Abdullah’s first act as an Imam was that he performed funeral rights for a gay Muslim who died because of AIDS after many imams denied this
OK. So when some diseased sodomite is refused a wedding cake by some baker, the latter is fined $135,000 for
discrimination against sodomites. On the other hand, when a Muslim cleric denies a funeral for someone (just because he happened to die from the dreaded HIV virus), it is not a crime and it is perfectly legal.
Well you're right, on the surface of it it is pretty dumb, and that case was blown way out of proportion. But I can see why - by operating in a certain state, the business must operate by the state's rules. If they do not, then they risk prosecution. A case of this nature would be lucrative, as it obviously appeals to mass media, what with the gay discrimination and a wedding cake. So the lawyers went all-out, and secured a whopping deal.
With the muslim clerics denying funerals, they're not really breaking the law as far as I know. They're just being assholes.
Working so hard to post multiple amount of gay jesus images, telling us how evil christianity is... I was hoping a massive participation pointing to us, regular folks who believe the concept of marriage should be between a man and a woman, how progressive islam is. How chrisitianity should follow the steps of imam abdullah...
As of yet... none of the regulars are here... As if islam is kriptonite to the pro ssm.
Wilikon it's easy to see the point you're trying to make with this thread, and it's pretty non-constructive.
Anyway, I say good for the guy - at least he's acting more like a religious person should, i.e. generally being nice to people. I really dislike this authoritarian way of running certain sects of religions whereby you're not a "true christian/muslim/etc" unless you believe and do
everything they say. Some are stricter than others, Islam is probably one of the worse ones so this guy's got some guts...
I have to disagree. It is not discrimination for imams denying funerals because=faith. It is perfectly OK to sue Christians refusing to bake a cake because=faith. It is perfectly OK to never talk about those gays killed by muslims because=faith.
How many gays got killed by muslims this year only, 2015, versus the numbers of gays who could not get a wedding cake by christians?
Let me guess:
"It's a non-constructive parallel" I don't really get what you're saying here, my point was that the reason they were prosecuted was because what they did was illegal. Imams denying funerals is not illegal, however of course it is discrimination: most religions are discriminatory by definition - they only accept those that believe their doctrine. To simplify things I'll make my views clear:
I don't agree with the law that forced the bakers to pay up - I believe that a private business should decide who it serves, not the state.
But I do think the bakers were stupid to not follow the law in this case - an analogy to this would be a drug user/dealer being executed - I don't agree with the law, but I think they are dumb for not following it.
Of course I would condemn anyone being killed by muslims (or anyone else). This would include gays, trannies, drug users, women etc. I would make exceptions for violent opponents or instances of self defence, stuff like that.
Quite why you're comparing gays killed by muslims and gays not receiving wedding cakes, I'm not sure. It's not a non-constructive parallel, it's pretty irrelevant as far as I can see. The state
could start making laws against religious institutions, but it's pretty obvious that this would be a dick-maneuver.
When I called your thread "non-constructive", I was referring to the fact that it is a blatant attempt to get a rise out of both Muslims (who might disagree with homosexuality) and pro-gay rights people (who might disagree with the Muslims). The thread serves to inflame the issues, rather than resolve them.