The Instigator
jackpool
Con (against)
Winning
40 Points
The Contender
Solarman1969
Pro (for)
Losing
10 Points

Islam should be banned in the United States on the basis of being a death cult, not a religion.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/26/2007 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,087 times Debate No: 1014
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (17)

 

jackpool

Con

Ok. I'll take you up on this.

The Koran is comparable to the Bible and Torah in content. So, the basis of this religion, its holy book, is very similar to the other two popular monotheistic religions of the world. In fact, the old testament is a large portion of all three of these. If you want to argue hat the old testament is possibly the basis of a death cult, I might actually agree with you. But then we might start banning every religion.

Secondly, Death Cults aren't illegal. Meeting, saying, and holding beliefs of the sort are all legal. Congress may not pass a law based on religion, let alone a law that conflicts with the Bill of Rights (ok...so maybe the Alien and Sedition Act and Patriot Act were passed, but they shouldn't have been).

Thirdly, oppression of any people is wrong. Believe it or not, the majority of Muslims have never committed evil acts. Or do you mean Death Cult is the sense of worshiping the afterlife above their first life? If you want to ban Islam on this basis you must also be willing to ban the top 10 religions in the world for the same reason.
Solarman1969

Pro

First of all, I like your picture- do you look like that?

Second, I see you are 18- thus you likely dont have the slightest idea what your taking about - and by what youve writen thats accurate

I am going to list some websites here for you to review and learn from

www.prophetodoom.net www.yadayahweh.com

www.faithfreedom.org www.jihadwatch.com www.religionofpeace.com

they will give you a good primer on Islam, as well as Chrisitianity and Judaism and their cults

The Qu'ran and Torah (old testament) and new testament dont have ONE THING in common.

The assertion that Islam is an Abrahamic religion is nonsense

Every aspect of these claims by Mohammed and his predecessors is plain and simple, plagarism and the attempt to paint Islam and Allah its moon god as somehow related in any way to the God (Yahweh) of the Torah and Bible to give it legitimacy, which is does not have at all.

Introduction (from Prophet of Doom)

Islam provides only one prime source of information on Muhammad and the formation of Islam written within two centuries of the time he lived and it was conceived. Ishaq's Sira, or Biography, stands alone - a singular and tenuous thread connecting us to a very troubled man and time. Over the next two hundred years, other Hadith Collections were compiled by the likes of Tabari, Bukhari, and Muslim. Their assemblages of oral reports, or Traditions, were said to have been inspired by Allah. They purport to convey Muhammad's words and example. They also explain the Qur'an - a book so deficient in context and chronology, it can only be understood when seen through the eyes of the Sunnah writers.

I have been less concerned with the validity of these sources than with what they have to say. Their message is all Muslims have. Together, the Sunnah and Qur'an are Islam. Therefore, I was willing to take them at face value.

But you don't have to dig very deep to find the truth. Even a cursory reading of the Qur'an is sufficient to prove that it is a fraud. There is no way the creator of the universe wrote a book devoid of context, without chronology or intelligent transitions. Such a creative spirit wouldn't need to plagiarize. He would know history and science and thus wouldn't have made such a fool of himself. The God who created man wouldn't deceive him or lead him to hell as Allah does. Nor would he order men to terrorize, mutilate, rob, enslave, and slaughter the followers of other Scriptures he claims he revealed, wiping them out to the last. One doesn't need a scholastic review of the Qur'anic text to disprove its veracity. It destroys itself quite nicely.

And who knows what version they finally committed to paper, if in fact they ever did? Bukhari:V6B61N513: "Allah's Apostle said, 'Gabriel [whom Muhammad said had 600 wings] recited the Qur'an to me in one way. Then I requested him and continued asking him to recite it in other ways, and he recited it in several ways till he ultimately recited it in seven different ways.'" So there were at least seven Qur'ans.

That wasn't the end of the confusion. In version two of the angelic recital, Muhammad was the reciter, not Gabriel. Bukhari:V6B61N519: "In the month of Ramadan Gabriel used to meet Muhammad every night of the month till it elapsed. Allah's Apostle used to recite the Qur'an for him." Then, we go from every night to once a year. Bukhari:V6B61N520: "Gabriel used to repeat the recitation of the Qur'an with the Prophet once a year, but he repeated it twice with him in the year he died."

No wonder they couldn't remember who said what to whom. Bukhari:V6B61N549 "Allah's Apostle said, "The example of the person who knows the Qur'an by heart is like the owner of tied camels. If he keeps them tied, he will control them, but if he releases them, they will run away." To release something you have memorized you would have to share it. So this Hadith is apparently telling Muslims not to recite surahs for fear of losing them. And speaking of losing it: Bukhari:V6B61N550 "The Prophet said, 'It is a bad thing that some of you say, "I have forgotten such-and-such verse of the Qur'an." For indeed, I have been caused to forget it. So you must keep on reciting the Qur'an because it escapes from the hearts of men faster than a runaway camel.'"

This frivolity is important because it exposes a lie that sits at the heart of Islam. It's irrational to think God would shift from a reliance on literate Jewish prophets to an illiterate Arab. The foundation of Islamic teaching is based upon the notion that God chose Arabs because they had good memories. Therefore, they reason, the Qur'an wouldn't be changed the way the Bible was corrupted. All Islamic schools from Alazahr to Pakistan are centered around this obvious lie. The Qur'an was forgotten; it was changed and recited by so many people it was corrupted beyond hope before it ever found paper. And since the Bible started out as words on a page, it has remained true to its initial inspiration.

But it's worse than that. Muslims insist on confining the Qur'an to Religious Arabic - a language which is so hard to learn with its complex grammar and antiquated vocabulary, it's ranked second by linguists after Chinese, as the world's least hospitable communication medium. Worse still, even in Arabic much of the Qur'an cannot be understood because many words are missing and others are nonsensical. It's not rational to think that God would choose illiterate people and such a difficult language if he wished to communicate his message to the whole world. It's like using diesel to fuel a lamp and then hiding it in a swamp.

But there is a method to their madness. By confining the Qur'an to Religious Arabic, Islamic clerics and kings can say whatever they want - and they do. An Egyptian doctor who edited Prophet of Doom wrote: "You would be amazed how they can distort facts to deceive others."

Despite all evidence to the contrary, including their own, Islamic scholars contend that today's Qur'an is an identical copy of Allah's Eternal Tablets, even so far as the punctuation, titles, and divisions of chapters are concerned. Maududi, one of the most esteemed Qur'anic scholars said, "The Qur'an exists in its original text, without a word, syllable nor even letter having been changed." (Towards Understanding Islam, Maududi) Abu Dhabi, another leading Muslim said, "No other book in the world can match the Qur'an. The astonishing fact about this Book of Allah is that it has remained unchanged, even to a dot, over the last fourteen hundred years. No variation of text can be found in it." That's factually untrue, every word of it.

The Qur'an says of itself: "Nay this is a glorious Qur'an, (inscribed) on a Preserved Tablet." (85:21) "A Scripture Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail; a Qur'an in Arabic." (Qur'an 41:3) "We have coined for man in this Qur'an. (It is) a Qur'an in Arabic, without any crookedness (therein)." (39:27) Richard Nixon tried that line too. It didn't work any better for him than it does for Allah. Over the course of these pages you'll discover why.

In coming arguments I will give you some history, or you can learn for yourself if you have the guts.

Some parody now

On 9/11, nineteen committed Muslims believed they had a religious mandate to fly planes into buildings and slaughter thousands of innocent people.
The Muslim world erupted with outrage over this horrible act of mass murder. Massive demonstrations were held in nearly every Muslim country and Western city. At these demonstrations, Muslim leaders harshly denounced Islamic terror and shared the many hundreds of verses from the Qur'an that encourage universal brotherhood, peace and tolerance. A slew of fatwas and clerical condemnations against terror soon followed.

I will argue in further debates specifics of why Islam should be banned

In short, it is threat to freedom liberty and life- all three
Debate Round No. 1
jackpool

Con

jackpool forfeited this round.
Solarman1969

Pro

another one bites the dust

ISLAM SHOULD BE BANNED . TODAY

once again, learn about terror and its history with Islam

http://www.prophetofdoom.net...
Debate Round No. 2
jackpool

Con

jackpool forfeited this round.
Solarman1969

Pro

please feel free to view any of the other debates I have started or am contending on this subject

the most recent one is with an actual muslim, although as usual he is very young and thus, has no concept of the history of the hatred of Islam and the tremendous suffering and oppression it has caused

cheers

solarman
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Solarman1969 8 years ago
Solarman1969
nice try

Apologist for the terrorists

sooner or later everyone will agree with me, and not Islamic types who want to subdue or kill them

SOLARMAN
Posted by Muhafidh 8 years ago
Muhafidh
It is not a mystery how Jackpool won a debate after only posting an opening argument. Solarman is notorious for his avoidance of debate. Instead of debating, he posts copies of text from prophetofdoom.net, an anti-Islâmic hate-speech site that uses a "special" translation of the Qur'ân as part of an energetic effort to defame Islâm and its founder.

Before I pounded him on this, Solarman used to do this without ever revealing what he was doing: Pathological plagiarism. Eventually, he decided that as long as he revealed his source, he could continue to hijack Craig Winn's racist rhetoric and thus continue to avoid doing any debating himself.

If you remove the plagiarized majority of Solarman's text, what remains is just mindless ranting. Take another look. What did Solarman actually say, in his own words?
Posted by jacobgunter 8 years ago
jacobgunter
Wow, you are an intolerant bigot. While I agree that many atrocious acts have been committed in the name of Allah, there have been just as many on the side of Yahweh. The crusades, 2000 years of death and destruction, the various inquisitions, etc.

Also, you are OK with the stripping of a right to worship one religion, if that happens, where does it end? What religion will be next, shall we pull a Hitler and get rid of the Jews? WHat about the Buddhists? The Hindus? Pagans?

History has shown that when one right is stripped, that it sets the precident that it is OK to strip away rights.

There is also a thing called the first Amendment that you are violating.

You are also judging an entire religion based on the few extremists. In that case All Christians must be Gay-killing, Abortion clinic bombing, inquisitionists that believe we should kill all those who dont believe.

And WTF is up with the "you are too young to understand" argument. That is the signal that you have nothing else to argue about the subject, and can only attack the other debator.

You forfeit the round by having to make that atack, which I will point out to you is a logical fallacy.

Just because somebody is young doesnt mean that they cant speak with understanding. Im only 17, and I know more about polics, religion, philosophy, and many other topics then most adults do. So shut your pie-hole, grow a brain, and maybe a heart where that ice-block is right now, and learn that others can have a voice to. You are not the GOd that you think you are.

I call you a naive, intolerant, elitist, supremisist, pig.
Posted by alexthemoderate 8 years ago
alexthemoderate
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free practice thereof".

I don't disagree that some elements of Islam have sparked extremism and terrorist cells, but a few quick things:

a) Christianity has had its share of 'bad apples'--The KKK, Westboro Baptist Church, the Crusades
b) The problem is in the misinterpretation of certain scripture
c) We can't ban any religion, we can only hope to prevent any violence or other action that hurts someone else's rights. A religion, of any kind, is a state of mind, a practice of reflection, or simply a philosophy of life.
d) Legislating religion is against the sworn creed of this country to promote and protect religious freedom, to be FREE from persecution.
Posted by Leonitus_Trujillo 8 years ago
Leonitus_Trujillo
geeze this guy post a few sentences and doesn't post again in the entire debate and solarman goes as it seems all out in thise one practically writting a book--and he sitll looses. Ok people are just voting against him becuase they dont like him, or voting like a survey.
Posted by cody30228 8 years ago
cody30228
um, age does not determine wisdom
its obvious by looking at you
Posted by Solarman1969 8 years ago
Solarman1969
at least you cant vote for another 5 years

maybe you will wise up by then
Posted by iluvdb8 8 years ago
iluvdb8
Solarman1969, no matter how much older than jackpool you are, you are still immature enough to argue that a few million peoples' religion is false...Smooth!

And to you jackpool, what kind of one sided topic is this??? why would anyone want to debate you on this topic???
Posted by Solarman1969 8 years ago
Solarman1969
DUH!

OK, Genius

I did notice that several of them is a porno site- are you promoting pornography on this site?

You need to grow up, kid

fkwr
Posted by theaceb 8 years ago
theaceb
To Solarman

First of all I notice your profile picture is the island of Kaua'i, do you look like that?

Second of all I notice your 38, and by what you've wrote your imeasurably valuable 20 extra years in existence has not prevented you from being a neo-conservative bigot.

I am going to list some websites here for you to review and learn from

google.com

youtube.com

wikipedia.org

mrchewsasianbeaver.com

amazon.com

bangbros.com

willandericfilms.com

learn for yourself if you have the guts.
17 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by U.n 9 months ago
U.n
jackpoolSolarman1969Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
jackpoolSolarman1969Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Vote Placed by Greendonut 8 years ago
Greendonut
jackpoolSolarman1969Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by gabriel04 8 years ago
gabriel04
jackpoolSolarman1969Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Padfoot36 8 years ago
Padfoot36
jackpoolSolarman1969Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by C-Mach 8 years ago
C-Mach
jackpoolSolarman1969Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by iluvdb8 8 years ago
iluvdb8
jackpoolSolarman1969Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Descartes 8 years ago
Descartes
jackpoolSolarman1969Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by killa_connor 8 years ago
killa_connor
jackpoolSolarman1969Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by artC 8 years ago
artC
jackpoolSolarman1969Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30