Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Feb 22, 2007 at 17:31
Sofa Sogood wrote : > OK, so, according to the Koran, it's a good thing to slaughter the Infidel if he refuses dhimmihood, and to die as a Shahid is an honor. It's written there for those who choose a literal and radical interpretation.
"Choose" ? You don't admit then that words mean something and that any word can't mean anything as it contradicts your choice of meaning ? In other words you adhere to a more "liberal" and "moderate" interpretation that any given word can mean anything you choose it to mean ? So e.g. the sentence "kill the infidels wherever you find them" is liberally speaking equivalent to the sentence "bring peace onto the infidels wherever you find them" because you chose "kill" to mean " bring peace" ?
> But, I ask you scholars of the Koran, is it written anywhere that child sacrifice is a good thing? That raising your child to be a Shahid could be a blessing -- recommended -- under any circumstances?
May I ask you a counter-question ...? Can you imagine a situation where you can venture a thought without relying on Allah's "masterpiece" and his arch-prophet's exploits ? Just using your human brain only with no archangels , no prophets, jinnis, imams , mullahs, qadis etc. as aide de memoire or consultants ?
How can you make anyone become a suicide terrorist without raising him in the appropriate climate and spirit ?
All human beings are born free from Islam. It is their Moslem environement that breeds those maniacs. Put all new-born children of Moslems into a decent Western orphanage and I assure you there will be no more shahids. Can you follow my thought-experiment ?
> In the Torah, Abraham was tested, but in the end the Lord told him not to sacrifice his child. Child sacrifice was common in that part of the world in those days -- by the "pagans" -- according to the Bible -- and under the new law -- monotheism -- it was forbidden.
Again your favourite Near Eastern fairy-tales! I wonder how the pagans could secure their existence if they slaughtered their babies almost on an assembly-line as the fairy-tales imply ? These were sporadic events in times of extreme need or extreme existential anxieties. More often it was like with Moses , abandoning children in the hope someone else would take care of them. But again it was no sadistic rite but rather an act of despair in families unable to feed one more child.
> Wasn't this "pagan" practice ever specifically forbidden in the Koran?
Yes, your Arabs were forbidden to dig alive their new-born daughters. Mohammed had the idea of making them concubines in his ansaars' harems. Brilliant demographic idea as long as their existence was secured by the kaffiri booty and slave labour !
> The Imams in Palestine and Iran interpret it to be good if it's for Jihad and the promulgation of Islam. Can they justify this by anything written in the Koran?
Be realistic! Otherwise they wouldn't interpret it to be good. Like all Moslems those know-all pundits can never venture a thought without consulting first Allah's third-rate manual for terrorists and his arch-prophet's criminal files.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (2101) on this item
Comment on this item
Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes