragraphs of out of context scripture arguing that Jesus wasn’t an outsider. Of course he was. He did not arise within the priestly order or among the religious elite. He chose even bigger outsiders as his inner circle. You’d argue with a fence post.

You are not proving anything. Of course Jesus was circumcised and dedicated in the Temple. He was Jewish and his parents were Jews. This was the custom. But that does not mean he was an insider. John 1:11 says "He came to what was his own and his own people did not accept him." Sounds like the fate of an outsider to me.

You two are pretending that each American citizens is "an outsider" simply if he/she is not a political figure or of material wealth. You're simply using skewed logic.

That a particular USA political party or leader does not accept YOU, does not you "an outsider" make.

By plan, WE the People are insiders (we are citizens). Jesus was a citizen of the nation (proved by Luke 2:21-25 as referenced).

Purple: "his own people" (NOTE: it does NOT say "his own priestly order and religious elite" !

 

[Roustabout]

You two are pretending that each American citizens is "an outsider" simply if he/she is not a political figure or of material wealth. You're simply using skewed logic.

That a particular USA political party or leader does not accept YOU, does not you "an outsider" make.

By plan, WE the People are insiders (we are citizens). Jesus was a citizen of the nation (proved by Luke 2:21-25 as referenced).

Purple: "his own people" (NOTE: it does NOT say "his own priestly order and religious elite" !

WTH are you talking about?
You need help

 

[UT-Rex]

Jesus was an outsider. There is nothing about Him or His teachings that indicate he was an "insider."He was poor, He wasn't a Pharisee or a Saducee nor was He a tax collector or politician. If you read the Beatitudes, Jesus said He came for outsiders...the poor, the meek, the downtrodden. His own people condemned him to death. Jesus and his followers were largely people who existed on the fringe of society.

a. "Christianity started with an outsider" >> not true, as Jesus was not an "outsider"

Go hash this out on your Bible thread.
I mean good grief, you’re laying out endless paragraphs of out of context scripture arguing that Jesus wasn’t an outsider. Of course he was. He did not arise within the priestly order or among the religious elite. He chose even bigger outsiders as his inner circle. You’d argue with a fence post.

WTH are you talking about?
You need help

Jesus was born Jewish ; at age 40 days old, His parents presented him to the temple, as per Leviticus 12, and the temple accepted His parents' sacrifice ; he studied at the temple as early as Age 12 ; as an adult, he taught at the temple and in the synagogue(s) ; throughout the Jerusalem area, he taught the Jewish people and performed miracles among the people ; He was referred to as "rabbi" ;

He was killed, according to Jewish law (well, per His accusers, but the "government" in charge found him innocent) -- "“We have a law,” answered the Jews, “and according to that law He must die, because ...." (John 19:7);

He was buried according to Jewish custom ;

John confirms "He came to His own" ("His own" is sufficient language to see that He was not "an outsider" << and that "His own did not receive Him" does not make him "an outsider").

He was born according to Jewish law ; He lived according to Jewish law ; "His own" killed him, according to Jewish law ; He was buried according to Jewish custom.

End of discussion; or, proceed to attempt to explain your "outsider" logic << or better yet, just quote the Scripture that says as much (quote it here, or in the Bible thread).

Again: "(Jesus) He came to His own" explains that "Jesus was an outsider" is not accurate (even though "His own did not receive Him").

 

[Roustabout]

Jesus was born Jewish ; at age 40 days old, His parents presented him to the temple, as per Leviticus 12, and the temple accepted His parents' sacrifice ; he studied at the temple as early as Age 12 ; as an adult, he taught at the temple and in the synagogue(s) ; throughout the Jerusalem area, he taught the Jewish people and performed miracles among the people ; He was referred to as "rabbi" ;

He was killed, according to Jewish law (well, per His accusers, but the "government" in charge found him innocent) -- "“We have a law,” answered the Jews, “and according to that law He must die, because ...." (John 19:7);

He was buried according to Jewish custom ;

John confirms "He came to His own" ("His own" is sufficient language to see that He was not "an outsider" << and that "His own did not receive Him" does not make him "an outsider").

He was born according to Jewish law ; He lived according to Jewish law ; "His own" killed him, according to Jewish law ; He was buried according to Jewish custom.

End of discussion; or, proceed to attempt to explain your "outsider" logic << or better yet, just quote the Scripture that says as much (quote it here, or in the Bible thread).

Again: "(Jesus) He came to His own" explains that "Jesus was an outsider" is not accurate (even though "His own did not receive Him").

You still talking about that? Great. I’ve moved on.

 

[rjd970]

This is probably my biggest issue with the left....the hypocrisy of Islam. They are all about denigrating and sicking the ACLU on Christian organizations, homosexual discrimination, minority rights....yet absolutely refuse to apply the same standard when talking about 3rd world Islamic countries. It’s a level of cognitive dissonance that makes no sense at all.

I’m not even saying this from a partisan point of view, it’s just basic observation.

 

[UT-Rex]

A point to ponder is the political connection. Christianity started with an outsider, hated by the government of His time It took hundreds of years for the church to gain a strong foothold even advising governments. In Islam, Mohammed was the government. He was the leader, the Caliph; Islam began its existence in control of things. It's all they've ever known. It's baked right into the religion..

Jesus was an outsider. There is nothing about Him or His teachings that indicate he was an "insider."He was poor, He wasn't a Pharisee or a Saducee nor was He a tax collector or politician. If you read the Beatitudes, Jesus said He came for outsiders...the poor, the meek, the downtrodden. His own people condemned him to death. Jesus and his followers were largely people who existed on the fringe of society.

I’ve enjoyed reading your posts with the other guy on ignorant. Its entertaining for me to fill in the other half of the conversation in my mind. I’m not going to look but I bet I am not far off.

Go hash this out on your Bible thread.
I mean good grief, you’re laying out endless paragraphs of out of context scripture arguing that Jesus wasn’t an outsider. Of course he was. He did not arise within the priestly order or among the religious elite. He chose even bigger outsiders as his inner circle. You’d argue with a fence post.

You still talking about that? Great. I’ve moved on.

Roust, your argument ignorantly perpetuates the false belief against that fact that Jesus is Messiah (this little lesson applies to Judaism and Islam).

EG: continually reminding the unbelieving Jew that "Jesus was an outsider" (your terminology), well, then, they obviously might continue to believe it (when, in fact, Moses spoke of Him (as being another "insider" just as was Moses and Abraham, Isaiah, Jeremiah, the others).

In fact, the argument here is showing, that the Deceiver would have the unbeliever continue to believe the False Narrative shown in writing here ^ that "Jesus was an outsider."

That Jesus is Messiah is proof that He was "an insider" (sent by God, at the appropriate time in History, with warnings against those false prophets who will come afterwards speaking things against His words) << that both Islam and Judaism deny Him, shows He's "an insider" as it's the "outsider" who will not believe in Him as Way, Truth and Life (again, "outsider"/"insider' is not my normal terminology, but all-things considered: That Jesus was "an insider" MUST be truer than "an outsider").

IE: It is the/a purpose of the Church (Christianity) to teach those of Islam and Judaism that Jesus was just as much (actually WAY more) of an insider than Abraham ("Before Abraham was, I am"), Moses and ALL of the Prophets.

It's been a pleasant study ! Scripture proves that the terminology "Jesus was an outsider" is simply incorrect (Here is the actual, Biblical teaching: "He came to His own and His own did not receive Him" << "He came to His own" explains that He was not "an outsider" << In Abrahamic / faith terminology: the "unbeliever" is "an outsider" << in Noahic study, the "outsider" was an unbeliever).

 

[Wafflestomper]

Even Jesus would be bored by this conversation.

 

[Purple Tiger]

Even Jesus would be bored by this conversation.

Bored AF.

 

[Purple Tiger]

This is probably my biggest issue with the left....the hypocrisy of Islam. They are all about denigrating and sicking the ACLU on Christian organizations, homosexual discrimination, minority rights....yet absolutely refuse to apply the same standard when talking about 3rd world Islamic countries. It’s a level of cognitive dissonance that makes no sense at all.

I’m not even saying this from a partisan point of view, it’s just basic observation.

It's a muddied observation, at best. There is no unified opinion about Islam on the "left." With regard to Islam, I believe the "left" cares about what happens in this country, not in others. The ACLU has no reason to be concerned with what happens in Islamic countries.

 

[Roustabout]

Roust, your argument ignorantly perpetuates the false belief against that fact that Jesus is Messiah (this little lesson applies to Judaism and Islam).

EG: continually reminding the unbelieving Jew that "Jesus was an outsider" (your terminology), well, then, they obviously might continue to believe it (when, in fact, Moses spoke of Him (as being another "insider" just as was Moses and Abraham, Isaiah, Jeremiah, the others).

In fact, the argument here is showing, that the Deceiver would have the unbeliever continue to believe the False Narrative shown in writing here ^ that "Jesus was an outsider."

That Jesus is Messiah is proof that He was "an insider" (sent by God, at the appropriate time in History, with warnings against those false prophets who will come afterwards speaking things against His words) << that both Islam and Judaism deny Him, shows He's "an insider" as it's the "outsider" who will not believe in Him as Way, Truth and Life (again, "outsider"/"insider' is not my normal terminology, but all-things considered: That Jesus was "an insider" MUST be truer than "an outsider").

IE: It is the/a purpose of the Church (Christianity) to teach those of Islam and Judaism that Jesus was just as much (actually WAY more) of an insider than Abraham ("Before Abraham was, I am"), Moses and ALL of the Prophets.

It's been a pleasant study ! Scripture proves that the terminology "Jesus was an outsider" is simply incorrect (Here is the actual, Biblical teaching: "He came to His own and His own did not receive Him" << "He came to His own" explains that He was not "an outsider" << In Abrahamic / faith terminology: the "unbeliever" is "an outsider" << in Noahic study, the "outsider" was an unbeliever).

Do I need to put you back on ignore? I took you off for New Years.

I’ve never seen anyone argue about crap the way you do. Get help.

 

[rjd970]

It's a muddied observation, at best. There is no unified opinion about Islam on the "left." With regard to Islam, I believe the "left" cares about what happens in this country, not in others. The ACLU has no reason to be concerned with what happens in Islamic countries.

I would argue there is no unified position about anything along either party line. Each side has its majority opinion, sure. The majority position on the left seems to be one of all beliefs are equal and at its root Islam should be treated no different than Christianity. Far be it from me to defend Christianity, but that simply isn’t true on an objective level. Islam is far more scary from a western values point of view. It’s record on women’s rights, homosexuality, and atheism is atrocious. The simple fact that we still have entire regions of the world where imprisonment and execution for these imaginary crimes is codified by law is a testament to this. The liberal left simply has it wrong here. They should be going after Islam with the same fervor they do the Westboro church.

Do you think Ben Affleck’s views here are not indicative of the majority left in this country?

 

[Purple Tiger]

I would argue there is no unified position about anything along either party line. Each side has its majority opinion, sure. The majority position on the left seems to be one of all beliefs are equal and at its root Islam should be treated no different than Christianity. Far be it from me to defend Christianity, but that simply isn’t true on an objective level. Islam is far more scary from a western values point of view. It’s record on women’s rights, homosexuality, and atheism is atrocious. The simple fact that we still have entire regions of the world where imprisonment and execution for these imaginary crimes is codified by law is a testament to this. The liberal left simply has it wrong here. They should be going after Islam with the same fervor they do the Westboro church.

Do you think Ben Affleck’s views here are not indicative of the majority left in this country?

I appreciate your response. My take as a liberal: According to the Constitution, Muslims have every right to freely participate in their religion as do Christians and Jews. Do I think Muslims in the US live under Sharia law and do the horrible things that happen in Muslim countries? No, because we have civil laws in our country that supersede religious laws. We cannot control what Islam does in other parts of the world. I think Islam can be terribly cruel and unjust to people. However, I am personally more ashamed of Westboro as an Christian American because they do cruel and unjust things to innocent people in the name of my own religion in my own country. I hope that makes sense because my brain seems to still be asleep this morning.

 

[Rickyvol77]

I appreciate your response. My take as a liberal: According to the Constitution, Muslims have every right to freely participate in their religion as do Christians and Jews. Do I think Muslims in the US live under Sharia law and do the horrible things that happen in Muslim countries? No, because we have civil laws in our country that supersede religious laws. We cannot control what Islam does in other parts of the world. I think Islam can be terribly cruel and unjust to people. However, I am personally more ashamed of Westboro as an Christian American because they do cruel and unjust things to innocent people in the name of my own religion in my own country. I hope that makes sense because my brain seems to still be asleep this morning.

yes because 25 inbred idiots who hold signs and shout mean things are definitely comparable to thousands of people being raped, stoned, beheaded, hung, thrown off buildings, blown up and enslaved.

 

[Purple Tiger]

yes because 25 inbred idiots who hold signs and shout mean things are definitely comparable to thousands of people being raped, stoned, beheaded, hung, thrown off buildings, blown up and enslaved.

I have no control over Muslims in other countries. I have yet to see the "left" support any of those terrible things you listed above. The Muslims who live in the US do not act like that. Westboro spews hate representing my religion that espouses love.

 

[Matt2496]

Indonesia's Aceh unveils new female flogging squad

Female flogging force unveiled in Indonesia to publicly punish women who violate Sharia law

 

[Orange_Vol1321]

 

[CagleMtnVol]

 

[Roustabout]

I appreciate your response. My take as a liberal: According to the Constitution, Muslims have every right to freely participate in their religion as do Christians and Jews. Do I think Muslims in the US live under Sharia law and do the horrible things that happen in Muslim countries? No, because we have civil laws in our country that supersede religious laws. We cannot control what Islam does in other parts of the world. I think Islam can be terribly cruel and unjust to people. However, I am personally more ashamed of Westboro as an Christian American because they do cruel and unjust things to innocent people in the name of my own religion in my own country. I hope that makes sense because my brain seems to still be asleep this morning.

The naïveté in this concerning. Everywhere Islam becomes a majority, Sharia isn’t far behind.

Westboro on the other hand is a band of a few dozen people who get more attention than they deserve and have been wholly condemned by the overwhelming majority of Christians.

The facts just don’t back you up here. Not at all: