The Insidious Advancement of Islam in Australia

[epronovost]

My point was that this proscription may be based in the older and deeper cultural base that gave rise to Islam as well. We cannot say it's the religion which made the taboo, or if the taboo existed prior and the religion then subsumed it.

That's entirely accurate. There are no written sources to confirm if the proscription of marriage between children fed by milk mothers and their actual children was taboo prior to Islam or if it's something entirely new. It doesn't really matter either way though as even the Hadith who mention that rules are not universally accepted either with some preferring even harsher restriction and others simply having no specific rules on the subject.

[SYZ]

Surah 3:151: "We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who have
denied the Truth...".

Surah 2:191: "And kill them wherever you find them kill them. Such
is the recompense of the disbelievers."

Surah 9:5: "Then kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, capture
them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush".

Why would I have to address this?

Well, simply because you've attacked me for my opinions on
Islam—which you've strongly disagreed with—and conversely
vigorously defended the core of the religion, and its archaic
precepts as—on the whole—being rational and acceptable in the
21st century.

So... why won't you address these prominent tenets of Islam?

And how can anyone defend Sharia "law"?  Punishments for
breaches range from public lashing, stoning to death, beheading
and amputation of hands, hanging, and Qisas eye for an eye.

[epronovost]

Well, simply because you've attacked me for my opinions on
Islam

No, I called you a bigot for your opinion on Milk Mothers which is not an Islamic practice since it pre-dates Islam by literal thousands of years. Your reaction to such a practice, describing it as threat to Australian secular society and "Islamic infiltration" is completely overblown, marked with a profound antipathy toward Muslim people, especially women, insinuating that since they are Muslim they are all for stoning people, slavery and other similarly monstrous practices which is not accurate.

It's not because you think something is Islamic that it's actually the case. In the same vein, it's not because someone call you a bigot for your pig-headed, prejudice based attack on an otherwise inoffensive practice that those people would defend uncritically all the behaviors and beliefs of the people who want to practice the otherwise inoffensive practice. I can perfectly defend a murderer accused of being a monster because of the shape of his skull and dismiss anybody who makes such an argument as racialist bigot high on pseudo-science, but that doesn't mean I am in favor of murder.   

and conversely
vigorously defended the core of the religion, and its archaic
precepts as—on the whole—being rational and acceptable in the
21st century.

Can you quote me doing such thing? I specifically mention in post number 13 that Islam has many disgusting tenets and is, as a whole a great source of oppression and suffering in the modern world which would be a direct contradiction. I am and was explicitly opposed to Islam as a whole and more particularly as a modern political force.

And how can anyone defend Sharia "law"?  Punishments for
breaches range from public lashing, stoning to death, beheading
and amputation of hands, hanging, and Qisas eye for an eye.

I don't defend such laws or system of laws either. I never had. You are throwing baseless accusations about a subject that has nothing to do with Milk Mothers or you average Aussie Muslim.

[Thumpalumpacus]

No one's telling you whose tit to suck. What's the big deal?

[epronovost]

No one's telling you whose tit to suck. What's the big deal?

You know maybe that's the problem... what if he really wants to suck on those tits specifically because it's the law.

/joke