At last Thursday’s National Prayer Breakfast Obama claimed that his policies are motivated by “God’s command to ‘love thy neighbor as thyself’.” He then conflated this law of love with the golden rule, and made a blatantly dishonest claim about Islam:
I know the version of that Golden Rule is found in every major religion and every set of beliefs — from Hinduism to Islam to Judaism to the writings of Plato
In fact, Islam repeatedly and explicitly rejects the law of love, teaching instead a law of hate.
When Jesus was asked “who is my neighbor?” (Luke 10:29), he answered (via the parable of the good Samaritan) that everyone is everyone’s neighbor. Islam, in contrast, instructs Muslims to be good only to other Muslims. Koran, verse 48.29:
Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those with him are firm of heart against the unbelievers, compassionate among themselves.
Verse 3.28 says that Muslims can only pretend to befriend infidels:
Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them.
Of course we are very familiar with this in practice, as one revealed terror-plotter after another is described by surprised neighbors and co-workers as the nicest guy.
“That” Golden Rule vs. “The” Golden Rule
I guess Obama can call the law of love “that Golden Rule” if he wants, but there actually is a corollary of the law love (implied by the law of love but not implying it) that is called THE Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” (Matthew 7:12). There is a hadith in Islam (a reported saying of Muhammad) that is similar in form to the Golden Rule, but opposite in substance. It only calls for goodwill towards other Muslims:
None of you will have faith till he wishes for his (Muslim) brother what he likes for himself.
Bukhari 1.2.13, translated by M. Muhsin Khan.
Preceding hadiths back up Kahn’s non-universalist translation of the Muslim version of the Golden Rule. Bukhari 1.2.10 reads:
The Prophet said, “A Muslim is the one who avoids harming Muslims with his tongue and hands…”
In Islam the principle of reciprocity is extended only between Muslims, which makes it a principle, not of reciprocity at all, but of bigotry and prejudice. Islam is the only religion of any significance that does not embrace a universal principle of reciprocity.
Islam rejects even the idea of cooperation. Koran, verse 9.28:
O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.
i.e. Go broke rather than have dealings with infidels.
Not loving: the Koran’s endless instructions to subjugate and kill infidels
Verse 9.29:
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Another murderous verse (Koran 9.5) is the infamous “verse of the sword,” so central to traditional Islamic doctrine:
Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush.
Etcetera ad nauseum.
Well meaning left-wing multiculturalists convince themselves that these verses are no worse, and no more relevant, than God’s Old Testament instructions to the Jews to annihilate one people after another on their mission to conquer the promised land, but those were not universal instructions to conquer everybody. They are framed as specific permissions from God to attack a specific people at a specific place and time. In accordance with this specificity, these Bible verses have rarely if ever been used as a justification for aggressive conquest.
Not all Christians have always heeded the law of love in its properly universal Christian form, but that was no fault of the Bible, while to Christianity’s great credit its various churches have all long since dedicated themselves to understanding and following the law of love as well as flawed human beings are able, and Judaism has done the same.
Decades before Jesus declared that the commandments to love God and to Love your neighbor are all the law and the prophets, Rabbi Hillel had said the same about the golden rule:
“What is hateful to thee, do not unto thy fellow man: this is the whole Law; the rest is mere commentary.”
Orthodox Islam, in contrast, is aggressively carrying its law of hatred and violent aggression to every corner of the globe.
Our taqiyyist president
Obama quite obviously “don’t know much about history,” and “don’t know much about a science book,” but he does know the Koran. He studied it for years as a child and even took classes in “menjaji,” or Koran recitation in Arabic, which is the gold standard of fundamentalist Islamic education.
Hatred of the infidel is not hidden in Islam. It is the essence of it. No one can study Islam at all without comprehending this, and Obama surely does comprehend it. His claim that Islam embraces the law of love can only be a strategic lie, what in Islam is called taqiyya, and the fact that he seems to be engaging in taqiyya is pretty good evidence that Barack Hussein Obama actually is Muslim and is using the Oval Office to promote Islamic supremacism.
Obama’s claim that he is Christian, not Muslim, is not probative because Islam’s very first instruction to converts is that they should lie about their religion. Tabari 8.23 (one of the hadiths, or reported sayings of Muhammad):
en Nu’aym came to the Prophet. ‘I’ve become a Muslim, but my tribe does not know of my Islam; so command me whatever you will.’ Muhammad said, ‘Make them abandon each other if you can so that they will leave us; for war is deception.’
If Obama is Muslim, he would lie about it. Muslims who live amongst Christians are supposed to pretend that they are Christian, if by doing so they can advance the cause of Islamic conquest.
In one set of hadiths, Muhammad asks who will murder a man whose poetry Muhammad finds offensive. He then grants a volunteer (Muhammad bin Maslama) permission to lie to the victim in order to get close enough to do the deed, and the volunteer proceeds to pretend that he has turned against Muhammad (i.e. that he is no longer a Muslim). This is regarded by orthodox Islam as model behavior.
In sum, Obama is certainly lying about Islam, and hence is almost certainly an orthodox Muslim who embraces the Islamic law of hate. So what else is new? Honestly, we knew this before the 2008 election.
(As for the sheer destructiveness of the policies that Obama claims to be required by love, don’t be such a wuss: “You’ve gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet.”)
Religion is like politics. In politics there is s difference between (D)emocracy and its p(R)actice, between the Constitution and the p(R)actices of say a Dick Cheney, when he was ‘president’.
Snerd
I used to be good friends with an ex-Muslim man.
He used Jesus illustration of the Good Samaritan to explain how Jews, Christians and Muslims would treat an injured stranger.
The Jews might pass him by.
The Jewish convert to Christ would act as the good Samaritan did.
The Muslim would take advantage of the man’s injury to loot him of his belongings.
And this was from a non-religious man who spent over 50 years as a Muslim before finally getting tired of the hypocrisy of pretending to believe and just getting out.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Just about the same day as the Egyptians started looting all the NGOs in Cairo (including the one DOT Sec Ray LaHood’s son Sam worked in) Obama tried to rush over a BILLION in aid to Egypt!
Now Sam LaHood is hiding in the US Embassy with other Americans and facing imprisonment and trial and 5 MORE years afterwards (if found guilty of insulting Islam) and Congress is holding off on the Egyptian aid package.
Whose side is Obama on in this?
He’s very quiet.
Maybe he’s ”leading from behind,” again….or practicing a low bow for Egypt’s leaders.
Oh good I’m glad this site is revisiting conspiracy theories….
Two things are patently obvious to any willing to accept the politically incorrect. Islam is incompatible with any form of secular government, particularly one that values things like free speech (the current administration is actually meeting with muslim governments now to address their objections to our freedom of speech, instead of dismissing their objections out of hand as they should have). And, Obama holds islam in higher regard than the Constitution he swore to uphold and protect.
So far, the only thing he hasn’t lied about is his heartfelt desire to spread Joe the Plumber’s money around.
@Nan G:
So Egypt is lying wounded on the ‘road of nations’, and you are suggesting Obama should act how ….?
Secondly, Obama is leading from ‘behind the scenes’, where all the real work is done. Like when Ronnie negotiated with Khomeini to hang onto the US hostages, until after Carter was defeated, while hiding behind his ‘Plausible Deniability’ …
Snerd
@Ron H.: Yeah Ron, we all know there’s no such thing as a conspiracy. Those airplanes flying into the WTC were a total accident.
Alec Rawls,
Much of what you’ve written is reflected in the vast difference between,
“God Is Love,” (Christianity)
and
“God Is Great,” (Islam).
I haven’t been here in a while. I see the Islamophobia is still thriving well…
@Cary:
Nothing “phobic” about it, you confuse fear with loathing. It is a racist death cult little different than Nazism and should be treated in exactly the same manner.
Come back when you’ve got more than a slogan.
@JustAl:
I bet you’ll get incredulous when the word “bigot” comes up, too.
@Nan G
THAT IS EXACTLY RIGHT. THE MUSLIM WOULD LOOT HIM. OBAMA LIES. ISLAM IS NOT A “RELIGION” OF PEACE. IN FACT IT IS NOT A RELIGION AT ALL. IT IS A POLITICAL SHARIA CULT THAT WAS BEGUN BY THE DEVIL AND PRETENDING TO BE A RELIGION. IT’S OF THE DEVIL.
Read http://www.apatriotview.blogspot.com to find out how bad ISLAM is. To call it a religion is a little far fetched. In actuality it is a political ideology masqurading as religion. It’s religion aspect is combined with is political asperations and one cannot exist without the other. There are no “moderate” Muslims. There are inactive ones but in the end, to stay a Muslim, they MUST kill infidels. If a Muslim is inactive he can be considered an infidel because he is not carrying out the Laws of Islam which is the “profets” demand.
@JustAl:
Oh and Al, this discussion isn’t anything new here. Reasonable rhetoric has already been made by many here, quite a few times (just check the archives), and the hate speech still keeps coming. Well, enjoy yourselves.
@Cary: So Cary thinks this post is bigoted? It is bigotry to point out that Islam demands bigotry from its followers? None of these leftists have an I.Q. of fifty.
@Alec Rawls:
Yup, I totally called how you’d respond! Thanks for not disappointing.
@Cary: You’re so brilliant Cary. You knew that if you called people bigots for pointing out Islamic bigotry, they would call you an idiot. Yet you did it anyway. That makes you even more of an idiot.
Have you actually got a point? Is there some way in which you think that it really is bigoted to point out orthdox Islam’s enforced bigotry? Then let’s hear it.
Cary,
the only time you show yourself here is to protect THE MUSLIMS OR ISLAM,
your word islamophobia is not well receive, because you are the one with the blind phobia,
@Alec Rawls:
Been there. Done that. It doesn’t make a difference. If you’re honestly interested (which I doubt), it’s all on record here on this site -very specific. I’d make the effort myself to cut/paste, but you seem rather attached to your narrow minded propaganda. Clearly your self identity is wrapped up in your ignorance. Sorry for pointing it out. I know, it’s annoying. You go on being you. It’s only fair the rest of the world should tolerate it.
@ilovebeeswarzone:
Not true, bees. You know I’ve spoken up on lot of issues here. Hope you’re doing well.
So somewhere else Cary has explained how it is bigoted to point out Islamic bigotry, and he can’t be bothered to repeat his explanation here, though he has no trouble repeating the charge of bigotry.
Methinks, Cary, that you’ve got absolutely nothing, because the simple fact is, it is NOT bigoted to point out Islamic bigotry. Imagine that.
SNERD GRONK
YOU SAID;
RONNIE negotiate with KOMEINI TO hang unto the US hostages until CARTER
would be defeated, while hiding behind his plausible denyeability,
I had my doubts about you from your first comment, where you seem to have the ability to sneak lies among words which are incomprehensible, when put together, so
I mean that you are not with us, you are against us trying to hide behind your comments
now you know that you have been uncovered.
@Alec Rawls:
No, not somewhere else. My points were made here on this site, as I said. Hint: there’s a search engine right on this page. But, I know already that you won’t bother because you don’t wish to know. And I’m too lazy to keep repeating myself in vain. I was simply stating an observation.
Now, shall we continue this last word game? It’s so much fun…
SENATOR MCAIN want to bring SYRIANS refugees in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
hope they learn to ask the PEOPLE BEFORE THEY CROWD THE COUNTRY with more MUSLIMS
after all they will become the next neighbord of the PEOPLE NOT THOSE ELECTED LIKE OBAMA OR MCCAIN
ALEC RAWLS
THANK YOU for a very smart POST, we can always profit from learning from those who try so hard to show that they are for peace and freedom for all, while thinking of ways to enslave community ALL OVER THE WORLD WHICH HAVE SHOWN THEM COMPASSION AND OPEN WIDE THEIR DOOR TO BE DECEIVED BY THEM AS SOON AS THEY ENTER IN THEIR NEW DOMAINE and planted their claws in the earth deep in, so to never leave alive
I’m listening to SANTORIUM WINNER SPEECH AND THE MORE HE GOES, THE MORE HE IS BELIEVED,
he is a straight shooter humble about seeking to serve not to rule as a tyrant, a DICTATOR LIKE OBAMA
AND SANTOTIUM SPEAK WITH HIS HEART AND SOUL YOU CAN TELL.
Wow, there’s nothing more entertaining than a religious bigot proclaiming, with the help of his Holy Scrolls, why you should hate another religion – because it’s not a religion of love. Christianity: a religion well acquainted with love, but obviously not with irony! This is not to dispute the evidence presented – no one can claim this proof isn’t scientific (whoops, forgot FA hates science). It’s really amazing that perfect bedfellows like the Mullahs of Iran, the Taliban, and the American Christian Right find so much to be divisive about, when they have so much in common, like an overriding need to persecute gay people. Good friends, what are we fighting for when we have such bogeyman in our midst ripe for demonizing?
These FA posts will age so well, I imagine. I can’t wait to come back and read this stuff in twenty years, when it will only read as forty years behind the times.
Tom
look at you, you aged, you try to mingle with adult again, but you aint got it yet,
you need more lernin boy, get to your book and don’t forget to observ around you, that is the biggest book of your life.
take care
@ OP
Compelling argument. I’m curious, do you consider yourself a disciple of the Abbott or Costello school of logic, Good Sir?
I’m not even going to start on the problems of religion. Rather, if you look at the basic element of our being, you realize that we’re all of the same species. We’re all humans. What kind of species wages wars with itself and fights battles against its own kind? Isn’t that counter-productive to its survival? Too many people are uneducated and close-minded. Because of this, we can no longer make progress. Everyone needs to start helping and stop hating. Otherwise, we’re bound to live like this forever.
@snerd gronk: You said:
Got any proof?
It would make no sense for Reagan to have Khomeni “hang onto” the US hostages until his inauguration. If you have even a fundamental grasp of history – which you obviously don’t – you would know this.
Were Reagan working behind the scenes, why would he not have Iran release the hostages as soon as the election was done?
But no worries, your bitterness and vile nature shines through nerdman.
So lying about Islam is no big deal as far as Tom is concerned. Good argument.
N thinks “everyone needs to start helping and stop hating.” Sorry, but that implies that everyone is hating. Are they really? Who are Christians hating? Who are Jews hating? Who are Buddhists hating? Yet all over the world orthodox Muslims are committing religiously motivated murder in endless small and large numbers.
If N is thinking, Cary-like, that it is hateful to point out orthodox Islam’s insistence that its followers hate infidels, that’s insane. “Religion” is not the problem. It is the substance of a religion that matters.
@Cary: Obviously you cannot illustrate your point, falling back on the “it’s in the archives” routine.
Hey, it’s no big deal if you are unable to articulate your POV.
@N:
I agree it’s not about religion per se. Who knows what to call “it”, whatever “it’ is – it’s been called many things over the years. I think fascism is close enough. I mean, people watch movies like Schinder’s List today and wonder “Old Lordy me, I can’t imagine living in a place like THAT, with people who thought THAT way and would do THAT to other people”, but does anyone seriously doubt that the author of this piece hasn’t already worked out to his satisfaction why millions of Muslims deserve to die wholesale, not to mention people like Obama, who aren’t, but whom he deems are? What else is this if not justification to hate millions of people based on a label?
It’s amazing to see something like this published on this site, where if someone talks about a tax rate moving 1% you’re sure to get dozens of overwrought posts about an assault on “freedom”, yet those same usual characters disappear (or silently assent) when confronted with the real thing.
@anticsrocks:
Reagan Admin complicity i Iranian Hostages:
Several individuals—most notably former Iranian President Abulhassan Banisadr,[2] former Naval intelligence officer and National Security Council member Gary Sick; and former Reagan/Bush campaign and White House staffer Barbara Honegger—have stood by the allegation. There have been allegations that the plane crash that killed the Portuguese Prime Minister, Francisco de Sá Carneiro, in 1980 was in fact an assassination of the Defence Minister, Adelino Amaro da Costa, who had said that he had documents concerning the October surprise conspiracy theory and was planning on taking them to the United Nations General Assembly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_surprise_conspiracy_theory
@Tom: So gays in America are persecuted by being beaten and killed by Christians?
Yeaahhhh, right. Christians systematically kill homosexuals, just like in muslim countries.
anticsrocks
TOM is talking to n about how outrage he is to see on this site, yet he don’t think about the MILITARY WHO GOT KILLED FIGHTING THE MUSLIMS IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY TO FREE THEIR OWN PEOPLE,
being oppress by their law of death to their own
@ilovebeeswarzone: Excellent point, Beezy.
@Alec Rawls:
Nice strawman. My “argument” is quite simply that your premise is flawed and your evidence a ridiculous construction. Understand though, my reaction is predicated not upon your failure as an essayist, but upon what I suspect underlies the attempt, what I can guess about your motives and your character and your belief system.
Do you think anyone not predisposed toward hating Muslims, or thinking Obama is a “secret Muslim”, is really going to buy any of this, your pseudo-academic airs notwithstanding? I can see you’re right out of the Josef Mengele school of scientific inquiry. Tell me, when can we expect your dissertation of Islamic phrenology?
@anticsrocks: oh yes, clearly I’m the one with the problem. Ha.
ALEC RAWLS
hi, hope you’re up to it, your POST should be name the flies attraction
bye
I always try to be neutral about new things I learn. After I started hearing about the possibility that Obama might be a Muslim, I tried to keep track of the things he says and does about the religion.
THINGS THAT MAKE ME WONDER IF HE IS MUSLIM
(1) He refused to say the National Anthem or wear the US flag pin until enough people complained about it.
(2) He says Muslim is a religion that teaches love.
(3) He is siding with Muslim countries.
(4) He refused to call the Fort Hood massacre a terrorist act by an individual.
(5) He wants the National Anthem changed to, “I want to teach the world to sing,” because it isn’t as warlike as our National Anthem is.
(6) He prays to Allah five times a day (just guessing).
I used to go along with the idea of changing our National Anthem, until I read how it came about. I don’t ever want it to be changed! I would like the story to be told before singing of the National Anthem. The words in the song have a very deep meaning to me now.
@Cary: See? Admitting it is half the battle. Before you can seek help, you have to want the help.
You are on a roll, you have admitted to two character flaws.
Being lazy and not being able to defend your position. I am proud of the progress you have made here on this thread.
Now you can begin the steps towards bettering yourself.
@Smorgasbord: You forgot that he also wants to call the Ft. Hood shooting, “workplace violence“.
Think about that.
How far to the left do you have to be for Collins to publicly attack you from the right…?
.
.
@anticsrocks: And I’m still holding out hope for you, bud!
@Cary: Thank you!
I will take all the good will I can get, but I never have a problem defending my positions. I guess it’s just a character flaw, but I seem to believe that a man is only as good as his word, and that if you can’t articulate your positions, you just keep your mouth shut. In this case it would be keyboard, but you get the idea.
One question – is someone a racist because they point out racist actions perpetrated by another person or group?
@anticsrocks: #42
I couldn’t think of the term, “workplace violence” at the time I was writing my comment. Thanks for filling in my blank spot.
Let’s not forget about all of the “honor killings” being done that the propaganda media isn’t reporting. I am guessing the women who convert to the Muslim religion don’t know about how they will be treated until it is too late. If they want out of the religion, the Koran says they should be killed. Anyone leaving the religion is supposed to be killed.
Tom writes, regarding my documentation of orthodox Islam’s instructions to hate: “What else is this if not justification to hate millions of people based on a label?” Exactly the same as Cary calling it bigotry to point out Islamic bigotry.
So yes, antisrocks, according to these deep thinkers, it would be racist to point out racist actions perpetrated by another person or group, and I guess if you stop a bank robbery, that would make you a bank robber too.
Sorry but, there’s a serious IQ problem here. Is it cruel of me to point that out? These guys don’t have any rationality check in their thought process. They just sling mud and hope some of it sticks I guess? But listen guys, if you don’t care whether you are making sense or not, you can never produce value. You can’t actually be right about anything. Doesn’t that matter to you?
@Alec Rawls:
Here’s some free advice: don’t publish if you can’t handle criticism of your (deeply) flawed argument. Up above I labeled your premise “flawed”. Why? Because your premise is Obama is a “liar” who “made a blatantly dishonest claim about Islam”. Reading that, I would expect you to present evidence that he’s a liar, proof that he willingly and deliberately mislead the public with false statements. You do nothing of the sort. You sidestep the main premise and move on to what is basically an argument that your interpretation of two religious texts is better than your strawman conjurings of what you imagine are Obama’s interpretations. Talk about a house of cards. You’re already in pretty deep, arguing your religious feelings as if they’re provable facts, but how exactly did you arrive at Obama’s, based on one innocuous statement? So you’ve not only completely failed to provide evidence to support your premise, your premise and your evidence don’t even correspond. Furthermore, at the end of your piece, you veer back to the (unproven) “Obama is a liar” premise and attempt to extrapolate from that “proof” that Obama is Muslim: “Obama is certainly lying about Islam, and hence is almost certainly an orthodox Muslim who embraces the Islamic law of hate”. Really? You think that’s a logical statement, that if he’s a liar he must be a Muslim? Are all liars Muslims?
All you’ve “proven” is that your interpretation of religion differs from what you imagine is Obama’s interpretation. Considering that statement can be made about almost any two random people on Earth, you’ve essentially proven nothing outside of your basic ignorance of logic and how to build an effective argument.
Tom is changing the subject. When he wrote: “What else is this if not justification to hate millions of people based on a label?” he was obviously talking about my exposing the hatefulness of Islamic doctrines, not what what I said about Obama being a liar. That is, he is calling it hateful to point out the hatefulness of orthodox Islam, exactly as I said.
Obama’s extensive lies about his Muslim upbringing are a whole further subject. Tom can follow the link I provided in the post if he is interested. I just commented directly on the one obvious lie that is the subject of the post: Obama’s claiming that Islam embraces the law of love when ANYONE who has ever studied Islam at all knows that the religion explicitly and repeatedly calls on Muslims to hate their non-Muslim neighbors. That certainly includes Obama. And no, this is not an “innocuous” lie.
@anticsrocks:
When they attribute those actions with broad brushstrokes, implicating the entire race of said people, yes. When the rhetoric is intended to incite hatred towards said group of people, yes. Since Islam is not a race, I didn’t use the word racist, I used the word bigot. Same application.
I went to my local pub last night, a sports bar in a largely Greek neighborhood. While we were, in good humor and camaraderie, trash talking a Patriots fan (who happened to be Greek) one fellow Giants fan began making statements that, albeit may have had some element of historic truth, were offensive both to the heterosexual Greeks and the homosexual non-Greeks who frequent the bar. I pointed out to him that he was taking it too far and that perhaps he wanted to bring it back a bit (a few other guys were ready to throw punches, but he seemed to be oblivious.) Nobody need to prove to him that what he was saying was both racist and homophobic, he got that what he was saying didn’t make him cool and that he should stop. Though, I do realize I’m not in my neighborhood here.
Since I’m feeling a little less lazy this morning, and lest I prove myself a liar voicing my goodwill towards you, and have an appreciation for your attempt to be somewhat reasonable, I will take the time to do some cut and paste of things I have written on this issue in the past. But then, I’m done with this thread. Another one of my flaws, perhaps my biggest, is a lack of patience. Repeating the same things when clearly they make no impact to open or change minds, is not really an activity I find healthy for me, I find it better to go for a run. So this will be it for me.
There are more, but they’d mostly be repetitive. I hope this is good enough for you.