Message from @Neuron Cortex
Discord ID: 651667730189254656
In Islamic Fiqh] there are absolutely no opinions, no variants, no exceptions...Muhammad ibn Sahnun said that even if a man claims that it is part of his religion to insult the Messenger, and so in his religion it is lawful, that makes no difference to us. If he openly insults our Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, then our religion makes it lawful to kill him. This surely is the inescapable centre of the current affair. The arrogant kuffar have to learn that the world contains a two-billion community who have a different set of Laws from theirs, and who can never be detached from that Law
The Fiqh Concerning Those Who Insult The Messenger of Allah
Shaykh Dr. Abdalqadir as-Sufi, February 6, 2006
@ᏉᎬᏁus ( ᵘ ᵕ ᵘ ⁎) whats with the whole thing with hermaphrodytes being trans people and islamic law is okay with them
@Castore allah obviously doesnt know that he created hermaphrodytes
he isnt even aware of that mexican lizard who is only female
Whoever Curses the Prophet Peace and Blessings be Upon him, Muslim or Kafir, Must be Killed.
The Drawn Sword Against the One Who Curses the Messenger - Pages 31-33 Ibn Taymiyyah
@Neuron Cortex
@Castore only shias are ok with trans specifically khomeini and Khamenei
Jabir bin Abdullah narrated:"I married a woman and went to the Prophet, he said: 'O Jabir! Have you married?' I said: 'Yes.' He said: 'A virgin or a matron?' I said: 'A matron.' He said: 'Why didn't you marry a young girl, so that you may play with her and she with you?' I said: 'O Messenger of Allah! Abdullah (his father) died and left behind seven - or nine - daughter, so I have brought someone who can look after them.'" (He said:) "So he supplicated for me." Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1100 https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/11/21
“Hitler massacred three million Jews ... there’s three million drug addicts. There are. I’d be happy to slaughter them.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/30/rodrigo-duterte-vows-to-kill-3-million-drug-addicts-and-likens-himself-to-hitler
Lol
The authors' central argument against the concept of natural selection is what they call "the problem of selection-for".[7] An extension of Gould and Lewontin's concept of spandrels, the authors note that certain traits of organisms always come together. The authors give examples:
A heart both pumps blood and makes heart-like noises [8]
A frog both snaps at flies and snaps at ambient black nuisances [9]
A polar bear is both white and camouflaged against its environment [10]
Because these traits come together, they are both correlated with fitness. Therefore, Fodor and Piattelli-Palmarini argue that the theory of natural selection "cannot predict/explain what traits the creatures in a population are selected-for",[11] and so "the claim that selection is the mechanism of evolution cannot be true".[12]
Another way the authors put the same point is as follows: If the mechanism of natural selection (as it is currently formulated) is correct, then it is a paradigm example of intensional causation. Intensional causation requires either (1) there be a mind involved in the causal process, or (2) the causal mechanism has access to nomological laws. Since there is neither (1) nor (2) at the biological level, the theory of natural selection cannot be correct.
