"Wife Beating" in the Quran - "the 4:34 dance"

The Quran, chapter 4 (An-Nisa), verse 34


But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them.

Comment: Ask a Muslim to defend this! Wiki article is interesting.

Muslim feminist writer Asra Q. Nomani has argued: Indeed, Muslim scholars and leaders have long been doing what I call "the 4:34 dance" -- they reject outright violence against women but accept a level of aggression that fits contemporary definitions of domestic violence
In contrast:


Screen sharing with Mac

How to use screen sharing in Messages for Mac

Comment: So simple / we use screen sharing for our daily Bible time and weekly financial review


The Qur'an and the Scales

Three passages:

And We place the scales of justice for the Day of Resurrection, so no soul will be treated unjustly at all. And if there is [even] the weight of a mustard seed, We will bring it forth. And sufficient are We as accountant.
[For such is the state of the disbelievers], until, when death comes to one of them, he says, "My Lord, send me back. That I might do righteousness in that which I left behind." No! It is only a word he is saying; and behind them is a barrier until the Day they are resurrected. So when the Horn is blown, no relationship will there be among them that Day, nor will they ask about one another. And those whose scales are heavy [with good deeds] - it is they who are the successful. But those whose scales are light - those are the ones who have lost their souls, [being] in Hell, abiding eternally. The Fire will sear their faces, and they therein will have taut smiles.
And those who argue concerning Allah after He has been responded to - their argument is invalid with their Lord, and upon them is [His] wrath, and for them is a severe punishment. It is Allah who has sent down the Book in truth and [also] the balance. And what will make you perceive? Perhaps the Hour is near. Those who do not believe in it are impatient for it, but those who believe are fearful of it and know that it is the truth. Unquestionably, those who dispute concerning the Hour are in extreme error.
Comments: This is "works" salvation and the antithesis of the "grace" salvation of Biblical Christianity: Ephesians 2:8-9:
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast

Carplay, IPhone, ITunes & iExplorer

As many know we bought a new car:

The feature I am most impressed with is CarPlay.  Plug you IPhone into the USB connection and voilĂ  one's phone is connected to the car entertainment system!

On my previous MacBook I had ripped many CD's into ITunes. Then I packed as many as I could into my 16 gig IPhone 5s.

When my Macbook died recently I lost that library (on the MacBook). What to do? 

Today I used IExplorer 4  to download all of that library from the IPhone 5s back into ITunes.

The next project is:
  • Backup the MacBook ITunes library onto a USB 3.0 Flash drive (128 Gig)
  • And begin to use an Apple Superdrive to contine to rip CDs into ITunes
  • Next: I need about a 128 gig Iphone. Fun Fun

Shariah Law is the Real Islam Problem

Do you think Islam needs reform?


Islam does need reform. This is critical to our national security for two reasons that bear directly on the question of which aliens should, and which should not, be allowed into our country.

First, reform is essential because the broader Islamic religion includes a significant subset of Muslims who adhere to an anti-American totalitarian political ideology that demands implementation of sharia — Islamic law.

This ideology and the repressive legal code on which it rests are not religion. We are not talking about the undeniably theological tenets of Islam (e.g., the oneness of Allah, the acceptance of Mohammed as the final prophet, and the Koran as Allah’s revelation). We are talking about a framework for the political organization of the state, and about the implementation of a legal corpus that is blatantly discriminatory, hostile to liberty, and — in its prescriptions of crime and punishment — cruel.

Islam must reform so that this totalitarian political ideology, sharia supremacism (or, if you prefer, “radical Islam”), is expressly severable from Islam’s truly religious tenets. To fashion an immigration policy that serves our vital national-security interests without violating our commitment to religious liberty, we must be able to exclude sharia supremacists while admitting Muslims who reject sharia supremacism and would be loyal to the Constitution.

Second, sharia supremacists are acting on a “voluntary apartheid” strategy of gradual conquest. You needn’t take my word for it. Influential sharia supremacists encourage Muslims of the Middle East and North Africa to integrate into Western societies without assimilating Western culture. The renowned Muslim Brotherhood jurist Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who vows that “Islam will conquer Europe, conquer America,” urges Muslim migrants to demand the right to live in accordance with sharia. Turkey’s sharia-supremacist president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, admonishes that pressuring Muslims to assimilate is “a crime against humanity.” The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, a bloc of 57 Muslim governments that purports to speak as a quasi-caliphate, promulgated its “Declaration of Human Rights in Islam” in 1990 — precisely because what the United Nations in 1948 presumptuously called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is neither “universal” nor suitable to a sharia culture.

Voluntary apartheid does not require insinuating terrorists into migrant populations. It requires insinuating assimilation-resistant migrant populations into Western countries. Those populations form sharia-supremacist enclaves, which (a) demand the autonomy to conduct their affairs under Islamic law as a challenge to the sovereign authority of the host country and (b) become safe havens for incitement, radicalization, paramilitary training, fundraising, and jihadist conspiracy — the prerequisites for terrorism.
Comment: Frankly the integration of Shariah Law with Islam is so tight, I'm not sure Islam can reform.


The three D’s of tolerance

The three D’s of tolerance 


Tolerance Requires a Disagreement

Tolerance is unnecessary when you and I agree on something. What’s there to tolerate when we both agree? Tolerance is required when two people don’t agree on something important. Tolerance is not a celebration of harmonious agreement, but a strategy for peaceful coexistence in the midst of disagreement. Tolerance is the attitude we adopt when we refuse to embrace a notion as true, not the act of embracing that notion as though it were true.

Tolerance Requires a Distinction

Tolerance is required when the two positions we hold are distinctly opposed. Competing worldviews that contradict one another, for example, require us to adopt an attitude of tolerance. That’s why it’s so important to examine what others believe, as well as what we believe (and why we believe it). The more self examined you are in your approach to truth, the more necessary it is to learn to tolerate others. The more you examine truth, the more likely you are to find that others will disagree with you.

Tolerance Requires a Demeanor

Finally, tolerance requires a response in the midst of the distinction and disagreement. The proper reaction is not acquiescence to the proposal or worldview being offered, but is instead a loving demeanor toward those with whom we disagree. It’s OK to hate a bad idea, as long as we remember that we are called to love those who hold bad ideas. I can reject a worldview yet still be “fair, objective, and permissive” toward those who hold this worldview. How I react toward people is what defines me as tolerant, not how I react toward ideas.
Comment: Author is J. Warner Wallace, Image source

The new "tolerance"


14 years of savings

Comment: Although interest rates are historically low, CapitalOne360 is one of the best places to save!

Henry Cuellar a "Blue Dog" Pro-Life Congressman

A Q&A With The House Democrat Who’s Voted With Trump 75 Percent Of The Time - He says that more Democrats should embrace his Blue Dog ways to win back the House.


My district is about +7 Democratic, but it’s still a diverse district in many ways. I do better than most Democrats here even though I’m a moderate conservative Blue Dog and I still do very well here. My hometown of Laredo, the border area, I’ll get 90, 95, 98 percent of the vote, so I must be doing something right here. I think people know that I will vote my district, and they know I’m bipartisan and they know that I’m not here to represent the Democratic Party. I think the best way to describe my position is what President Lyndon Johnson said many years ago where he said, “I’m an American, I’m a U.S. Senator, and I’m a Democrat, all in that order.”1 And I agree with him in the sense that we’ve got to come up here and vote the district.

The way we won the majority in 2006 was because of the Blue Dogs. The way we win the majority again is through the Blue Dogs again. I told the DCCC, I told the House leadership, and they gave me a nervous laugh. How did we lose veterans? How did we lose a lot of the labor folks to Trump? When people think that you’ve got to be a “pure Democrat” in our image, they’re wrong. When we lost Blue Dogs because a lot of us voted for health care and a whole bunch of other things, we lost the Democratic leadership.
Comment: On Pro-Life. Home page for the Blue Dogs . Facing extinction as the party moves left.


The Assault on Free Speech

Jake Shields Reportedly Saves Man From Masked Attackers During UC-Berkeley Riot


Former Strikeforce champion Jake Shields reportedly came to the aid of an unidentified man who Shields said was jumped by masked attackers during the riotous scene on Wednesday night at UC-Berkeley, a public university in Berkeley, Calif. The riots erupted in response to the scheduled appearance of a controversial speaker, Milo Yiannopoulos, whose appearance at the university was later canceled due to the chaos. “Amid an apparently organized violent attack and destruction of property at UC Berkeley’s Martin Luther King Jr. Student Union, the UC Police Department (UCPD) determined it was necessary to evacuate controversial speaker Milo Yiannopoulos from campus and to cancel his scheduled 8 p.m. event,” according to UC-Berkeley officials.

Comment: The Intolerance of Tolerance (good book)