Sweden: 58 per cent of convicted rapists are foreign-born

What is the acceptable percentage of domestic versus foreign born rape?

 

According to your source...

When Sweden took in its highest number of asylum seekers in 2015, the number of reported rapes declined by 12%. At the height of the migration crisis, some 160,000 migrants arrived there - more per capita than any other EU country.

 

See, the left thinks that the REASON that so many many immigrants get convicted of rape in Sweden is that the poor dears simply lack proper legal help - the leftists always want to make Muslims victims. But we know otherwise - the real reason is because the Islamic texts teach that raping non-Muslims is ok in Islam: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Rape
and
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Rape_in_Islam

 

Can we at least both agree that it would have been best if Mohammad did not approve of raping female captives - thereby setting a terrible example for the world, notme?
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Rape
and
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Rape_in_Islam

 

NOT 58%, THAT'S FOR SURE!!!!!!!!

 

Can we at least agree that the 58% is the real problem, not the definition of rape, per se?

 

A stat on the ratio of foreign born to non foreign born would be good for comparative purposes.

 

Wikiislam is a hate site, buddy.
Rape is illegal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Islamic_law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zina

When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered (raped) her. She shouted and he went off, and when a man came by, she said: That (man) did such and such to me. And when a company of the emigrants came by, she said: That man did such and such to me. They went and seized the man whom they thought had had intercourse with her and brought him to her. She said: Yes, this is he. Then they brought him to the Messenger of Allah. When he (the Prophet) was about to pass sentence, the man who (actually) had assaulted her stood up and said: Messenger of Allah, I am the man who did it to her. He (the Prophet) said to her: Go away, for Allah has forgiven you. But he told the man some good words (AbuDawud said: meaning the man who was seized), and of the man who had had intercourse with her, he said: Stone him to death. He also said: He has repented to such an extent that if the people of Medina had repented similarly, it would have been accepted from them.

 

No, they just take a cynical view of Islam - nothing wrong with that - if you Muslims have an all-powerful "god" on your site then you have nothing to worry about from Wikiislam.
THEY QUOTE THE ISLAMIC TEXTS AT THAT SITE, THEY ARE NOT JUST PARROTING WHAT, SAY, PAMELA GELLER SAYS!
Can you condemn the Islamic texts for approval of sex-slaves, notme? I can, because I care about women. You?

 

That's what a Muslim would say when the QUOTES FROM THE ISLAMIC texts at that site are very problematic.
Can you condemn Mohammad for approving of rape?

 

Well I sourced it's wrong, now did I?

I sourced he stoned a dude to death over rape.
You call that approving? lol
Guess that's what you get when you put your trust in hate sites.

 

Rape of CAPTIVE INFIDELS - can you condemn Mohammad/Allah for approval of rape of captive infidels?

 

If you went back in a time machine and saw Mohammad approving of rape of captive Infidels, would you condemn Mohammad for that? I would. How about you, notme?

 

F*ck State run telly (SVT) and all of the mainstream news outlets. For years and years, they denied and waved off and even silenced all voices suggesting certain groups commit more rapes than others. For years, this "opinion" what labelled as "Nazism" and it is really pathetic and actually also disgusting to now see them doing a complete 180, taking off the gag from their mouths to start reporting on what alternative sources have been saying for ages.

 

He had a person stoned for over it.

 

I just sourced that it's illegal. Get over it already.

 

I didn't ask that - I asked that if you went back and saw him approving of rape with captive infidels would you condemn him for that. What say you?
My thinking is that you could NOT condemn him if, repeat if, he did that. I'm not after what may or may not have actually happened here, I'm after YOUR MORALITY, notme. My gut feeling is that you can't pass this ethical test - but I don't blame you, I blame Allah for teaching immoral values.

 

That's a "no, I couldn't condemn him for ANYTHING, regardless of how unethical it might be, because religion teaches us to FOLLOW, and not think for ourselves".

 

ISIS approves of rape of infidel captives - so do you have a different Qur'an than ISIS does? Or are they just more ISLAMICALLY-CORRECT than you are - and YOU are the outlier, the less pious Muslim, ISIS being the more true Muslim that follows Mohammad' example more accurately??

 

If, repeat if, hypothetically, you went back in a time machine and saw Mohammad having sex (raping) a captive Infidel, would you then leave Islam? I would if I was a Muslim (in this hypothetical)....how about you, notme? Obviously, in this hypothetical, no one should have a prophet who is a rapist, obviously.

 

I think stoning to death a rapist is a bit over the top. But lots of people demand the death penalty for rape in the west.
Kind of it.

 

Can you condemn Mohammad for approving of stoning an adulterer to death? I can, because Modern Secular Humanists have the most loving belief system. How about you?

 

What would Mohammad, theoretically, have had to have done for you to, hypothetically, condemn him? This is a good moral exercise for a Muslim (or any religious person, regarding their prophet, actually.)

 

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2018/05/indian-baby-rapist-sentenced-to-death.html
^^
Seems morally okay to me.
And you've pushed the goalpost so far now. It's totally not on topic.

 

Multiculturalism works out well for barbarians. Not so much for everyone else.