The Instigator
TheDragon5
Pro (for)
Winning
19 Points
The Contender
npt2
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Sharia Law is immoral.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
TheDragon5
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/3/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 950 times Debate No: 100541
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (22)
Votes (4)

 

TheDragon5

Pro

Round 1: Acceptance and Opening Arguments.
Round 2: Rebuttals.
Round 3: Rebuttals and Closing Arguments.
Good luck to the opponent.

Sharia Law is Immoral
Anti-Sharia Argument #1 " Women. Sharia Law is extremely anti-woman. It states that it is illegal for a woman to leave the house against the will of her husband. It allows husbands to beat their wives under any circumstance. If this is not anti-woman, I don"t know what is.
Anti-Sharia Argument #2 " Non-Muslims and Jihad.
"Fighting is prescribed for you' (Koran 2: 216);
"Slay them wherever you find them' (Koran 4: 89)
"Fight the idolators utterly' (Koran 9: 36)
Sharia Law states that a Muslim who takes the life of a non-Muslim may not be punished.
The legal system also allows non-Muslim subjects living in an Islamic State to live free of harm, but with a nasty twist. They must:
Pay a special tax, accept lesser forms of greeting, and never build homes or places of worship taller that homes of Muslims and Mosques. Breaking this agreement may result in lynching.
Anti-Sharia Argument #3 " Lying.
(r8.2) - The Prophet said, "He who settles disagreements between people to bring about good or says something commendable is not a liar.'

Kulthum added, "I did not hear him permit untruth in anything people say, except for three things: war, settling disagreements and a man talking with his wife or she with him (in smoothing over differences)'

The legal system permits lying, a practice called Taqiyya, to spread Islam.

I now turn this debate over to Con. Good luck to you.
Sources and works cited:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com...
http://www.americanthinker.com...
http://www.billionbibles.org...
npt2

Con

There is nothing immoral about Sharia. By YOUR standards YOU say it is immoral.
The Quran, the Hadith, this is the words of God.

You claim that Sharia Law is immoral. But that is to question Allah:
"Allah is never unjust In the least degree." Al-Quran 4:40
God is just. He cannot be unjust. Otherwise, He is not God. The word He gives us is true and perfect. There is no mistake in His word. Otherwise, He is not God.

Allah is Eternal. He is the One and Only.

Sharia is the only standard of morality. It is the only standard of what is right by Him.
These rulings are mandatory. They are not left open to YOUR interpretation.

Heretics, apostates, and infidels are all subject to the will of Allah- hell fire.

What is your standard of What is Moral?
Debate Round No. 1
TheDragon5

Pro

My opponent"s only proof is that his God, Allah just says so, and that"s that. In order for this to be a constructive debate, Con must realize that not all people believe in Islam and Sharia Law. I refuse to follow the rules of a religion I am not a part of.

Con then resorts to an offensive allegation, alleging that I am an "infidel." I urge the voters to take note of this.

To answer Con"s question of what I believe is moral, I believe that basic morals are equal and fair treatment of others and honesty. That is what most believe is moral, and those are two things that Sharia Law does not advocate.

I am awaiting Con"s Rebuttals.
npt2

Con

You've quoted, taken verses to mold a favorable context, and taken examples of the authority from a Holy book you don't believe in.
You spoke of honesty and fair treatment of others.
But what do you mean by fair?
It is not fair treatment of others who suffer under the regimes set up by murderous foreign governments in countries across the world.
It is not fair treatment for those in prisons who've been the victims of merciless sexual assault and abuse and torture.
It is not fair treatment for those indiscriminately killed by drone strikes.
It is dishonest to mislead the public for personal gain and the Quran denounces lying to harm others.

You may say I argue from authority, but is the alternative nihilism?
Tell me how can everyone be moral? What allows for this?

To decide what is moral and what is not moral is to decide what is going on in someones head. I cannot do that.
Sharia Law decides.
That being said, we live in a world of governed law.

A man practicing Sharia says, "I am moral."
A different man says, "You are not."

Where does that leave us?
Debate Round No. 2
TheDragon5

Pro

My opponent appears to be criticizing another legal system, instead of defending the topic.
Con also seems to believe that the only alternative is nihilism.
Nihilism - the rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless.
I am not asking that he reject his religion or his own morals, only that he argue in this debate with an open mind, and not only argue from authority.
I"ll ask Con: Would you be willing to kill me if I did not allow you to implement Sharia? Answer this in your turn, please.

Anti-Sharia Argument #4 " Freedom of Religion and Conscience.
(o8.1) - When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.

(o8.4) - There is no indemnity for killing an apostate (since it is killing someone who deserves to die).
Clearly, Sharia allows the killing of non-Muslims, and those who convert away from Islam.

Anti-Sharia Argument #5 " Sex and Killing.
(o1.2) - The following are not subject to retaliation: ... -4- a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring or offspring's offspring

o12.2 - The penalty for adultery is stoning. The penalty for unmarried sex (fornication) is 100 lashes.
Sharia Law has rather brutal punishments for sexual crimes, and states that a parent killing their children or grandchildren is "not subject to retaliation.

Anti-Sharia Argument #6 " Slaves
Female slaves are subject to sexual immorality with their owners, whether they like it or not.
Here is what www.answering-islam.org has to say:
"Sayyid Maududi (d. 1979), a highly respected traditional commentator and scholar, says in his comment on the verse that is it lawful for Muslim holy warriors to marry women prisoners of war even when their husbands are still alive. But what happens if the husbands are captured with their wives? Maududi cites a school of law that says Muslims may not marry them, but two other schools say that the marriage between the captive husbands and wives is broken (note 44). But why would a debate over this cruelty emerge in the first place? No sex or marriage should take place between married female prisoners of war and their captors. In fact, no sex should take place between women captives and their Muslim overlords. But Islam traffics in injustice too often."
"Islam allows deep immorality with women who are in their most helpless condition. This crime is reprehensible, but Allah wills it nonetheless"the Quran says so.(2)

In light of one of my arguments, I"ll ask again: Con, would you be willing to kill me if I did not allow you to implement Sharia Law?
I will now turn this debate over to Con for the last time, best of luck to him.
Thanks for a great debate.
Vote Pro!
npt2

Con

You ask me if I would kill you under Sharia. Know that people have a different understanding of what is right and wrong. Have an open mind to another person's religion. It governs how they live. Who are you to deny that?

I do not command. I am not a theocrat. I am commanded by my Holy Book. Have an open mind to my way of life.
Under Sharia, a Muslim is prescribed to fighting. "Fight the idolators utterly' (Koran 9: 36), as you've pointed out.

"I am not asking that he reject his religion or his own morals, only that he argue in this debate with an open mind, and not only argue from authority."

I'm happy you pointed that out.
You continuously raise points from the book that tells me how I ought to live.
You tell me not to argue from authority. Aren't you doing the same thing?
Reverse the roles if you will.
Say there is a book, a written creed that says all the opposites of my book.
You live under that law, and argue from that authority and accuse me of not having an open mind.

A man practicing the opposite of Sharia says, "I am moral."
A different man under Sharia says, "You are not."
They are both wrong in the other person's eyes. The "other" guy will always be the bad guy- immoral.

Therefore, it is left up to one's discretion.
You have not convinced me that Sharia Law is immoral.
We've both come to a conclusion based on our own evidence and reasoning. Sharia Law is moral.
Debate Round No. 3
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by TheDragon5 10 months ago
TheDragon5
18 more minutes to vote
Posted by whiteflame 10 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: kgbisafterme// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: AMERICA!

[*Reason for removal*] Not an RFD.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 10 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: kgbisafterme// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: AMERICA!

[*Reason for removal*] Not an RFD.
************************************************************************
Posted by TheDragon5 10 months ago
TheDragon5
kgbisafterme is a vote bomber. Gives all 7 points to npt2 without explaining why.

Not only that, why in the hell would he list a reason for Sharia Law as "AMERICA"?
Posted by subdeo 10 months ago
subdeo
@npt2: where do morals and morality come from in your opinion?
Posted by canis 10 months ago
canis
No . just what it is.
Posted by TheDragon5 10 months ago
TheDragon5
Huh?
Posted by canis 10 months ago
canis
No. Catch 22..
Posted by TheDragon5 10 months ago
TheDragon5
@canis21.

What?
Posted by canis 10 months ago
canis
Sharia is not immoral. Some moral is not sharia...
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by subdeo 10 months ago
subdeo
TheDragon5npt2Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct and S&G were both good by both parties. Infidel was not specifically directed at pro. Pro cited his sources and backed up his claims well with these. Con did not do this. Although I personally agree with Pro, he did not argue strongly that Sharia law is immoral. Yes, he pointed out things that seem wrong and evil with it, (and are) however he did not specifically defend that they were actually immoral more than personal opinion dictated. Con asked the question multiple times, "what do you mean by fair" and others like it. These questions were not answered. Pro never addressed the origin of morals, so never conclusively condemned Sharia law as immoral, and only made it clear that his personal convictions were against it. I have accurately followed all the DDO voting guidelines, and have addressed arguments from both sides.
Vote Placed by CivilianName295 10 months ago
CivilianName295
TheDragon5npt2Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made good arguments for why shira law is immoral and con only response is that Allah permits it so therefor it's good which is circular reasoning. So my vote goes to (Pro)
Vote Placed by ILikePie5 10 months ago
ILikePie5
TheDragon5npt2Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct in my opinion is tied because no side was vulgar. However, there was a possible ad hominem against PRO, but I do not believe it was specifically directed to PRO and that's why it is tied. S/G is tied--there were a few grammatical errors on both sides. Arguments goes to PRO. Con's only argument was that the Muslim God Allah wasn't unjust and therefore Sharia Law isn't. PRO goes on to easily defeat that argument, as he doesn't believe in Allah and a majority of people don't as well. Along with this, CON goes extremely off topic, talking about morality itself and nihilism....not about Sharia Law. PRO continues to provide arguements, while CON provides hypothetical statement without evidence which leads to Reliable Sources. R/S goes to PRO as well because they provided sources unlike CON and the sources were fairly decent, but could have room for improvement as philosophy and morality is generally biased. But there was no comparison of sources, so finding bias was extremely hard.
Vote Placed by JimShady 10 months ago
JimShady
TheDragon5npt2Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Victory for Pro, at least in my opinion. I agreed with him before and after the debate. S/G for both parties was excellent, and conduct was tied. I do take note that npt2 said "infidel", but since it was not specifically directed at Pro, I'll give a tie for conduct. For convincing arguments, I have to go with TheDragon5. He quoted multiple verses of the Quran in which it seems to be immoral. Con tries to argue that since it is written by Allah (God), it is right. However Pro doesn't believe that, so it's kind of nullified, because you can't assume the Pro follows the law and its writer. The question is if Sharia Law is immoral, and in R2, Con just says that other laws and actions are immoral. Even if npt2 is right, this is deviating from the topic of Sharia Law. In R3, Con says "Therefore, it [morals] is left up to one's discretion," when in R1 he said "They are not left open to YOUR interpretation." Contradiction alert. And Pro uses more quotes and sources, so he wins sources. Pro wi