EDL nonsense.

[Noodlebear]

Have had to edit the above comment several times because I'm so useless at using my phone

 

[ttc_lolly]

This is the link to the video I watched online. Maybe it's controversial, and admittedly it does say "halal" and no mention whatsoever of kosher (so I agree with bumpy-j that that is wrong in itself, how it's another reason for those small minded people to hate Islam when infact another religion do it to), but it's real and it just goes to show the terror and pain the animals go through when killed inhumanely. Hopefully this will open peoples eyes a bit more to think about what they're putting in to their mouths. It's very graphic, so please bear that in mind if you do decide to watch it.

https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=545_1345800806#VSxMTb52AmSpZzx1.01

 

[Abigailly]

That's not a great video really. I didn't watch much of it. Just until the part where the Halal cow finally succumbs.

They were 2 different types of slaughter houses. The traditional one was a mass scale, highly modern one. You could tell by the robot stun and the cleanliness of it all. The Halal one was dirty, manual and fairly inefficient. It wasn't a true representation of a Halal slaughterhouse which falls under British guidelines. It is probably how some Halal butchers slaughter the cattle as it was obviously un stunned. However, traditional slaughtering has the dodgy ones in it too.

 

[ttc_lolly]

I'm not disagreeing with you on that part, but I think the video is just saying how a lot of the halal (and kosher!) meat that is slaughtered outside of the UK and imported in is done like this obviously I'm much more happier that we have laws and regulations in place for animals slaughtered in the UK, but my heart breaks to know this goes on elsewhere around the world.

 

[Abigailly]

But if you compared non Halal meat from said countries there would be just as horrific practice. I know exactly what you mean. I'm not trying to jump on you, I just don't think that's a fair comparison and has has been created to use against the Halal argument.

 

[Noodlebear]

Videos like that are part of the problem. People are seeing such a misrepresentation and basing their (sometimes horrendously racist) opinions on it when the reality is that, whether the meat is halal or not, you get idiots who mistreat animals.

 

[ttc_lolly]

But if you compared non Halal meat from said countries there would be just as horrific practice. I know exactly what you mean. I'm not trying to jump on you, I just don't think that's a fair comparison and has has been created to use against the Halal argument.

Oh of course, and I get that. I'm just referring to the killing of domestic livestock done in the main nations and that unfortunately halal/kosher will have a huge custom worldwide, so it's still pretty valid no matter what.

 

[ttc_lolly]

Videos like that are part of the problem. People are seeing such a misrepresentation and basing their (sometimes horrendously racist) opinions on it when the reality is that, whether the meat is halal or not, you get idiots who mistreat animals.

Misrepresentation how? I get videos like that do not help things in the slightest for those already small minded people who are looking for anything to jump on Islam/religion, but it's still a real video of how those animals are slaughtered. It makes me disgusted and sick to my stomach that animals could be treated in such a way but it would never make me despise a person or group because of their beliefs.

Anyway, I digest from the main point of your post... I'm pretty sure it was nothing to do with halal!?

 

[Noodlebear]

If it was just highlighting issues then it'd be good but it's drawing ridiculous comparisons and fuelling a lot of ignorance.

 

[ttc_lolly]

That's true. I guess the video could have been done without the written commentary and that would make it less against one sided, but honestly I barely read it. I just think the video is still good for people to watch who didn't even know how animals are killed regardless of what religion or custom they follow, I know there were a few previous posters on here who said they didn't know and hadn't ever even thought about it before, and that kind of blew my mind!

 

[Noodlebear]

Yeah I agree. It's a shame it didn't show them both in the same light, it could've been much more informative if it showed the good of both practices vs the bad.

 

[emyandpotato]

They use a recoverable stun (if one IS used) as opposed to a captive bolt stun.. Aside from all the other issues involved (bear with me) and just focusing on animal welfare for a sec, I think unless you're a hardcore vegan and have literally NO dealing with anything animal derived (milk, honey, silk clothes, leather shoes and car seats/sofas, angora, feathers, cashmere, god knows what else!) then really nobody can say they advovate animal welfare and care about the animals. I do think for a lot of people it's the other issues too, such as the tax and VAT exemptions that come with Halal accreditation through some charity loophole, profits indirectly going to Zatak which in turn funds terrorism and just the simple issue of the meat not being labelled as Halal. It's infiltrated the mainstream without anyone being told, and has taken away a simple basic right of freedom of choice purely to serve a minority (less than 5%). It's just pushed upon you, and for hardcore Christians it's actually against THEIR religion to eat meat which has been sacrificed/killed in the name of a false idol (in this case, Allah). If people are all in favour of halal meat which is a Sharia Law, then in turn you're also agreeing with the Sharia law for crime and offence and having limbs amputated. Where does it end?! Anyway, rant over x

I don't agree with the bit about meat eaters but I see you've sort of retracted that in a later comment so I won't go into that lol. I think the bit in bold was a daft thing to say though. Even people who practice the religion and actively support halal meat don't have to agree with every aspect of Sharia law. That's like saying that all Christians are homophobic or all Christians think that women on their periods are dirty etc. I don't think you could find a single religion that doesn't have some sort of out of date teaching that not everyone these days will necessarily agree with. Times change. You can be religious and still have your own opinion on things within the religion. You can also support aspects of it without being religious.

Exactly! People follow the material dimension of religion, which includes diet, not just because it's the will of God, or whatever, but for so many other reasons. For one thing it is a sense of identity to keep with historic religious traditions, and following the practical aspects of a religion keeps followers focused and connected to their religious goal and focused on morals etc., amongst so many other reasons. So no, because someone eats halal does not mean they agree with all sharia punishments. Like Noddlebear said, it's like suggesting all Christians are homophobic, or, similarly to your comment about sharia, that all Christians believe in the dumb historical punishments set out in the bible, just because they accept the bible's general teachings. Anyway, sharia law is NOT how our media portrays it. There are a few punishments retained from when it was written but actually if you look at them they are much less harsh and exaggerated than how extremists/the media voices them nowadays. Anyway, sharia law isn't pure religion it is politicised religion and therefore not all Muslims accept it as necessary/right by any means.

And Allah is the same god as the Christian god, so hardly a false idol. And the meat isn't really sacrificed, it's just killed in a respectful manner that honours the gift of the food. It's not an offering.

 

[Paloma123]

They use a recoverable stun (if one IS used) as opposed to a captive bolt stun.. Aside from all the other issues involved (bear with me) and just focusing on animal welfare for a sec, I think unless you're a hardcore vegan and have literally NO dealing with anything animal derived (milk, honey, silk clothes, leather shoes and car seats/sofas, angora, feathers, cashmere, god knows what else!) then really nobody can say they advovate animal welfare and care about the animals. I do think for a lot of people it's the other issues too, such as the tax and VAT exemptions that come with Halal accreditation through some charity loophole, profits indirectly going to Zatak which in turn funds terrorism and just the simple issue of the meat not being labelled as Halal. It's infiltrated the mainstream without anyone being told, and has taken away a simple basic right of freedom of choice purely to serve a minority (less than 5%). It's just pushed upon you, and for hardcore Christians it's actually against THEIR religion to eat meat which has been sacrificed/killed in the name of a false idol (in this case, Allah). If people are all in favour of halal meat which is a Sharia Law, then in turn you're also agreeing with the Sharia law for crime and offence and having limbs amputated. Where does it end?! Anyway, rant over x

I don't agree with the bit about meat eaters but I see you've sort of retracted that in a later comment so I won't go into that lol. I think the bit in bold was a daft thing to say though. Even people who practice the religion and actively support halal meat don't have to agree with every aspect of Sharia law. That's like saying that all Christians are homophobic or all Christians think that women on their periods are dirty etc. I don't think you could find a single religion that doesn't have some sort of out of date teaching that not everyone these days will necessarily agree with. Times change. You can be religious and still have your own opinion on things within the religion. You can also support aspects of it without being religious.

Exactly! People follow the material dimension of religion, which includes diet, not just because it's the will of God, or whatever, but for so many other reasons. For one thing it is a sense of identity to keep with historic religious traditions, and following the practical aspects of a religion keeps followers focused and connected to their religious goal and focused on morals etc., amongst so many other reasons. So no, because someone eats halal does not mean they agree with all sharia punishments. Like Noddlebear said, it's like suggesting all Christians are homophobic, or, similarly to your comment about sharia, that all Christians believe in the dumb historical punishments set out in the bible, just because they accept the bible's general teachings. Anyway, sharia law is NOT how our media portrays it. There are a few punishments retained from when it was written but actually if you look at them they are much less harsh and exaggerated than how extremists/the media voices them nowadays. Anyway, sharia law isn't pure religion it is politicised religion and therefore not all Muslims accept it as necessary/right by any means.


And Allah is the same god as the Christian god, so hardly a false idol. And the meat isn't really sacrificed, it's just killed in a respectful manner that honours the gift of the food. It's not an offering.

*Copied and pasted as I really can't be arsed to get into a theological debate about this. Fact remains there's more to halal than animal welfare and people need to educate themselves rather than cling onto religious arguments as their only point...

No, the God of Christianity and the God of Islam are not the same. First of all, the God of Christianity is a Trinity where the God of Islam is not. The Trinity is the monotheistic teaching that God exists eternally as three distinct persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In Islam, this is blatantly denied.

"And behold! Allah will say: "O 'Isa Ibn Maryam! Did you say to men, "Worship me and my mother as gods besides Allah?" He will say: "Glory to you! Never could I say what I had no right to say. Had I said such a thing, you would indeed have known it. You know what is in my heart, though I know not what is in yours. For you know in full all that is hidden," (Quran 5:116).
"O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist--it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs," (Quran 4:171).

Furthermore, in Christianity the doctrine of the Trinity allows for the incarnation of the Word. John 1:1, 14 says that the Word which was God was with God and became flesh and dwelt among us and was crucified (Matt. 26:2; 27:38). This is denied in Islam, which says that Jesus is only a prophet and was not crucified.


"[Jesus] said, "Indeed, I am the servant of Allah . He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet," (Quran 19:30).

"And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain," (Quran 4:157).
ALLAH IS PLAINLY AN IDOL
Mohammed’s father was called Abdullah, which means ‘slave of Allah’. The worship of Allah was well-established long before Mohammed was born in 570 AD. Modern scholars identify Allah with Sin (as in Sinai), the god of the moon, a position reinforced by the crescent moon atop every mosque. All Mohammed said was that Allah alone was to be worshipped of all the idols in Mecca . Even today, Allah’s idol in Mecca is a black stone, held sacred by Muslims. Our publication Understanding Islam explains further about the origins of Islam.
Christians need to understand that Allah is not just another word for ‘God’ (Allah means ‘the god’, not ‘God&#8217 and that Allah, by denying in the Koran that he ever had a son, by denying the crucifixion of our Lord, the saving power of Jesus, and the words of Isaiah that Christ bore our sins, puts clear water between the Koran and the Bible and between himself and the God who became incarnate in his only begotten son and suffered for our sakes upon the cross. Allah is an idol, and meat dedicated to him is meat sacrificed to an idol.
Sikhs understand this very well, which is why their religion expressly forbids them from eating halal meat. It also explains why they, and anyone who desires openness and honesty in food labelling, are so disturbed that halal meat is being sold surreptitiously, and is not required to be labelled as such in the United Kingdom .
THE IDOLS HE SHALL UTTERLY ABOLISH
The injunctions against idol worship are clear in the Old Testament:
Lev. 19:4 Turn ye not unto idols, nor make to yourselves molten gods: I am the LORD your God.
Ps. 96:5 For all the gods of the nations are idols: but the LORD made the heavens.
Isa. 2:18 And the idols he shall utterly abolish.
Zech. 13:2 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.
All through the Old Testament we read of a battle between the worship of Yahweh, the true God, and the worship of idols, or more properly, of the demons from the realm of Satan hiding behind them. The tribes around Israel were predominantly pagan. Aspects of nature such as the sun and the moon, the fishes of the sea, the stars of heaven, fertility and the weather, even trees and mountains, were exalted and worshipped. Human life was downgraded and expendable as a result. In all the pagan religions there was large-scale shedding of human blood, and it is note-worthy that Islam spread that way from its inception in the 7th century AD, across the Middle East, east to India and west to Spain and that it continues down that same bloody path today.
But the words of the prophets speak of a day when Christ shall rule, Satan will be sent to the pit and all false worship will be utterly abolished.
UNCLEANNESS IS FROM WITHIN
The Lord Jesus said some words which could be relevant to this matter. He was engaged in a debate on ritual washing of hands. He said that not washing hands before a meal in the prescribed manner did not make a man unclean before the Lord. It might give him a stomach upset, but that is a different matter, and we might easily suspect that the people of those days were a little tougher in their resistance to disease. Without modern medicines they needed to be. But it was the thoughts of the heart which made a man unclean. This is how the Lord explained it:
Mark 7:18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;
19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.
21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:
23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.
So we might see a relevance to eating halal food in good conscience there, but on the other hand, the context is about Jewish ceremony and hand-washing. It does not in itself mean one can eat anything.
FIRST CHURCH COUNCIL BANS EATING OF HALAL MEAT
Certainly that is how the early church understood it, because the first Church Council held in Jerusalem considered whether the Gentiles were to observe Jewish customs, circumcision being the biggest stumbling-block. The result was a letter from James to the Gentile Churches:
Acts 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
Acts 21:25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded … that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
This word has to proscribe the eating of halal meat as being included in the definition of that which is offered to an idol. Idolatry was rife in the societies out of which the early Christians were called, and they found themselves surrounded by idolatry and having to decide whether to eat meat dedicated to false gods. The Apostle John was given a word from the Lord Jesus himself to the churches at Pergamos and Thyatira on this issue, and that word is strongly against eating such meat:
Rev. 2:14 But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.
Rev. 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.
REFUSING HALAL IS AN ACT OF WITNESS
The same problem existed in Corinth . This is what Paul wrote to the believers there:
1 Cor. 8:1 Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.
2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.
3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him.
4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.
5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.
9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of your’s become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.
10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol’s temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;
11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?
12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.
13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
It seems from what the Apostle is saying that although Christ is bigger than the idols to which the meat is offered, and the meat would not defile the mature believer, nevertheless it is an act of witness to those who are weak to refuse it. The weak might be those young in the faith or even those of another faith.
DO NOT HAVE FELLOWSHIP WITH DARKNESS
Paul returns to the theme two chapters later where he sets it all in the context of not having fellowship with darkness. It we are sharing Holy Communion with the Lord, we should not be in communion with an idol:
1 Cor. 10:14 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.
15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.
16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?
19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.
21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.
22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?
23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
24 Let no man seek his own, but every man another’s wealth.
25 Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:
26 For the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof.
27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.
28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof:
29 Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man’s conscience?
30 For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?
31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.
32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God :
33 Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.
When Paul speaks of ‘offence’ as translated in the KJV he does not mean the word in a modern sense of putting someone’s back up; he means causing them to think poorly of the Gospel. For Muslims in particular, if they see Christians acting with no regard to their Christian faith, or not taking it as seriously as they do their Muslim faith, that causes them ‘offence’ in the Pauline sense.
BLOGGER TALKS SENSE
The conservative weblogger who goes under the name of Archbishop Cranmer puts it quite well:
‘While Christians are at liberty to consume whatever their conscience permits, Paul expresses a particular concern over meat offered to idols. (1Cor 10:14-32).
‘But this assumes that the believer is aware that the meat has been blessed in the name of Allah, who is the greatest. (sic)
‘If the Christian is kept in the dark, Paul is rather chilled about the matter until someone comes along and makes the believer aware that the meat was idol-sacrificed. Christians are then exhorted not to eat the meat for their sake: we may eat and drink anything unless and until it causes another to stumble.
‘But no-one is much bothered about the dietary sensitivities of 71 per cent of the population. British Sikhs, however, constitute 0.7 per cent, and their voice will be heard. Unlike Hindus, some Sikhs eat meat, not least because one of their gurus is recorded as being a hunter. Yet within the Sikh faith are the ‘kurahit’ or prohibitions, one of which is to not eat meat ‘killed in the Muslim way’.
‘The origins, as ever, have more to do with the politics of identity, but it is a sustained article of belief for Sikhs all over the world – they are simply not permitted to eat halal meat at all.’
And if Sikhs buy their meat from Sainsbury’s, Tesco, Waitrose, ASDA or the Co-op, they have been doing so without their knowledge.


So, the God of Islam and the God of Christianity are not the same. Allah IS an idol.

 

[pinkpolkadot]

I have had a read up on the Christian viewpoint as I find all aspects of it really interesting.

It seems there are 2 schools of thought on it and it can be interpreted in different ways so some are OK with it.

It doesn't affect me personally as I am an atheist but I do agree that if we are respecting Islam by providing Halal meat then I guess we should be respecting those Christians who believe their religion does not permit them to eat it by labelling it.

To be fair though, out of all the Facebook posts, newspaper and internet articles/comments that I have read on the subject nobody else has brought this up as a reason for their outrage. It is clear to me the majority of outrage is based on media fulled anti Islam propoganda.

Similarly there are differing viewpoints on methods of slaughter and which is more respectful to the animal. As others have said, the videos on Youtube have been selected to prove a point one way or the other, you can find shocking videos on both sides of the argument but I agree it is horrible to think standards can vary so that these disturbing videos can exist at all.

 

[Abigailly]

They use a recoverable stun (if one IS used) as opposed to a captive bolt stun.. Aside from all the other issues involved (bear with me) and just focusing on animal welfare for a sec, I think unless you're a hardcore vegan and have literally NO dealing with anything animal derived (milk, honey, silk clothes, leather shoes and car seats/sofas, angora, feathers, cashmere, god knows what else!) then really nobody can say they advovate animal welfare and care about the animals. I do think for a lot of people it's the other issues too, such as the tax and VAT exemptions that come with Halal accreditation through some charity loophole, profits indirectly going to Zatak which in turn funds terrorism and just the simple issue of the meat not being labelled as Halal. It's infiltrated the mainstream without anyone being told, and has taken away a simple basic right of freedom of choice purely to serve a minority (less than 5%). It's just pushed upon you, and for hardcore Christians it's actually against THEIR religion to eat meat which has been sacrificed/killed in the name of a false idol (in this case, Allah). If people are all in favour of halal meat which is a Sharia Law, then in turn you're also agreeing with the Sharia law for crime and offence and having limbs amputated. Where does it end?! Anyway, rant over x

I don't agree with the bit about meat eaters but I see you've sort of retracted that in a later comment so I won't go into that lol. I think the bit in bold was a daft thing to say though. Even people who practice the religion and actively support halal meat don't have to agree with every aspect of Sharia law. That's like saying that all Christians are homophobic or all Christians think that women on their periods are dirty etc. I don't think you could find a single religion that doesn't have some sort of out of date teaching that not everyone these days will necessarily agree with. Times change. You can be religious and still have your own opinion on things within the religion. You can also support aspects of it without being religious.

Exactly! People follow the material dimension of religion, which includes diet, not just because it's the will of God, or whatever, but for so many other reasons. For one thing it is a sense of identity to keep with historic religious traditions, and following the practical aspects of a religion keeps followers focused and connected to their religious goal and focused on morals etc., amongst so many other reasons. So no, because someone eats halal does not mean they agree with all sharia punishments. Like Noddlebear said, it's like suggesting all Christians are homophobic, or, similarly to your comment about sharia, that all Christians believe in the dumb historical punishments set out in the bible, just because they accept the bible's general teachings. Anyway, sharia law is NOT how our media portrays it. There are a few punishments retained from when it was written but actually if you look at them they are much less harsh and exaggerated than how extremists/the media voices them nowadays. Anyway, sharia law isn't pure religion it is politicised religion and therefore not all Muslims accept it as necessary/right by any means.

And Allah is the same god as the Christian god, so hardly a false idol. And the meat isn't really sacrificed, it's just killed in a respectful manner that honours the gift of the food. It's not an offering.

I completely agree with your first paragraph, particularly on Sharia Law. A lot of Muslims do not accept it for it's few barbaric punishments and a lot follow the modernly adapted version of it. As they should, and as everything needs to Sharia Law has moved forward with the times and when you see a woman being stoned for her affair with a married man etc, this isn't the norm and most Muslims don't agree with it. It's just the 'OMG did you see that' version portrayed by the media.

 

[Abigailly]

Paloma123 - That's a really cute copy and paste and all, but as a Catholic I can wholly tell you that the God we all worship (Christians, Jews and Muslims) is one. We just believe different follow ups. We all believe in Our father, creator of our universe. We all believe he is our judgement. And we all believe the prominence of Devine Power.

Very few will argue that our Gods are all the same. Yes, I believe in the Trinity, however, I also believe in the Assumption of Mary... Protestants may disagree with me there, yet we are both Christians and we both believe in the same God. We just believe different follow ups to that creation of Heaven and Earth.

 

[Paloma123]

I clearly stated the fact it was copy and paste as I can't be bothered to argue about religion!

Just because you have the "likes" and support from a cliquey group of women, doesn't make anyone right. Anyone who has a different point of viewing here, wow!! God forbid!!

Well, you eat what you like then. I do not want to be buying halal meat, nor do I want to be unwillingly sold it in the supermarket and restaurants thank you, and I think people who don't want to have a right to be upset. You should research into Zakat and how buying halal indirectly supports and funds terrorism. Not to mention marginalising the work place as only MUSLIMS can carry out the slaughter in halal accredited houses. Only 4.8% of the UK is Muslim, so this is creating division and is unfair. What happens to all the non Muslims jobs? What happened to freedom of choice? Tax and VAT are issues too, it's a whole can of worms, not just people bashing Islam and Muslims. There are hugely valid points, and I would love for you to come and air your views and opinions on sites and with people I know x

 

[ttc_lolly]

I never knew that Muslims, Christians and Jews all believed in the same god but different follow ups.... Confusing! Definitely another debate, but who's right and who's wrong!?

 

[Abigailly]

Well, you eat what you like then.

No thanks, as I said, they are the same God. However, the Islamic prayer also says 'I testify Muhammad is His servant and Messenger'. I don't. I believe Jesus Christ is His son and is part of him. They don't.

Just because we believe in the same God, does not mean we have the same beliefs.


We thank God in different ways. I don't agree with their way. They don't agree with mine.

 

[Paloma123]

Well, you eat what you like then.

To me, the Bible expresses concern to food that has been offered to an Idol.

e.

So why aren't you differing with emyandpotato who said he's not an idol then?!