tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3977100651062963844.post6682606463627091286..comments2024-03-28T23:50:49.886-05:00Comments on Throne, Altar, Liberty: Common Law or Sharia?Gerry T. Nealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12137796641408373451noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3977100651062963844.post-39739905292506209982014-04-08T17:47:21.653-05:002014-04-08T17:47:21.653-05:00I have received a comment via e-mail from John. I...I have received a comment via e-mail from John. It disappeared when he attempted to post it and I could not find it in my spam filter so I am posting it this way. It has two parts, one addressed to me in response to my original essay, the other addressed to Trevel, in response to his comment. - gtn<br /><br />Gerry, one of your sentences gave an unfortunate impression to atheists, multiculturists and their ilk. The sentence said Sharia Law would make Christians and Jews Dhimmi. What you left out was that atheists or multiculturists or the all roads lead to God crowd would already be dead. They are the "heathen" and Muhammad had a short way with heathen - "Kill them." Muhammad had the Christians and Jews made Dhimmis so they could be tortured because their ancestors in faith refused to acknowledge Muhammad as their Messiah.<br /><br />As for Trevel, good Muslims want to live under "god's law" whose sole purpose is to make everyone "'good' Muslims" (those who fight Jihad). "Man made laws" are irrelevant. Remember the Muslims who killed the English soldier? Their first cry was they wanted to be tried under Shariah law, where they had committed no crime. <br /><br />Parents and grandparents may kill their children or grandchildren for disrespect of Islam. A woman can report a rape if 4 males witnessed the rape: otherwise she is admitting adultery and is to be stoned. In Islam all is subsumed into submission to allah. Only Islam matters, not individuals. English common law, based on Jesus' teachings, said individuals matter to God and are given certain inalienable rights. <br /><br />Your mistake is assuming there can be accommodation between two opposing political ideas. Muslims are already rejoicing at the proof of the superiority of Islamic law because it has supplanted English law. Gerry T. Nealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12137796641408373451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3977100651062963844.post-8366259391011835562014-04-08T09:04:33.648-05:002014-04-08T09:04:33.648-05:00I assumed, upon reading that they were making will...I assumed, upon reading that they were making wills that complied with Sharia law, that they were making sure the wills complied with BOTH sets of laws. That is, after all, the sensible way to do it: respect the traditions of the one, and the laws of the second. <br /><br />After all, the will of an immigrant might need to be respected in both the courts of their original homeland and the courts of their new country, since they are likely to have friends and relatives (and potentially property) in both. Trevelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06064589154123819958noreply@blogger.com