Taliban sinks to new low, cruelty on new level.

Originally posted by black beetle
Unfortunately the fact that Jesus rejects the killing means not that the so called Christians are following his doctrine; people they tend to follow whoever and whatever they are trained to believe, and currently they are really lost in the ...interpretation

I think we agree on most things, my friend.

But there are two ways to address such violence. Either one tacitly agrees with the claim that religion commands it by blaming religion or one refuses to agree that religion commands it by blaming the man (and the interpretation). I think that the latter is not only more effective, it is also more accurate. We can have the cake AND eat it!

Originally posted by Palynka
If the pizza arrives 2 hours late, it's not OK for me. But not being OK for me, doesn't mean I think it should be a crime.

If you can't satisfy your wife and she wants to have sex with sexier and gentler men, then it's her right. You can divorce her if you don't like it. I'm guessing she wouldn't mind it too much.

If this is not OK for you, then I sug ...[text shortened]... t and believe in basic human rights. I don't defend anyone who proposes retrograde laws.

who defines human rights?

After what you said what the difference between you and animals!!!

Originally posted by ahosyney
[b]That doesn't mean it should be a crime, now does it? 🙄

Now lets suppose that your wife got pregnant from that relation, is it ok for you to have a son or a daughter that is not yours.

Lets say that you discovered that the son/daughter is not yours, will you still care of him/her.

What if you refused to consider him/her as your son/daughter ...[text shortened]... hat relation and later you got infected and that led to your death, is this ok for you.

----[/b]

What's wrong with you, ahosyney?
If my wife wants to sleep with another man or if she actually does it, when I will find it out I will divorce her. However you are free to get yours in front of your precious Sharia and have her killed; it seems that you know very well what for the stones at the size of the palm must be used for.

And spare me the preaching. I asked you three simple questions, you may find my specific post on the fifth page of this thread and answer them if you feel up to it, that is.

Originally posted by ahosyney
who defines human rights?

Humans, obviously.

Humans who are supposed not to have their heads in the sand.
Humans who are supposed to have learned something from their cruel history.

Originally posted by ahosyney
After what you said what the difference between you and animals!!!

Animals can't order pizza.

Originally posted by ahosyney
[b] I just said that the three Abrahamic religions are based on the specific concept "eye for an eye", and I did it because there are pure evidence and hard facts -but you are more than welcome to show me I 'm wrong!

Yes you are wrong. If you ask any Muslim what are the bases of your religion, the answer will be the there is only one GOD and he is th ...[text shortened]... whole picture, and it will be much difference. Or simply close the window and Ignore it.[/b]

It may be an optional law but the religionist Muslims they follow it all the time;

Originally posted by Palynka
I think we agree on most things, my friend.

But there are two ways to address such violence. Either one tacitly agrees with the claim that religion commands it by blaming religion or one refuses to agree that religion commands it by blaming the man (and the interpretation). I think that the latter is not only more effective, it is also more accurate. We can have the cake AND eat it!

Right! But I still haven't noticed a consensus as such between the heads of each religion and each denomination 😵

Originally posted by Palynka
Animals can't order pizza.

And we can play some chess too😵

Originally posted by black beetle
Right! But I still haven't noticed a consensus as such between the heads of each religion and each denomination 😵

Not yet. But I'm confident I'll persuade them eventually. 😛

Originally posted by black beetle
What's wrong with you, ahosyney?
If my wife wants to sleep with another man or if she actually does it, when I will find it out I will divorce her. However you are free to get yours in front of your precious Sharia and have her killed; it seems that you know very well what for the stones at the size of the palm must be used for.

And spare me the pr ...[text shortened]... y specific post on the fifth page of this thread and answer them if you feel up to it, that is.

The problem is that there will be no difference between human society and animal ones. It will be a complete sexual mess where every one can have sex with who ever he wants when ever he wants. There will be no family , and hence there will be society.

There is nothing wrong with me, the problem is with you guys.


I understand that the human rights are limited with the rights of others. If if it leads to limiting the rights of other then it is no more a right.

I see adultery is is a form of the usage of woman to the pleasure of man. Women are the most affected member of the society who are affected with it. Man get the pleasure and woman get the baby.

What is the ratio of women involved in porn related industries to men?

It has nothing to do with human rights. It has to do with the stability of the society.

--------------------
Islam didn't ignore the sexual desire. In fact it was mentioned in many places in Quran and Hadith. But it regulated it so it will not affect the society. Islam encourage marriage, and established the regulations that makes it easy for everyone. The law includes section about situation when there is a mismatch. So it doesn't contradict human rights but it keeps limits to build a good society.

If you don't like what I say it is your choice but it is not good to call me that I'm living in a middle age, because if I'm living the middle age then whoever want this sexual mess is actually living in a pre-human age.

Originally posted by Palynka
Humans, obviously.

Humans who are supposed not to have their heads in the sand.
Humans who are supposed to have learned something from their cruel history.

So all humans must agree on those rights, don't you agree

Originally posted by black beetle
It may be an optional law but the religionist Muslims they follow it all the time;

I think you still don't understand it. It is not the fault of the law, it is the fault of those who miss use it.

Originally posted by ahosyney
So all humans must agree on those rights, don't you agree

Of course not. Wife-abusing scum that wants to use the law to keep their wives might not agree. That shouldn't stop the decent men and women of this planet from saying enough is enough.

Originally posted by ahosyney
I think you still don't understand it. It is not the fault of the law, it is the fault of those who miss use it.

Then why don't you, the decent Muslims, do something?

I still wait for you to answer to my questions regarding Sharia, regardiong the Jyllands-Posten issue and regarding the murder of Theo Van Gogh. So kindly please spare me the preaching and comment, state that you are unable to do it or that you are indifferent to them.

Originally posted by Palynka
Of course not. Wife-abusing scum that wants to use the law to keep their wives might not agree. That shouldn't stop the decent men and women of this planet from saying enough is enough.

Good luck. I cannot stand it for the time being;

Have a good time😵