Friday, March 27, 2009

"Muslim smokers worse than cows" says Muslim cleric

The smoking fatwa is in place, but it's none too popular even amongst Muslims.

Muslims who smoke and try to portray themselves as pious are worse than cows which defecate in the street, a top Malaysian Muslim cleric and politician said.

"...a cow which defecates in the middle of the road, (we) cannot take legal action against it because it has no brain and cannot think," said Nik Aziz who is the spiritual leader of the country's Pan-Islamic Party (PAS).

Cow

"But human beings, who have brains, for them to do something which is wrong in religion ... when they are in an attire which symbolizes Islam, they can be regarded as being more despicable than cows," he said on Friday, according to Malaysia's state news agency Bernama.

PAS is one of the three parties in Malaysia's opposition alliance led by former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim.

Nik Aziz said that smoking was forbidden by Islam.

Recently, Indonesia's top Islamic body passed a fatwa or ruling banning smoking. Malaysia's top Islamic body has also banned smoking.

Despite the ban in Malaysia, where over half the population of 27 million is Muslim, 50 percent of the male population smokes according to World Health Organization (WHO) data.

13 comments:

Unknown said...

This endless description of what people can do is almost as obnoxious as the Muslim's constantly telling people what to do. Let's accentuate the positive my Muslim moralizing friends.

Anyone here an Immanuel Kant fan? One of his good points was that one does not really make a moral decision unless one is given the freedom to do so. Under compulsion or blind obedience, you lose your "personhood" and cease to be a moral agent. In other words, morality requires freedom.

Well that is another one for our Muslim moralizing friends to debate. But these endless "you shall nots" because we say insult our intelligence and "personhood."

www.culturism.us

rumcrook™ said...

well then, the solution is obvious.

the 50% that dont smoke will have to cut off the heads of the 50% who do smoke.


its a win/win from this infidels perspective.

Damien said...

Culturist John,

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyone here an Immanuel Kant fan? One of his good points was that one does not really make a moral decision unless one is given the freedom to do so. Under compulsion or blind obedience, you lose your "personhood" and cease to be a moral agent. In other words, morality requires freedom.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah I remember that about Kant. Its one of the strong points of his philosophy.

Anonymous said...

Anybody here ever smoked a Muslim?

If you know anyone who has smoked a Muslim in, say, Afghanistan or Iraq, please convey my thanks.

Smoke 'em if you got 'em.

Just Cause said...

John, they would need to have a look at a dictionary first to find out what moral means, assuming Allah permits them to look at dictionaries of course after all, Mohammed wasn't a reader, no reason why his followers should be either.

Rumcrook, I like your thinking!

Damien said...

rumcrook,

Unlike just cause, I hope your joking. I'm mean some of the people who would end of dead would be innocent non practicing Muslims who don't take the Koran literally and don't hate nonmuslims. Plus, the 50% that don't smoke who cut off the heads of the 50% who do smoke, will be the more fanatical ones. The Jihadists are the ones we have to eliminate, and the more fanatical and literalistic a Muslim you are, the more likely you will be a Jihadist and a violent one at that. Part of the unwillingness of people in the west to criticize Islam is because of our fear of terrorism. If not for the terrorists, the cultural Jihadists would have a harder time silencing people.

rumcrook™ said...

dude relax sarcasm is my middle name.

its an old family name on my fathers side......




im aware of all the sound arguments you made. next time I will try not to forget a sarc tag / after the comment

Just Cause said...

Damien & other fellow Infidels, many may disagree but I see all Muslims as potential Jihadis and here's why. Those practising the 'peaceful' Islam are basically living a lie.

They have been told that Islam is about peace, respect, submission to Allah and all that nonsense and told how to pray etc which is fine, no problems there only that it's not what Allah/Mohammed had in mind but regardless, you belong to Islam.

After a while you start getting pissed off that everyone is looking at you funny, and some news channels are giving airtime to people who are critical of your religion. Then one day a well respected Imam turns up at evening prayers and starts talking about how Muslims are being oppressed and that Mohammed himself commands Muslims to fight oppression (although the 'oppression' Mo faced was actually the rejection of the Meccan Jews for his claims to be a prophet from God) and then says, let's take a look at the 9th surah and bang...black and white justification, nay, obligation to wage holy war against infidels who reject Islam as the one true faith. Next thing they know, they are being trained in weapons just in case they need to 'defend' themselves against infidel oppression and hey presto, one more Jihadi ready for the cause. No need to worry about dying as long as you die fighting for Allah, how about that for motivation?

Hence why I have no compassion for 'moderate' Muslims because empowering them or affording them special treatment because they've not yet made the leap is not going to help anyone. We have to deal with Islam root and branch otherwise we'll be forever trying to deal with the end of the production line rather than breaking the machine.

I appreciate such an approach contravenes moral (and possibly legal) boundaries of religious freedom however I'm sure Culturist John would agree, you have to define the religions acceptable within your culture and then be prepared to defend them against other religions that aren't compatible or designed to co-exist. I am not religious and I see Islam as a threat to my culture hence why I harbour no reservations in suggesting that religions that aren't compatible with my culture banned.

Damien said...

Just Cause,

I don't think we can ban a religion in the west outright without seriously violating our values. However we can ban many of its practices. The right to wave one's fist ends where my face begins. We can also seriously restrict immigration from Muslim countries, until they start embracing western values and allowing people of other religions to practice freely and openly. Weather non Jihadist Muslims are living a lie or not is irrelevant to my point. One way to keep more of the moderate Muslims from becoming Jihadists is to is to stand up to the Jihadists. Seeing the Jihadist fail (weather terrorist or cultural,) will discourage them from joining their ranks. We shouldn't stop criticizing Islam, but why should we treat those Muslims who oppose Sharia and Jihad, (even if they are being contradictory) the exact same way we treat the terrorists? Plus living in a society where their beliefs are openly criticized where they can't stop the criticism will make them get used to it. If they can't stop it, it will encourage them to tolerate it. Also openly criticizing their beliefs will discourage other people from becoming Muslims in the first place.

You said you had no compassion for non Jihadist Muslims. Should we just go about killing every Muslim on the planet, including those that you would consider Muslim in name only? I doubt we will be able to get rid of Islam in our life time anyway. Its far too ingrained and we are having enough trouble as it is getting our fellow westerners to stand up for their culture and their freedom.

Just Cause said...

Damien, just because I have no compassion for them doesn't mean I want them killed, I didn't mean to imply that. My point was that IMO theres a ultra fine line between moderate and Jihadi thus I look upon all Muslims as potential Jihadis and have no compassion for a moderate's standpoint of renouncing the bad bits of the religion. Consider this analogy - two guys are trying to steal your wallet, one of them has a gun, you shoot the guy with the gun and his friend will either reach for the gun or see the error of his ways. Even if he chooses the latter it doesn't mean he's now my friend and wont avenge the death of his friend once my guard is down.

I agree though that criticising Islam in order to prevent people from joining the ranks in the first place is a viable tactic.

As for violating our values, as an example you can't defend our value of tolerance by tolerating a faith that is intolerant of your values and is pursuing an agenda to destroy them, that is illogical. If you're fighting for your life or cultural survival then trying to remain a moral authority is a one way ticket to oblivion, Israel is a perfect example of where this gets you.

Damien said...

Just Cause,

I'm not suggesting we do anything suicidal. For one thing, Imams and other Muslims who preach Sharia can be arrested for sedition or thrown out of the country. Not to mention I support severally limiting immigration from all Muslim countries right now, until their leaders openly condemn Sharia and start tolerating other religions.

One of the reasons Israel acts the way it does is because the outside world puts such incredible pressure on them to act that way, and so they don't eliminate threats to their survival for fear of losing what few allies they have and the allies they do have, are lukewarm at best. The free world really needs to just let them do what must be done.

Just Cause said...

"The free world really needs to just let them do what must be done." Amen to that my friend.

Epaminondas said...

It's getting a little hard for me to complain that sharia as sedition when the prez is advocating SEVERAL seditious courses himself, and CONGRESS GOES ALONG.

Never the less, it IS sedition, PASTO is completely correct.

The Quran and Hadith are pock marked with racism and religous hate speech, and incitement to violence.

Incitement which results in violence IS both illegal in the USA and remonstrable thru civil action.

Why this was not done in the cases of sudden jihadism in NC and Seattle FOR INSTANCE, is beyond me.

Sooner or later, because the Quran must be accepted as the word of a perfect being by anyone calling themselves a muslim, we are going to have to deal with someone acting out of this profound difference between other religions and Islam and cannot paper over the perpetrator as insane.