[x0137294744532]

> He voluntarily associates and culturally identifies with a group of people who are culturally incompatible with the country (Sharia, triple talaq,festivals which involve cutting goats on the road,etc) and are a threat to national security (a lot of terrorist attacks are after all funded by Muslim countries).

According to this logic, by being a conservative american protestant, you culturally associate with westboro baptist church. Also, by being a strong believing hindu, you obviously culturally associate yourself with the massacre of muslims, and vice versa.

This doesn't make sense.

[blabberer]

>strong believing hindu, you obviously culturally associate yourself with the massacre of muslims, and vice versa

Hindus dont have religious literature (and Hindu countries dont have laws) against other religious. Muslims do, Muslim countries do. I dont know anything about Christianity though, but yes, I guess you do culturally associate with all churches if you are openly Christian and wear a cross at work,etc.

[x0137294744532]

> Hindus dont have religious literature (and Hindu countries dont have laws) against other religious.

But hindus have the same culture. Going by your logic, every hindu culturally associate with the other hindus.

> but yes, I guess you do culturally associate with all churches if you are openly Christian and wear a cross at work,etc.

Then let me give you a more extreme implication of this logic:

By calling ourself openly human beings, we culturally associate with every other evil man since they are also human beings. Therefore, we are no better than the most evil man on earth.

[blabberer]

>But hindus have the same culture. Going by your logic, every hindu culturally associate with the other hindus.

There is no text which codifies it, unlike Islam. So Hindu culture is much more fluid than Muslim which is written on paper

>By calling ourself openly human beings, we culturally associate with every other evil man since they are also human beings. Therefore, we are no better than the most evil man on earth.

Unlike religion, its not voluntary.

I would say a better analogy would be a white man associating himself with black gang culture by getting gold teeth, gold chains, tattoos,etc to a job. Which would probably get him rejected from the interview itself

[x0137294744532]

> There is no text which codifies it, unlike Islam.

Each sect has a different Quran, different Sharia, different precepts. There are massive differences in the way Islam is practiced across the world.

> Unlike religion, its not voluntary.

Imagine then someone who openly claims to be an artist and that creating art is a part of them. Would you say this person culturally associate with a murderer who kills "for art"? Both call themselves and associate with the artistic work.

> I would say a better analogy would be a white man associating himself with black gang culture by getting gold teeth, gold chains, tattoos,etc to a job.

I don't think that it is a good analogy, as that white man associate concretely to black gang culture.

A better analogy would be, a man who associate with black culture in general but gets rejected because his employer consider him to associate with black gang culture although he claims he doesn't.

[Yetanfou]

> Each sect has a different Quran, different Sharia, different precepts

Uhhhh no. The koran is the koran is the koran. Written in Arabic, not a single letter to be changed because it is 'perfect' according to itself [1]:

   And the word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice.
   None can alter His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.

The Hadith are another story, not so much their contents but which ones are followed.

[1] http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=115

[tptacek]

The interpretation of the Koran differs significantly between Shia and Sunni Islam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tafsir