Should radical Islam be banned from the United States?
Debate Rounds (5)
http://dictionary.reference.com... ---> dictionary definition of radical, all definitions apply.
If by radical you mean 100% adhering to the Quran and the teachings of Islam as closely as possible then some would argue that this is a wonderful thing to do.
What is Islam? https://en.wikipedia.org...
The word "islam" translated from Arabic to English means "submission to the will of God". Islam is a verbal noun originating from the triliteral root s-l-m which forms a large class of words mostly relating to concepts of wholeness, submission, safeness and peace. In a religious context it means "voluntary submission to God".
What is a muslim? https://en.wikipedia.org...
The word "muslim" translated from Arabic to English basically means "one who submits their will to the will of God". The word muslim (Arabic: مسلمR06;, IPA: [G2;mA0;sl=8;m]; English /G2;mA2;zl=6;m/, /G2;mA0;zl=6;m/, /G2;mA0;sl=6;m/ or moslem /G2;m;4;zləm/, /G2;m;4;sləm/) is the participle of the same verb of which islām is the infinitive, based on the triliteral S-L-M "to be whole, intact".
What is considered the "will of God" in Islam? It is whatever is written down in the Quran. So a muslim cannot be a muslim unless their believe and adhere to and agree with every single verse written down in the Quran.
The burden of proof is on you to show where in the Quran it says that muslims are supposed to rape females and kill people for absolutely no reason at all. Keep in mind that whatever verses you provide, such as verse Quran 2:191, I will read most of the verses before that verse and most of the verses after that verse so that I can fully understand what the actual message is.
You will come back and start arguing about "interpretations", I will respond by telling you that in that case everything can be interpreted differently, including a math book, physics book, dictionary, and dr. suess's "green eggs and ham". The interpretation argument is weak. If 10 different people sat down and sincerely read the book they would all come to the same conclusion about what the actual message of the Quran is in certain places.
When one side is uneducated and doesn't know the Arabic language and how much "richer" it is than the English language (one word in Arabic can be correctly translated into 10+ different words in English), of course there will be arguments.
To boot, if Islam teaches that it is okay to stone an adulterer to death then what would be anyone else's beef with it? This becomes a question of morality.
Why is it incest wrong then? Why is anything wrong then? Why is it wrong to kill and murder people if you take away the argument of God telling you not to do that because it is wrong and the argument that it does harm to people (how incest will very quickly create deformed offspring, killing people will create dead people).
Science is a methodology for understanding how the physical universe around us works. Science will NEVER have the answer to everything, and there are plenty of things science cannot speak on at all, morality being one of them. An individual then, has to utilize and exercise REASONING skills. But even then I would argue that an individual cannot come to any solid conclusion at all about what should be "right" or "wrong" on their own.
If one argues to the contrary, then they open up a can of worms, because what that entails is that everyone will start coming up with their own ideas of what is "right" and "wrong", it becomes subjective and relative to each person. One guy will be okay with incest but not be okay with killing, and another guy will be okay with murder but will shun incest. If you have 7 billion people across the planet doing their own thing, there would be chaos, with everyone pointing the finger at the other person being angry at them about why they are doing things a different way (which is currently happening more and more actually).
If you take away those things, as you mentioned before, we can all basically go around doing whatever we want. And this is why ATHEISM is extremely dangerous. When you have people who feel like they should be able to do whatever they want morally because they have no real concept of morality or where it comes from or what is "right" and "wrong", and when they also feel like they won't be answerable for their actions at all, at any point, after they are dead, you have very high potential for confused potentially genocidal maniacs running around doing whatever they want. Examples of this include Mao Zedong who killed upwards of 80 million people, Joseph Stalin who killed upwards of 25 million people, Pol Pot who killed upwards of 2 million people, Ho Chi Minh, Hideki Tojo....in fact the 20/21st century was riddled with Atheistic leaders who killed more people than all of humanity combined from all previous wars and conflicts, including religion, by far.
Furthermore, there is no single place on earth where Sharia law is adhered to 100% today. Not Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Indonesia, Malaysia, USA, Canada Europe, not anywhere. There are already laws that have been put in place that would not allow Sharia Law or any other religious law to be implemented 100%, because people have their own confused ideas of what is right and wrong.
Should "radical Islam" be banned? But then you will have to ban everything else, ban christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, etc etc etc, ban every single other belief on earth as well.
So my answer is NO. I would argue no, but that is my personal opinion and where I personally stand on morality. I would argue no, also for the reason that it wouldn't change anything at all. Banning guns won't stop a terrorist hell-bent on using guns to massacre people (the recent Paris attacks are a perfect example, automatic rifles and explosives were illegal and 100% banned in France and that didn't stop them did it? NO), and banning "radical Islam" won't stop anyone who wants to be a "radical muslim". I don't like advocating for things that won't make any real difference.
I say: You rather make things up and follow conjecture and do whatever you feel like doing?
You said: You just have to look at reality. Reality means that radical Islam is not even a religion.
I say: Yes, so lets forget about facts and meanings and reality and let's just believe what the nice looking tv lady on the TV screen says? That isn't how reality works. Islam is a religion... what you consider "radical" I have absolutely no idea.
You said: Ok look when you have a code such as Shria Law that says kill the infidel and women are to be mistreated.
I say: There is no official book out there titled "Sharia law". No such book exists. The Sharia law comes from an understanding of Islam and Islamic Jurisprudence which comes from the Quran and Hadith and a scholarly understanding of those sources. It doesn't come from your mommy or daddy or your news anchor.
You have no idea what Sharia law is. Sorry buddy.
You said: The American society doesn't need this to be in our country. First off all people who follow this always want to kill Americans. 9/11, San Berniedino, Charlstown SC. According to sources there are multiple cases where people turn to Shria law and do mass shootings.
I say: Because you are the spokesperson for America? Atleast 10 million Muslims live in the USA and that number is growing. And how do you know people want to kill americans or why they want to or what the Quran teachs? I don't think you've opened up the Quran and read it for yourself not even one time your life so far, this is probably very likely true which makes it extremely sad in my opinion.
Maybe people want to kill Americans because of political reasons and not religious reasons at all. Maybe if you vote for your government to go and kill 100,000's of INNOCENT people in a village in the middle east, maybe those people will simply want to get revenge because you just killed their entire village who didn't do anything to anyone at ALL. Maybe that is why and it has nothing to do with Islam? But political motivation or any other possibility can't be a possibility at all right?
I say: I don't watch or listen to the media, because I like to get my information from real sources.
You said: Look all I am saying is that we as the United States of America shouldn't allow a pratice that says killing the infidel and raping women and all of the other things is ok and let it be. This can not and should not be the case. I respect the Quran and Muslims who don't follow shreia law.
I say: Let's keep it simple...here it goes. SHOW me where it gives the message in the Quran that women need to get raped. Right now. Give me the exact location where I can find it in the Quran so I can see it for myself.
I say: This debate isn't about me. Focus on the topic.
You say: "The Quran and shreia law are not the same thing. Shreia law is based off the Quran. The Quran doesn't mention anything about raping women..."
I say: So one minute you are claiming that Shariah Law and the Quran tells people to rape women and now you are saying it doesn't? So either you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Islam, rape, and Sharia Law, OR you are a liar. In either case, it's not looking good for you. If you are confused about these topics or if you are LYING about these things, then I think to myself, "what else could this guy be LYING about", you lose credibility when you show yourself to be a liar or confused. Everything you say I will fact-check, and you should do the same thing before you speak or respond.
In every instance that Quran mentions that "the infidel" should be killed it is talking about what is permissible for a Muslim to do during times of war with another combatant, that message is clear in the Quran but you wouldn't know this because you've never read the Quran thoroughly, you've just simply listened to your Fox news. If you bring me quotations from the Quran I will go straight to the Quran and read a couple verses before and after until I have a full proper understanding of what the Quran is actually saying and I will fact-check you again, so be warned, kafir.
You say: "Either one of those things shouldn't be allowed.
I say: By the way, who put YOU in charge to decide what should or should not be allowed? Who are YOU that people need to follow your potentially confused and definitely subjective ideas of morality? What makes your ideas of "right" and "wrong" better than everyone elses, including the Quran or Shariah law?
You say: "Also you mention to get real information. If you are suggesting that foxnews is not a sorceable site tell me how you are citing Wikipedia. But you cannot prove that Fox News isn't sourceable so you cannot tell me it is not a reliable source."
I say: You can source Foxnews all you want, sure it is "sourecable", but I don't consider it credible, because I'm not in high school anymore. The problem with that is that Fox News doesn't define Islam, the Quran does. What are we still in high school or something? Jennifer told Jessica that John told Mike who told Amber who told Lewinsky that Jacob farted, so lets not ask Jacob if he really farted or not, lets just believe whatever rumor everyone wants to spread without any real evidence (i.e going straight to the source which is the Quran, in terms of what we are talking about...this is called an "analogy" in case you want convolute it), what are you, in high school dude? Get real. Fox news doesn't define Islam, the Quran does.
I say: The entire foundation of Sharia law is the Quran...if the Quran doesn't allow people to get raped, it will never be allowed in Sharia law. People cannot just pick and choose what is Sharia law, the entire foundation of "sharia law" IS the Quran.
I have already mentioned this in a previous round, ROUND 2, which you seem to have completely and conveniently ignored, and here it is again:
--->There is no official book out there titled "Sharia law". No such book exists. The Sharia law comes from an understanding of Islam and Islamic Jurisprudence which comes from the Quran and Hadith and a scholarly understanding of those sources. It doesn't come from your mommy or daddy or your news anchor.
You have no idea what Sharia law is and/or you are very confused about this.
You say: "You have no reason for calling me a liar because I am only comparing Sheria law and not the Quran. I state that the shreia law is based off the Quran but I never said that the Quran says anything about raping women. So you are a bigot for calling me a liar when you don't even know what you are saying."
I say: See my previous statement above: Sharia law comes from an understanding of Islam and Islamic Jurisprudence which comes from the Quran and Hadith and a scholarly understanding of those sources. Sharia Law, essentially, comes from the Quran, the two are inseparable. Sharia law can NEVER allow anything to be okay if it is not allowed in the Quran. Therefore when you say that Sharia law tells everyone to rape women, you are saying that the Quran allows people to rape women. Sharia law comes from an understanding of Islam and Islamic Jurisprudence which comes from the Quran and Hadith and a scholarly understanding of those sources.
You say that sharia law is bad and it shouldn't be allowed and radical Islam is bad, and 50% of muslims believe in Sharia law, and then you are confused about where Sharia law comes from, you have no idea what it is, you have no idea what a muslim is, you have no real idea what Islam is. How can you even begin to speak about something and formulate an opinion about something that you seem to have absolutely no real idea of where it comes from?
Sharia deals with all aspects of day-to-day life, including politics, economics, banking, business law, contract law, sexuality, and social issues.
There is not a strictly codified uniform set of laws that can be called Sharia. It is more like a system of several laws, based on the Qur'an, Hadith and centuries of debate, interpretation and precedent.
Islamic shariah is not implemented in any country of the world, most Muslim countries have their own laws & chosen only few of laws from Islamic shariah.
How long does it take for a person to become a Judge in the United States? It takes years upon years of studying, well the same thing applies to Sharia Law. You think you are going to be an expert on Sharia law and how it works by watching foxnews every night? Get real dude. It is way more intricate and complex then you think, and your idea of it and where it comes from and what it is, is very warped and riddled in confusion.
In conclusion: No, Islam should not be banned from anywhere. The entire world needs Islam, Islam is the cure for all sorts of nonsense around the world actually. A Muslim is a person who believes in and strives to adhere to 100% of everything that is written down in the Quran and Sharia law comes from the Quran. Even if Islam was banned, it isn't going anywhere. No one can control what a human being thinks or feels in their heart.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by imabench 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Con essentially dismissed all of pro's arguments and sources because it disagreed with his warped worldviews. Ignoring arguments rather then proving why they are wrong doesnt defeat the pro's points, it just concedes them. Full argument and source points to pro, spelling almost went to Pro as well since Con is apparently inept at spelling "Sharia' correctly....
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.