As for your “good debating ……” statement, just how ridiculous do you want to make yourself look? You’ve demonstrated an inability to construct a logical argument, you have avoided a perfectly simple question repeatedly (over a period of about a week) and you have shown yourself to be prejudiced and bigoted. You’re hardly in a position to give advice on what constitutes good debating, now are you?

Anyway, is “bowing out” another example of you using words you obviously don’t understand? Rather like “mainstream”? Bowing out would suggest to me, in the context of an internet message board comments thread, that you aren’t going to post any more comments. You have obviously made up your own definition of this phrase as you’ve posted twice since your “bowing out” announcement.

So, now I’ve explained the meaning of “bow out”/”bowing out” (hopefully you’ll understand the explanation though, on recent form, I doubt it) either do so or answer the question and respond to the points you’ve been avoiding, rather than popping up to make inane, unsupported comments in the hope that they’ll be the last word.

> You still haven’t given your definition of mainstream.

I already explained said I was bowing out of that debate.

> You still haven’t responded to my description of the reasons behind your use of that word and your failure to define it.

Good debating focuses on issues and what people actually say; not try to guess the hidden motivation of others.

> You haven’t made any comment on the list of mainstream christian beliefs in post 82.

Yes, I ignored that whatAboutery. The thread was about Islam not christianity.

You still haven’t given your definition of mainstream.

You still haven’t responded to my description of the reasons behind your use of that word and your failure to define it.

You haven’t made any comment on the list of mainstream christian beliefs in post 82.

You haven’t done any of these things because you aren’t capable of doing so.

Just one of many you could find, but this is the BBC from 2006:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4850080.stm

I’m bowing out of this one – because we’re getting nowhere.

No doubt you’ll blame me, because you’re still unhappy with my use of the word mainstream.

But as to the facts of Apostasy in Islam I’ve raised, you’ve not denied them.

If you are genuinely interested in what the real situation is worldwide regards apostasy in Islam – one site you might like to read up is

http://formermuslimsunited.americancommunityexchange.org

And, if ever your Imam friends do put up a web page arguiing that death for apostates is wrong – do come on LC and let us know,

Is it actually possible that you don’t realise that you’ve just definitively proved that you’re using the word in the way I described above, ie:

a. To impute a particular viewpoint to all/most muslim people

and

b. To be able to avoid facing uncomfortable facts about christian doctrine and belief?

You’ve just written a statement about the legal systems of some muslim countries and the lack (apparently) of any condemnation of them by other muslim countries and you’re actually saying that this is your general definition of the word mainstream. Are you serious? Do you really not realise that what you’ve just written makes absolutely no sense at all? Read it again and think about whether what you’re looking at could possibly be construed as a general definition of the word mainstream. Does mainstream only apply to muslims and muslim countries? By your definition it does.

Here are a few mainstream (by whatever definition I choose, since we’re playing that game) christian beliefs:

a. The bible is the word of god

b. The earth is less than 10,000 years old

c. Evolution didn’t happen

d. Women are inferior to men and were created by god to serve men

e. DEATH IS THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE PUNISHMENT FOR APOSTASY

f. Sexual relationships between people of the same gender are wrong.

g. A big man in the sky created everything in a week (including time off).

Since statement a. is a mainstream (choose whatever definition you like) christian belief and since statement e is contained in the bible, e must also be a mainstream belief. Hence its inclusion in the list. Would you care to challenge that?

If they feel as you describe “No punishment is necessary” for apostates – then presumably they would feel it important to help overcome the misunderstanding about the issue.

What word do you think better fits?

This is a pretty clear confirmation of what I wrote in various posts above about your tactics.

It’s also pretty clear confirmation that you’re going to do anything you can to avoid giving a straight answer. I don’t see why. You’ve already been exposed as a religious bigot and someone who can’t construct a logical argument. Surely the embarassment you will experience when you give a straight answer to my simple question wont be any worse than the embarassment you should already be feeling?

If you think I’m wrong to use the word ‘mainstream’ – then what word would in your view be right to describe the situation.

This thread is about “islamaphobia” and whether or not patriotism can be an effective vehicle to oppose it. Now, “islamaphobia” can have various meanings but I understand it as:

fear and distrust of, and hostility towards, islam and muslims.

I think the majority of people who post on here (but, probably not you) would accept that this fear, distrust and hostility has risen over the last few years. To a large extent I think this is understandable in light of the terrorist attacks on New York, London etc but it’s unfortunate that a number of groups and individuals are being opportunistic in their use of the climate of “islamaphobia” to advance their own causes. It is pretty clear from the content of your posts that you are such an individual. You seek to promote an idea of islam as a religion which advocates violence and the suppression of human rights and, in doing so, to imply that most muslims support such actions. Your motivation appears to be your religious belief.

Now, I have no sympathy with islam and I don’t have any objection to someone who points out the fact that it is frequently used to justify violence and oppression. I do object when someone, in this case you, does so in such a way as to clearly imply that most muslims are supporters of a return to a medieval system of criminal justice, the systematic oppression of women and similar ideas. I don’t think this is true of most muslims in the UK and people who, like you, promote the idea that it is are, essentially, promoting prejuduce and bigotry. I object even more when the person promoting such ideas, in this case you, is doing so in order to support their own belief in a religious doctrine which contains the same inconsistency, bogotry and prejudice as the one they are criticsing. My final objection is to your method of “argument.” I don’t have any real issue with people who have no clear idea of formal logic, not everyone has the same education or interests but I do object to people who think that they do when, in fact, they really haven’t a clue. Once again, you.

Anyway, still no clear statement of what you mean by “mainstream” other than your abortive attempt at an explanation (if it could be called that) in post 74. Or were you hoping that we could skip over the fact that I pointed out in post 75 that what you wrote, once again, doesn’t answer the question in a meaningful way and is just a mask for your prejudice and bigotry?

Then that makes it hard to argue that its “only a tiny number of extremists that support the death penalty”.

.

“Why don’t you give a clear statement of what you mean by mainstream?”

However, since you ask, your definition that something is “mainstream” to a particular belief system if several countries that espouse that belief system have it enshrined in law doesn’t really seem very sensible, does it? By that definition, there is virtually no “mainstream” christian doctrine since I don’t think you’ll be able to provide many examples of specific pieces of legislation relating to christian doctrine which exist in a number avowedly christian states. So maybe you should try again. Or maybe you should admit that it means anything you want it to mean provided that it supports your own religious bigotry. Your posts seem to indicate that this is the definition you’re using.

Look back to what I wrote in 66:

“We have evidence that in several Islamic countries, death penalty for apostates is enshrined in their legal system.”

If it’s enshrined in the legal system of several countries – is that a definition of mainstream you’d be happy with?

As stated above (several times) this tactic allows you to direct hostility towards muslims in general by implying, through your use of the undefined term “mainstream,” that the views you impute as “mainstream” are actually held by most muslims. At the same time, your failure to provide a definition also allows you to sidestep any criticism of christianity which employs the same form of argument you have deployed against islam by claiming that something isn’t “mainstream.”

In view of this, it’s a bit rich to state “I guess you are aware that launching an ad hominen attack, is normally a sign that someone has no logic to support their views ” since you have studiously avoided any foray into logic in pretty much everything you’ve written.

So, any chance of backing up your religious bigotry with a clear statement of what you mean by mainstream? I doubt it.

Two types of change are possible. Simple phase shift, or nuclear shattering. Read this article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/8560398.stm

This seems at first to be a simple rent in the time/space continuum, but when you consider the fuller effects of the sudden death on many creatures that fly, you may realise this is about as big shift we have seen in 4 millennia.

I guess you are aware that launching an ad hominen attack, is normally a sign that someone has no logic to support their views ….but wants to bully those who disagree with them….

> if you think Muslims should be locked up…be chucked out of the country

I don’t.
But this thread is not about me – it’s about what islam says about apostasy.

> Stop all this bullshit about what this mosque man said, or what that mosque website hasn’t said.

How do you suggest one understands islam without listening to what it says?

‘absence of evidence’

Not sure how this fits here.

We have evidence that in several Islamic countries, death penalty for apostates is enshrined in their legal system.
Evidence of Islamic websites supporting the death penalty.

Where there is absence of evidence, is the lack of Islamic voices campaigning to say that is wrong: absence of Islamic voices trying to help these countries out of supposed misunderstanding.

So overall the conclusion seems pretty clear – mainstream islam appears to support death for apostates?

Or is there another way to pull that data together?

Stop all this bullshit about what this mosque man said, or what that mosque website hasn’t said.

You want a race war. This is all just chaff you’re throwing about in the wind. You hate Muslims, you hate it when you see them on the street, or on the bus. You want them to leave, you want them to suffer – like Martin Amis and Douglas Murray also want – stop wasting time by trying to pretend Muslims aren’t already under threat.

Are you Lord Pearson by any chance?