This post started as a response to Jeff's but started to get overly heavy and in keeping with the monthly topic so here it is in it's own thread
( Read more... )
The other ones the disagreement is a matter of degrees.
1. Climate Change/AGW: You're right, there is still debate. But not very much. If you want major scientific organisations, there is almost none about the basic fact of Climate Change/AGW
For instance, No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion since 2007. Not even the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, who obviously have a vested interest.
Various numbers between about 95-98% of Climatologists surveyed agree with the basic fact of Climate Change/AGW.
Do we actually absolutely no-one with a science degree to disagree with it, before we can say there's no debate over the fact of Climate Change/AGW? Or are you really saying that until we have 100.00% agreement, we can't accept that it's a fact?
2. How many Muslims want Sharia law in the United States? A majority? Less than half? Which Muslims living where are you counting? What do they mean by "want"? Do you mean, are actively seeking to create Sharia, or just like the idea?
If we polled Christians in the United States, how many of them would "want" Christian laws to rule in Iraq? 80%? 90? 99.99%? (Remembering that number would mean there is still a "debate" going over whether Christian's really want Christian law to rule in Iraq)
There's a great confusion in the discussion about Sharia law in the US. Sharia means laws that are in compliance with the religious teachings of Islam. All Muslims should to a degree want Sharia law as it's what Islam teaches.
The thing with the US is ultimately Sharia hits a point where it's blatantly unconstitutional. And though minor, there have been US cases where sharia came up. Generally custody cases involving foreign courts where we gave sharia based laws weight in the decision.
Just as all US states but Louisiana should want common law and all Jews should want Halachah. The one thing that I'll give the USA is that we do not permit Bet Din and then turn around and declare the Muslim version a threat to liberty, as though one type of separate religious court hierarchy is more dangerous than another.
There IS a great confusion in the discussion about shari´a in the US. Like, for example, that shari´a means "laws that are in compliance with the religious teachings of Islam", like shari´a is a kind of civil law. But this kind of confusioni is what happens when you listen to non-expert partisan hacks, like the good folks at Fox News, who tell you that revisionist fundies (wahabis, etc.) are the real believers of a huge, international faith community.
I dint talk about sharia as if it were a separate form of civil law. Laws divined from Islamic teachings that are sexist should not hold sway in American courtrooms.
Just because you hate women doesn't mean US law ought to as well.
just rails against ghosts despite. Now that really makes sense.
Heh... You're scolding me for a typo from my iPhone. Bet that makes you feel dumb. Not at all, especially since your "typo" included leaving out the apostrophe in "didn't".
All Muslims should to a degree want Sharia law as it's what Islam teaches. What you believe all Muslims "should" want and what each of them actually wants differs significantly, particularly since Islam is one of the most--if not THE most--ethnically diverse religions in the world.
Just as the bible is interpreted in many different ways, so is the Koran.
1. Climate Change/AGW: You're right, there is still debate. But not very much. If you want major scientific organisations, there is almost none about the basic fact of Climate Change/AGW
For instance, No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion since 2007. Not even the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, who obviously have a vested interest.
Various numbers between about 95-98% of Climatologists surveyed agree with the basic fact of Climate Change/AGW.
Do we actually absolutely no-one with a science degree to disagree with it, before we can say there's no debate over the fact of Climate Change/AGW? Or are you really saying that until we have 100.00% agreement, we can't accept that it's a fact?
2. How many Muslims want Sharia law in the United States? A majority? Less than half? Which Muslims living where are you counting? What do they mean by "want"? Do you mean, are actively seeking to create Sharia, or just like the idea?
If we polled Christians in the United States, how many of them would "want" Christian laws to rule in Iraq? 80%? 90? 99.99%? (Remembering that number would mean there is still a "debate" going over whether Christian's really want Christian law to rule in Iraq)
Reply
The thing with the US is ultimately Sharia hits a point where it's blatantly unconstitutional. And though minor, there have been US cases where sharia came up. Generally custody cases involving foreign courts where we gave sharia based laws weight in the decision.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I dint talk about sharia as if it were a separate form of civil law. Laws divined from Islamic teachings that are sexist should not hold sway in American courtrooms.
Just because you hate women doesn't mean US law ought to as well.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Did you at all read what that person actually said?
And it's "didn't" not "dint".
Reply
Heh... You're scolding me for a typo from my iPhone. Bet that makes you feel dumb.
Reply
Now that really makes sense.
Heh... You're scolding me for a typo from my iPhone. Bet that makes you feel dumb.
Not at all, especially since your "typo" included leaving out the apostrophe in "didn't".
Reply
Reply
What, no explanation for just rails against ghosts despite? Tsk.
Reply
Reply
What you believe all Muslims "should" want and what each of them actually wants differs significantly, particularly since Islam is one of the most--if not THE most--ethnically diverse religions in the world.
Just as the bible is interpreted in many different ways, so is the Koran.
Reply
Leave a comment