Koranic principles of warfare only allow defensive wars which obviously would have prevented the two crazy World Wars that ended European hegemony. Why did Britain enter WW1? To protect Belgian neutrality. Britain's Liberal Prime Minister Asquith only entered it thinking it would be a short successful war after which the boys would be home for the Christmas of 1914 so he could win the subsequently cancelled election of 1915.
The priapic PM who wrote love letters to his mistress as he sent a generation off to die in the trenches
Poppy Mania Day prevents any rational and impartial analysis of the insanity of UK foreign policy for the past 100 years
Imagine! To lose your world empire over a stupid election because of a lecher of a Liberal Prime Minister, henpecked by his wife and writing love letters to this mistress after the war had started!
Oh yes, and multi-party democracy is obviously wrong because it warns us against dividing our national ideology into sects and rejoicing in our own doctrines such as Conservatism, Liberalism, Socialism etc which are now indistinguishable from each other in terms of policy except in hating Donald Trump.
The Koran also says slave girls are part of war booty but you must marry them if you want to have sex with them and must have no more than four wives. While they are allowed to be prostitutes to earn their manumission, you must not compel enough, which is fair enough.
This does suggest that the Confederate South should have won the American Civil War because slavery is tolerated by the Koran. If that were so, America would not have entered WW2 because it would just not have been united or powerful enough to take over from the empires of the Europeans after the they destroyed themselves in two World Wars ignoring the Koranic rules of warfare.
This of course also means that the Yanks would not have nuked the Japanese twice, which is also against the Koranic principles of warfare, by the way.
God rewards those who obey His laws, and punishes those that do not, as we are now seeing from the imminent collapse of the West.
Would a quick collapse be better than a slow collapse? There would be less suffering and bloodshed, I imagine.
Anyone legally trained would know the superiority of the Koran compared to the Bible. God if He exists is the best legal draughtsman of all. A good legal draughtsman states the terms of the contract clearly and has the foresight to anticipate the situations when questions could arise over the validity of the terms.
Why the Koran does not forbid bestiality
The Koran does not explicitly forbid men from having sex with animals because God in His wisdom assumed women wouldn't want to marry men known for having sex with animals.
The Koran forbids sexual relations between father and daughter but the Bible does not
One of the most notable features of all the lists is that sexual activity between a man and his own daughter is not explicitly forbidden. Although the first relation mentioned after the Levitical prohibition of sex with "near kin" names that of "thy father", it must be taken into account that the Hebrew original text only addresses male Jews with regard to their female relatives. The talmud argues that the absence is because the prohibition was obvious, especially given the proscription against a relationship with a granddaughter, although some biblical scholars have instead proposed that it was originally in the list, but was then accidentally left out from the copy on which modern versions of the text ultimately depend, due to a mistake by the scribe. The second list in the Holiness code noticeably differs from the first by not including the closer relatives, and it might be assumed that obviousness is the explanation here as well. One might argue that the explicit prohibition against engaging in sexual activity with a woman as well as with her daughter, implicitly forbids sexual activity between a man and his daughter. However, the rationale might suggest otherwise (the original text is unclear here), since it mentions only that "they" (i.e., the woman and the daughter) are related. John Calvin did not consider the father-daughter-relation to be explicitly forbidden by the bible, but regarded it as immoral nevertheless.
The Bible does guarantee religious tolerance and freedom of worship and belief
By how many years did the Koran precede the First Amendment?
The Koran is conceptually superior to the Bible
The Koran is conceptually superior to the Bible, because it is said to be the directly transcribed Word of God revealed over a period of 23 years by the same prophet while the Bible is only hearsay evidence from many sources over many many many centuries.
The Bible does not propose a flat rate income tax of 20%
The Bible does not propose a flat rate income tax of 20% nor does it give you the constitutional right not to be pay more than a flat rate income tax of 20%, does it?
While the Bible is silent on divorce, the Koran devotes an entire chapter to it.
Because Muslims treat marriage as a contract, the state supporting marriage in these terms allows it to implicitly abolish no fault divorce, because this means divorce will only be allowed if the terms and conditions of the marriage contract are breached by the party at fault.
Finally, sluts will be shamed by quran.com/24/2 - the only way to curtail the power of sluts in the matriarchy.
Only a one-party theocracy governed under the principles of Secular Koranism can effectively overthrow the matriarchy and stop it from re-establishing itself again.