Somalia to Behead People Who Don't Pray

**singern** · 12-06-2006, 01:11 PM

Somalia Threatens to Behead People Who Don't Pray 5 Times Daily.

MOGADISHU, Somalia — Residents of a southern Somalia town who do not pray five times a day will be beheaded, an official said Wednesday, adding the edict will be implemented in three days.

Shops, tea houses and other public places in Bulo Burto, about 124 miles northeast of the capital, Mogadishu, should be closed during prayer time and no one should be on the streets, said Sheik Hussein Barre Rage, the chairman of the town's Islamic court. His court is part of a network backed by armed militiamen that has taken control of much of southern Somalia in recent months, bringing a strict interpretation of Islam that is alien to many Somalis.

Those who do not follow the prayer edict after three days have elapsed, "will definitely be beheaded according to Islamic law," Rage told The Associated Press by phone. "As Muslims we should practice Islam fully, not in part, and that is what our religion enjoins us to do."

He said the edict, which covered only Bulo Burto, was being announced over loudspeakers throughout the town.

Somalia's Islamic courts have made varying interpretations of Koranic law, some applying a more strict and radical version of Islam than others. Some of the courts have introduced public executions, floggings of convicts, bans on women swimming in Mogadishu's public beaches and on the sale and chewing of khat, a leafy stimulant consumed across the Horn of Africa and in the Middle East.

**Tock** · 12-06-2006, 08:54 PM

Not much different than what some Christians have imposed in times gone by, or what some of 'em want nowadays.

**Red Ketchup** · 12-06-2006, 09:26 PM

Aw come on folks! Remember, Islam is a religion of peace!!!

Yeah... ok there...

Though tock has a point... the spanish inquisition anyone?

Whatever happened to LIVE AND LET LIVE? goooosh! (in my best Napoleon Dynamite voice)

Red

**Bigen12** · 12-07-2006, 06:37 AM

Originally Posted by Tock

Not much different than what some Christians have imposed in times gone by, or what some of 'em want nowadays.

Yeah, you're correct, but it doesn't make it right.

I was listening to a conservitive talk show the other day, they were talking about the new Muslim member of congress that was planning, during a ceramonial photo shoot of his swearing in, to place his hand on the Koran instead of the bible, and people were going nuts!

It's crazy, people forget that one of the reasons this country was founded was religious freedom.

**scriptfactory** · 12-07-2006, 06:54 AM

Originally Posted by Bigen12

Yeah, you're correct, but it doesn't make it right.

I was listening to a conservitive talk show the other day, they were talking about the new Muslim member of congress that was planning, during a ceramonial photo shoot of his swearing in, to place his hand on the Koran instead of the bible, and people were going nuts!

It's crazy, people forget that one of the reasons this country was founded was religious freedom.

That's for sure...

**Logan13** · 12-07-2006, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by Tock

Not much different than what some Christians have imposed in times gone by, or what some of 'em want nowadays.

You can not validate bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior, especially behavior from hundreds of years ago. Funny how when it is Islam, you point to Christianity, but never the reverse. Remember, TODAY Islamic countries still punish homosexuality, sometimes by death.

**Logan13** · 12-07-2006, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by Bigen12

Yeah, you're correct, but it doesn't make it right.

I was listening to a conservitive talk show the other day, they were talking about the new Muslim member of congress that was planning, during a ceramonial photo shoot of his swearing in, to place his hand on the Koran instead of the bible, and people were going nuts!

It's crazy, people forget that one of the reasons this country was founded was religious freedom.

Has nothing to do with religious freedom, has to do with the Judeo-Chrisitian principles that this country was founded on. This Muslim congressman is an American first, he was born here afterall, he is not an Arab. A large part of the supporters for his congressional campaign are members of the Black Panther Party and the Nation of Islam. US tradition guys, next people will want to sworn in using Arabic and not English. This is all politically motivated....

**Bigen12** · 12-07-2006, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by Logan13

Has nothing to do with religious freedom, has to do with the Judeo-Chrisitian principles that this country was founded on. This Muslim congressman is an American first, he was born here afterall, he is not an Arab. A large part of the supporters for his congressional campaign are members of the Black Panther Party and the Nation of Islam. US tradition guys, next people will want to sworn in using Arabic and not English.

Regardless who his supporters are, he was lawfully elected.

His race is not relevant. He chooses to be Muslim, there for his religious book is the Koran. If he wishes to be sworn in during a photo opt, in Arabic is his own business.

Maybe I'm too much of a libertarian, but traditions be damned.

**scriptfactory** · 12-07-2006, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Logan13

Has nothing to do with religious freedom, has to do with the Judeo-Chrisitian principles that this country was founded on. This Muslim congressman is an American first, he was born here afterall, he is not an Arab. A large part of the supporters for his congressional campaign are members of the Black Panther Party and the Nation of Islam. US tradition guys, next people will want to sworn in using Arabic and not English. This is all politically motivated....

Oh' hell no. This country's founding fathers had a lot of BS "principles" that no one even cares about any more. This is supposed to be the "land of the free" and someone can't even choose what book they get sworn into office with?

Also, the Black Panthers aren't even around anymore. That particular political party is dissolved...

**MuscleScience** · 12-07-2006, 02:40 PM

The world would be a lot better place if people were not so caught up on what other people believe and do.

**Logan13** · 12-07-2006, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by scriptfactory

This country's founding fathers had a lot of BS "principles" that no one even cares about any more.

Can you name some of these BS principles script?

Also, the Black Panthers aren't even around anymore. That particular political party is dissolved...

You have been out of the states too long script.........
www.newblackpanther.com
http://www.blackpanther.org/

**spywizard** · 12-07-2006, 04:05 PM

So who are we to judge??? it is thier faith, thier moral guide, thier way of life...

I mean they own slaves, kill one another.. they dont' have 2 million people in prison like we do..

go figure..

**spywizard** · 12-07-2006, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by scriptfactory

Oh' hell no. This country's founding fathers had a lot of BS "principles" that no one even cares about any more. This is supposed to be the "land of the free" and someone can't even choose what book they get sworn into office with?

Also, the Black Panthers aren't even around anymore. That particular political party is dissolved...

nope, still hating, and going strong

http://www.11alive.com/news/news_art...?storyid=88363

**scriptfactory** · 12-07-2006, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by Logan13

You have been out of the states too long script.........
www.newblackpanther.com
http://www.blackpanther.org/

You should read, "There Is No New Black Panther Party: An Open Letter From the Dr. Huey P. Newton Foundation". It's on a link on that blackpanther.org site. Also, that site just gives information about the BPP. Trust me, there is no such thing as the Black Panther Party anymore.

**scriptfactory** · 12-07-2006, 04:12 PM

Originally Posted by spywizard

nope, still hating, and going strong

http://www.11alive.com/news/news_art...?storyid=88363

The NBPP is like the black KKK. They are not the Black Panther Party.

**Logan13** · 12-07-2006, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by Bigen12

Regardless who his supporters are, he was lawfully elected.

His race is not relevant. He chooses to be Muslim, there for his religious book is the Koran. If he wishes to be sworn in during a photo opt, in Arabic is his own business.

Maybe I'm too much of a libertarian, but traditions be damned.

If David Duke were elected, would you be OK with him being sworn in with the The Life of the Führer? When a Muslim goes to court, does he not have to tell the truth unless he can be sworn in with the Koran? Do we need to start keeping every religious book known to man on hand to fit everyone's little whim? Where do you draw the line Bigen? Somewhere along the way, common sense was replaced with this kind of touchy-feely bullshit...
BTW, Traditions are held by the vast majority in this country.

**Bigen12** · 12-07-2006, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by spywizard

So who are we to judge??? it is thier faith, thier moral guide, thier way of life...

I mean they own slaves, kill one another.. they dont' have 2 million people in prison like we do..

go figure..

Yeah, I see your point, but when we compared the beheading to our way of life, beliefs and religious freedoms, it is appalling. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live there.

**spywizard** · 12-07-2006, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by scriptfactory

You should read, "There Is No New Black Panther Party: An Open Letter From the Dr. Huey P. Newton Foundation". It's on a link on that blackpanther.org site. Also, that site just gives information about the BPP. Trust me, there is no such thing as the Black Panther Party anymore.

http://www.11alive.com/news/news_art...?storyid=88363

news cast in Atlanta Ga...

**scriptfactory** · 12-07-2006, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by spywizard

http://www.11alive.com/news/news_art...?storyid=88363

news cast in Atlanta Ga...

Go back. Read my post and the article slowly. Then post.

**spywizard** · 12-07-2006, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by Bigen12

Yeah, I see your point, but when we compared the beheading to our way of life, beliefs and religious freedoms, it is appalling. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live there.

ahh.. so now we have it... we are imposing our standard of living, our value of life, our moral judgement of how someone should live...

that's the issue..

Yes, we believe women should be protected, valued..

there are many in the world that do not see it that way..

so we are judging people, and forcing them to adapt our value system..

that's the problem..

**spywizard** · 12-07-2006, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by scriptfactory

Go back. Read my post and the article slowly. Then post.

ok...

**spywizard** · 12-07-2006, 04:19 PM

ya know.. i think i will start fund raising for the new KKK.. a more gentle, less violent group...

I want an investigation into the illegal, and immoral funding of colleges using taxpayer Money, my money to educate those not willing to attend classes on a regular bases..

**Bigen12** · 12-07-2006, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by Logan13

If David Duke were elected, would you be OK with him being sworn in with the The Life of the Führer?

Remember the ceremony in which the Koran is to be used, is only a photo opt, it isn’t the actual swearing in, in which no religious book is used.

Originally Posted by Logan13

When a Muslim goes to court, does he not have to tell the truth unless he can be sworn in with the Koran?

The person better tell the truth, or face the consequences of the court.
Actually a person in court no longer has to put their hand on the bible nor swear to tell the truth, so help them God.

Originally Posted by Logan13

Do we need to start keeping every religious book known to man on hand to fit everyone's little whim?

No just don’t use any religious book.

Originally Posted by Logan13

Where do you draw the line Bigen? Somewhere along the way, common sense was replaced with this kind of touchy-feely bullshit...

No, I don’t see it that way. I see it as protecting our heritage of religious freedom.

Originally Posted by Logan13

BTW, Traditions are held by the vast majority in this country.

So we should impose them on the rest of the population, like in Somalia where religious nuts are proposing to cut off the heads of those that don’t follow the tradition of prayers?

**Bigen12** · 12-07-2006, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by spywizard

ahh.. so now we have it... we are imposing our standard of living, our value of life, our moral judgement of how someone should live...

that's the issue..

Yes, we believe women should be protected, valued..

there are many in the world that do not see it that way..

so we are judging people, and forcing them to adapt our value system..

that's the problem..

So, in your opinion, when should we step in?

Should we allow another Holocaust, just so we don’t exert our values on others?

**spywizard** · 12-07-2006, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by Bigen12

So, in your opinion, when should we step in?

Should we allow another Holocaust, just so we don’t exert our values on others?

my point is... 1 death, 100, or 1,000,000 when do we commit our lives and the lives of our young men and women to fight and die in a foreign land...??

The afore mentioned was for example...

**Logan13** · 12-07-2006, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by scriptfactory

The NBPP is like the black KKK. They are not the Black Panther Party.

what is the difference?

**3Vandoo** · 12-07-2006, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by scriptfactory

The NBPP is like the black KKK. They are not the Black Panther Party.

the black KKK

yeah, they are the Kniggers Kill Kramer!

**Tock** · 12-07-2006, 09:20 PM

Originally Posted by Logan13

Has nothing to do with religious freedom, has to do with the Judeo-Chrisitian principles that this country was founded on. .

As I pointed out in another thread, the main reason people came to North America from Europe, was for $$$. European investors put their cash up, hoping for a good return on their investment. To the extent that rigorous enforcement of religious values helped keep colonists productive citizens, it was considered a good thing.

Other Judeo-Christian principles prevalant in America's early days included Tax-supported Official Government-approved churches, banning observation of Christmas, banning Catholics, banning Quakers, Anabaptists, Baptists, killing people convicted of witchcraft, mandatory church attendance, etc. Ya, if you knew more of what organized religion did in North America back in the 1600's and 1700's, you wouldn't want to claim those values as your own . . .

But we've already beaten this horse to death elsewhere . . .
( 100,000 slavics use first amendment rights post #51)
hope we don't have re-hash all this again . . .

**Logan13** · 12-07-2006, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by Tock

As I pointed out in another thread, the main reason people came to North America from Europe, was for $$$. European investors put their cash up, hoping for a good return on their investment. To the extent that rigorous enforcement of religious values helped keep colonists productive citizens, it was considered a good thing.

Other Judeo-Christian principles prevalant in America's early days included Tax-supported Official Government-approved churches, banning observation of Christmas, banning Catholics, banning Quakers, Anabaptists, Baptists, killing people convicted of witchcraft, mandatory church attendance, etc. Ya, if you knew more of what organized religion did in North America back in the 1600's and 1700's, you wouldn't want to claim those values as your own . . .

But we've already beaten this horse to death elsewhere . . . hope we don't have re-hash all this again . . .

Your opinion does not constitue hashing out anything, your views are very much in the minority in the US. Do you have anything besides your personal opinion to back this up? The country that you want the US to be is nowhere near what it was in 1776 in regards to values.

**Tock** · 12-07-2006, 09:38 PM

Originally Posted by Logan13

Your opinion does not constitue hashing out anything, your views are very much in the minority in the US. Do you have anything besides your personal opinion to back this up?

FACT: In colonial Massachusetts, it was illegal to celebrate Christmas, because the protestants considered it a "Catholic" holiday, and anyone observing it was presumed to be a papist. They were expelled from the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and if they returned, they were put to death.
They also ran roughshod over Quakers, Baptists, and others (remember the Salem Witch Trials?) who thought to disagree with the official Judeo-Christian religious philosophy.

People nowadays who are familiar with early American religious persecution perpetrated by our founding fathers regard it as a black mark on our history, and resolve to do better than that early "Judeo-Christian philosophy" you so revere.

FACT is -- that the folks who bankrolled the early settlers did so out of a desire for profit. Ya, organizations like the . . .

Plymouth Company
London Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Company
Virginia Company

. . . were formed by investors, with the King of England's authority, not for the purpose of spreading the Gospel, but for Profit. No doubt the leaders of the new settlements found the harsh threats of hellfire and damnation useful to keep the citizenry under control, but their primary concern was to keep their bosses back in England happy with investment returns. Read history, mon petite . . .

Ya, I grew up in Massachusetts, and they made sure you knew about this sort of stuff -- state history & etc. Now you know it, too . . .

Originally Posted by Logan13

The country that you want the US to be is nowhere near what it was in 1776 in regards to values.

Fortunately so.
We no longer have slavery, require taxpayers to support official churches, or deny women and blacks the right to vote.
Maybe you regard tradition as moral authority, but I sure don't.

**Logan13** · 12-07-2006, 09:57 PM

Originally Posted by Tock

As I pointed out in another thread, the main reason people came to North America from Europe, was for $$$. European investors put their cash up, hoping for a good return on their investment. To the extent that rigorous enforcement of religious values helped keep colonists productive citizens, it was considered a good thing.

Other Judeo-Christian principles prevalant in America's early days included Tax-supported Official Government-approved churches, banning observation of Christmas, banning Catholics, banning Quakers, Anabaptists, Baptists, killing people convicted of witchcraft, mandatory church attendance, etc. Ya, if you knew more of what organized religion did in North America back in the 1600's and 1700's, you wouldn't want to claim those values as your own . . .

But we've already beaten this horse to death elsewhere . . .
( 100,000 slavics use first amendment rights post #51)
hope we don't have re-hash all this again . . .

Example of the Judeo Christian principles used during the founding of America.

Proposed Seal for the United States
On July 4, 1776, Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams "to bring in a device for a seal for the United States of America." Franklin's proposal adapted the biblical story of Moses' parting of the Red Sea. Jefferson first recommended the "Children of Israel in the Wilderness, led by a Cloud by Day, and a Pillar of Fire by night. . . ." He then embraced Franklin's proposal and rewrote it (right). Jefferson's revision of Franklin's proposal was presented by the committee to Congress on August 20. Although not accepted these drafts reveal the religious temper of the Revolutionary period. Franklin and Jefferson were among the most theologically liberal of the Founders, yet they used biblical imagery for this important task.

The Mayflower Compact (authored by William Bradford) 1620
“Having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine our selves together…”

John Adams letter to Thomas Jefferson:
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798

–John Adams in a letter written to Abigail on the day the Declaration was approved by Congress
“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.” July 4th ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.”

Thomas Jefferson (excerpts are inscribed on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial in the nations capital)
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.”
“ We’ve staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all of our heart.”

James Madison [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]
“We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”

The three branches of the U.S. Government: Judicial, Legislative, Executive
At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, James Madison proposed the plan to divide the central government into three branches. He discovered this model of government from the Perfect Governor, as he read Isaiah 33:22;
“For the LORD is our judge,
the LORD is our lawgiver,
the LORD is our king;
He will save us.”

New York Spectator. August 23, 1831
“ The court of common pleas of Chester county, [New York] rejected a witness who declared his disbelief in the existence of God. The presiding judge remarked that he had not before been aware that there was a man living who did not believe in the existence of God; that this belief constituted the sanction of all testimony in a court of justice: and that he knew of no cause in a Christian country where a witness had been permitted to testify without such belief.

Congress allocated money and approved the production of The Holy Bible
for all Americans
The Continental Congress in 1782, under the Presidency of John Hanson of Maryland, gave money to the mass printing and distribution of the Bible since America was unable to import the Bible during the Revolutionary War. The Bible was produced by Mr. Robert Aitken and is known as "The Bible of the Revolution" and was the first English Bible printed in America.

But I am sure that you know better than the Founders...........

**Logan13** · 12-07-2006, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by Tock

As I pointed out in another thread, the main reason people came to North America from Europe, was for $$$. European investors put their cash up, hoping for a good return on their investment. To the extent that rigorous enforcement of religious values helped keep colonists productive citizens, it was considered a good thing.

Other Judeo-Christian principles prevalant in America's early days included Tax-supported Official Government-approved churches, banning observation of Christmas, banning Catholics, banning Quakers, Anabaptists, Baptists, killing people convicted of witchcraft, mandatory church attendance, etc. Ya, if you knew more of what organized religion did in North America back in the 1600's and 1700's, you wouldn't want to claim those values as your own . . .

EVERYONE of these examples of yours above stem from the Puritans, not the Founding Fathers, Puritans are not the Founding Fathers. No Puritans signed the Constitution...........
Keeeeeep reaching Tock.
Regardless, the truth will set you free............

**Tock** · 12-07-2006, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by Logan13

EVERYONE of these examples of yours above stem from the Puritans, not the Founding Fathers, Puritans are not the Founding Fathers. No Puritans signed the Constitution...........
Keeeeeep reaching Tock.
Regardless, the truth will set you free............

Well, you cited colonial sources to make your point in your previous post (#31). If it's good enough for you to cite, it's good enough for me.

The Mayflower Compact (authored by William Bradford) 1620
“Having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine our selves together…”

**Logan13** · 12-07-2006, 11:37 PM

Originally Posted by Tock

Well, you cited colonial sources to make your point in your previous post (#31). If it's good enough for you to cite, it's good enough for me.

The Mayflower Compact (authored by William Bradford) 1620
“Having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine our selves together…”

I sighted ONE Puritan example, if you do not like it, look to the many others I listed from our Founders. You based all of your arguement on the Puritans. I am in no place to push religion down anyone's throat, but to deny the intent of the Founders would be intelectually dishonest.