That’s what happens when you have an entire race of inbreds.

have no frigging idea what their religion is supposed to be about.

I think you’re wrong here. They know exactly what the religion is about. Have you read the Quran, and the Ahadith that comprises the Sunnah?  Is yours a faith in Islam that is really just a faith in human nature?  There is nothing good about Islam.  The parts that sound sort of good were stolen and mangled retellings of passages he was read from the Torah and Talmud.  Mohammad was possessed thief, rapist, and murderer.  His book is a book of deception, greed and death.  It has nothing to do with human nature.

Don’t get me wrong.  There are plenty, millions I’m sure, of good people who have been deceived by Islam’s peddlers into thinking they can live good lives if they follow the guidance of Mohammad.  These people may do good in the name of Islam, but they would do good without Islam just the same.

Anyone who’s honestly cracked open the Koran, and read the Sunnah couldn’t possibly find more good than evil.

You may have a point...I’ve only begun to delve into the annotated Koran “study guide” I have...since of course infidels aren’t allowed to actually own the Koran itself.

It’s that free one that CAIR was sending out...originally I ordererd it just to cost them the shipping fees, but I am actually goimng to read it...or at least try.  It’s HUGE.

I’ve only begun to delve into the annotated Koran “study guide”

Be careful with this.  Study guides tend to lend their bias.  These bias will only lend to the confusion. 

For instance:  the word Islam.  Some people will tell you it means submission.  Some people will tell you it means peace.  The word, written in Arabic, would be SLM.  The root, Salama does mean peace.  But even with English words we know that, while root words can provide clues to the meanings of words, they do not always lend their own meaning directly to the word they are used in.  The trick then becomes devining the context through which the word is used.  The trouble is, the Quran is not written in a format that is conducive to providing context.  The Sura are not in any sort of order, either chronological or topical.

Another example is a passage that is discussed quite often in debates on the religion:

002.256
YUSUFALI: Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
PICKTHAL: There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.
SHAKIR: There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing.

This Sura can be taken to mean very different things.  Appologists will say that the Sura confirms that Muslims can not attempt to compel you to follow Islam.  For them, it is a repudiation of the notion that Islam allows conversion by the sword. 

Others think that the passage has been abbrogated by contradictory Sura later in the Quran.  Some say that the Sura is figurative in that the “truth” of the Quran is so obvious, to force someone to follow it wouldn’t amount to actual compulsion.  Others think that the statement only applies to certain groups of people, be it Muslims, people of the Book, or everyone including infidels.

For me however, what I find lacking in the passage, is the command to not compel.  I understand the passage to mean that a man who is compelled to do what is right will be judged harshly by Allah, because a compeled man truely is not a believer.  The passage itself does not provide reason, or incentive to not compel, and the rest of the Quran directs compulsion at every turn.  So either the Quran is contradictory, which Mufti assert is it not, then the passage must mean something different than what they tell you it means. 

And see.  I couldn’t help but lend my own bias.

There are many online sources to find translated Quran, and Hadith of Tabari, Bukhari, and Moslem.  One source has three translations of each Sura. My advice is that when you must seek explination, or background information on a subject, do consider the source in context.

Another good one that comes up is this one:

005.032
YUSUFALI: On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
PICKTHAL: For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah’s Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth.
SHAKIR: For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our messengers came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

The appologists claim that this is another verification of the peaceful nature of the religion.  They state that Muslims cannot kill innocent people because it would be as if they killed all of mankind.

But notice.  There’s a qualification to the statement: unless it be for murder, spreading mischief, (or corruption.) There’s a wide range of ways to interperit that little nuance.  Some might take it as praise for an attempt to symbolically slay an entire population of corrupt people.

What I find ironic though, is that it is not the first time such a sentiment was offered.  Except the context was quite different.  When Mohammad was in Medina he paid Jewish scholars to read to him from Jewish religious texts.  Contained within the Mishnah Sanhedrin is a Rabbi’s musings in regard to the story of Cain and Abel.

“How are witnesses inspired with awe in capital cases?” the Mishna begins. “They are brought in and admonished as follows: In case you may want to offer testimony that is only conjecture or hearsay or secondhand evidence, even from a person you consider trustworthy; or in the event you do not know that we shall test you by cross-examination and inquiry, then know that capital cases are not like monetary cases. In monetary cases, a man can make monetary restitution and be forgiven, but in capital cases both the blood of the man put to death and the blood of his [potential] descendants are on the witness’s head until the end of time. For thus we find in the case of Cain, who killed his brother, that it is written: ‘The bloods of your brother cry unto Me’ (Genesis 4:10) — that is, his blood and the blood of his potential descendants.... Therefore was the first man, Adam, created alone, to teach us that whoever destroys a single life, the Bible considers it as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a single life, the Bible considers it as if he saved an entire world. Furthermore, only one man, Adam, was created for the sake of peace among men, so that no one should say to his fellow, ‘My father was greater than yours.... Also, man [was created singly] to show the greatness of the Holy One, Blessed be He, for if a man strikes many coins from one mold, they all resemble one another, but the King of Kings, the Holy One, Blessed be He, made each man in the image of Adam, and yet not one of them resembles his fellow. Therefore every single person is obligated to say, ‘The world was created for my sake”’ (Mishna Sanhedrin 4:5). (One commentary notes, “How grave the responsibility, therefore, of corrupting myself by giving false evidence, and thus bringing [upon myself the moral guilt of [murdering] a whole world.")

http://www.flemcomics.com/

http://www.flemcomics.com/

Holy crap.  That’s...mean yet awesome.  :)

let’s make sure there’s now a direct link to that flem comic now in the archive:

http://www.flemcomics.com/d/20060206.html

flem is awesome.  you’d appreciate much of the humor, i think ;)