Pauline Hanson #fundie

Pauline Hanson #fundie sbs.com.au

'Put a ban on it': Pauline Hanson calls for Muslim faith to be banned

One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has taken to social media to once again call for the Muslim faith to be banned in Australia.

Those on social media trying to show solidarity with the victims of the London terror attack should instead be ending their posts with #Pray4MuslimBan, according to One Nation leader Pauline Hanson.

Senator Hanson is unhappy with recent comments by London Mayor Sadiq Khan, and wants Australia to “solve the problem” of terrorism by banning the Muslim faith.

"It's amazing that the Muslim Mayor over there has come out and said, 'Oh well terrorist attacks are part and parcel of a big city',” she said.

“People are feeling sorry for these people over there and I've seen the hash tags ‘pray for London’.

“Look I have my own hash tag and you won’t need to be praying for this place, or that place.

"Put a ban on it and then let’s deal with the issues here."

27 comments

old comment by SpukiKitty

Sometimes I wonder if the leaders of hate groups KNOW that hating on Muslims is counter-productive to stopping Wahhabi terrorism.

....Y'know little "Golden Apples" to keep the chaos going and thus, gain more power via fear and hate.

I hope there's a huge counter-movement against all this stupidity. There needs to be a horde of Europeans (and Americans in the USA) who'll provide counter-arguments and go "YO! YOU'RE GIVING IN TO THE TERRORISTS! YOU'RE DOING THE SAME CRAP THAT PUT HITLER IN POWER! QUIT LETTING A BAD APPLE SPOIL THE WHOLE GOOD BUNCH!".

I really hope that this Far-Right crap is just a very loud minority. I'd hate to think that Western Europe is this profoundly stupid to fall for the same crap that put Nazis in power! Europeans are supposed to be more Progressive and smarter with a better Education system and stuff!

Embrace the Muslims! That's how you stop Wahabbi terrorism. These terrorists are native citizens sucked into a horrid ideology by evil bigshots on the web or in the Mid-East. Treat them with respect and they won't feel the malaise that gets them sucked into stupid!

Also; There needs to big resource from a sane perspective about Islam to educate non-Muslims. One that will explain EVERYTHING and also address concerns like the whole matter of "Verse Abrogation" and "Aisha The Nine Year Old Bride".

Muslims defending their faith with the Quran's verses of peace and tolerance are often countered by others bringing up the "abrogation" stuff (later, more brutal verses superseding earlier, peaceful verses). I want that explained. Perhaps it's not a universal doctrine or there's a way to explain context and languages.

I know that Aisha was actually older and that it was only one Hadith of questionable repute that told that story of "Child-Bride Aisha". If anything; Mo was into the MILFs. All his wives apart from Aisha were older than him. Aisha was likely a teen (considered normal and adult, back then) or perhaps a 19 year old woman (Mistranslation? Someone forgot the "One"?) when wed....or the marriage wasn't consummated until she was old enough (even if she was a 9 year old when wed).

And Hadith's aren't all created equal and are contradictory....You'll have Hadith's where Mohammed is a cool guy who fights ethically, respects women, is relatively progressive and loves kitty cats....then others where he's basically Proto-DAESH. Perhaps the Shi'ites had the right idea (ignore the Hadiths, just follow the Quran).

old comment by Titania

It would be illegal anyway. Section 116 of our Australian Constitution is very similar to the US First Amendment, giving religious freedom:
The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/s116.html

Pauline is just a racist bitch, who discriminated against Asians and Aborigines, before her current campaign targeting (even moderate) Muslims. She would look considerably less hideous in a burqa.

@Uilleam
A very good point there.

old comment by A'isha

@SpukiKitty

Abrogation is a lot more complex than "later, more brutal verses superseding earlier, peaceful verses". It's pretty complex to go into herr, given the limitations of FSTDT's comment boxes, but in brief: abrogation, or naskh, is the defined set of rules by which scholars attempt to reconcile apparent contradictions in the Qur'an (and sometimes between the Qur'an and ahadith). It rarely involves one ruling erasing and replacing another completely - most often the previous ruling is still considered valid, with the new ruling providing explanations, exceptions, limitations, or even expansions to how that old ruling applies.

Because what counts as a "contradiction" is pretty subjective (as is the nature of the explanations, exceptions, limitations, and expansions provided by later rulings), the scholarly literature as to what parts of the Qur'an have been abrogated and what parts abrogate them can rarely, if ever, come to a consensus, particularly regarding the violent verses vs. the peaceful ones, on which there is WIDE disagreement (just about the only verses that are agreed on are the ones regarding the consumption of alcohol).