Arab culture before monotheism

The problem is that the same logic is being used to oppress people who don't want Mohammed message everywhere else. "Kaffir" caught on to describe everyone else.

Since kaffir is anyone who is not a follower of Islam, it would "catch on" wherever Islam "spread". After all, the first kaffirs tortured Muslims for 13 years before the hijra. That kind of thing is still catching.:rolleyes:


?? What, islamic governance caught barbarism? Like a disease? Please. This is akin to DH, who would seemingly sweep every inhumanity of islamic law under the rug by blaming it on the Westerners, as if we wrote the codices of the legal schools of islam.

Geoff

As Gandhi said, when asked what he thought about about western civilisation: it would be a very good idea.:)
 
Since kaffir is anyone who is not a follower of Islam, it would "catch on" wherever Islam "spread". After all, the first kaffirs tortured Muslims for 13 years before the hijra. That kind of thing is still catching.

Excepting that it's primarily the other way around. Quite a societal grudge.

As Gandhi said, when asked what he thought about about western civilisation: it would be a very good idea.:)

And a more principled one than sharia, to be sure. :D
 
Excepting that it's primarily the other way around. Quite a societal grudge.

You can make a list of victims if you like. You'll be quite surprised which side piles on the casualties.

And a more principled one than sharia, to be sure. :D

Still waiting to even get beyond defining what is sovereignty for non-white people.
 
I'm still curious as to how this sounds when it's written like so:

We may sum up the social situation in Islamic countries by saying that the Muslims are groping about in the dark and ignorance, entangled in a mesh of superstitions paralyzing their mind and driving them to lead an animal- like life. The women are a marketable commodity and regarded as a piece of inanimate property. Therefor the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are justified. The elimination of Islam or it's fundamental change by war is warranted. etc.. etc.. etc...

Imagine this if you will (again altering a few word but retaining the meaning):

Shamanism made the Mongolians into the strongest, proudest, and most noble people the world had ever seen. From ignorant nomads into an educated and devoted community. Without Shamanism, the Mongolians have nothing. Just as without Mogolian rule, the Persians, Turks, South Asians, an Arabs would have nothing.....


Or how about this:

Christianity made the European into the strongest, proudest, and most noble people the world had ever seen. From ignorant serfs into an educated and devoted community. Without Christianity, the Europeans have nothing. Just as without Chrsitianity, the Canadians, Greeks, Russians, English, French, Germans, Italians, Koreans, Dutch, Australians, Americans, Mexicans, Brazilians, Chileans, Portuguese, Austrians, Norwegians, Danish, Argentineans, Columbian, Peruvians, Venezuelans, etc... have nothing. Christianity is the binding factor of a global brotherhood which unites 100 billion trillion zillion billion people of different ethnicities, while preserving the cultural identities of each.

Starting to sound a little silly yet?


Lets' think about this. SAM justified the murder Arabs and destruction of Arabs temples and heritage because Mohammad was Arab (although it should be noted there were Jews and Christians living there that were murdered as well). OK, well, the Spanish used a similar justification to conqueror the Americans. Only "Humanity" was the common bond. And Christianity was the culture to replace the "Pagan" Aztecs and their "barbaric" ways. (it should be noted the Aztecs thought they were the cultured and the Spanish were barbarians).

So? Was it therefor just of the Spanish to conquer and kill and convert unknown millions of central and south Americans - in the name of Christianity? If NO, then the same is true of Arabs. Agreed?


M
 
How strange, the fact that some people centuries away from Mohammed thought pre-Islamic Arabs were animal-like for burying their female children alive, is somehow a justification for killing people in Iraq.
 
Exactly the opposite.

And the connection is that this is what people do - it's called propaganda. Back then it was apologists demonizing Arabs by making them out to be animal-like inhuman savages now it's making Iraqis out to all be terrorists.

The sad thing is SAM, English and French colonialists made Indians out to be animal-like inhuman savages and made themselves out to be the enlightened benighted heroes.

I suppose it's true, that if you repeat something long enough and often enough, people will eventually believe it.
You have.
 
I think the Europeans in the dark Ages were unwashed barbarians, who lived on straw and squalor. Does this mean I can now attack some random European? Oh wait, I am not European. Okay, I think the people who forced women to take opium and put them on a funeral pyre were groping in animal like ignorance. Does this mean that I can now attack a Hindu? Or that their change to present day non-satiness detracts from their lovely cultural practice of drowning female children?

Have you seen Matrubhoomi? Its kind of a visual statement on female infanticide in the dark ages of Indian culture. I assure you, the director has not invaded any country after making it.
 
What did you think of this statement: We may sum up the social situation in Islamic countries by saying that the Muslims are groping about in the dark and ignorance, entangled in a mesh of superstitions paralyzing their mind and driving them to lead an animal- like life. The women are a marketable commodity and regarded as a piece of inanimate property. Therefor the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are justified. The elimination of Islam or it's fundamental change by war is warranted. etc.. etc.. etc...

BECAUSE this is the exact paragraph only it was written by a Muslim Islamic apologist about Arabs.


I'm sure we can find many such similar statements the Europeans had about animal- like Indians and how they needed to bring civility to that country in the name of Christiandom and Humanity.


Arabs were NOT animal-like inhuman creatures SAM and you, if anyone, should recognize this is propaganda made-up by Islamic apologists to demonize Arabs and justify their destruction. That you can not recognize this and continue on trying to justify murder and destruction shows how deeply brainwashed you are.


You know what you should like? You sound like a Slave owner trying to justify Slavery as "helping" the ignorant animal-like Negro. Your voice echoes those of the English colonists as they marched across India. Maybe one was your great great grandfather. Perhaps that explains it?

Michael
 
The majority of people can be taught to be better SAM. When the message makes sense, is coherent and clear, then it's as simple as this.
 
Yes, we are fully aware of the white man's burden. Strange that a white man, who spends much of his time commenting on the barbarism of Muslims and other non-toilet trained, non-hand shaking people, should be all hot and bothered by a Muslim scholar commenting on the dark ages of his own people.
 
I'm much more interested in the Muslims response to questioning their beleif system. It's like looking into a window on the past and how early, how did you put it (unwashed barbarian Europeans) may have responded to scientific enlightenment.

I find "of his own people" disturbingly racist-like. Where the Jewish also his own people? How about the Persians who lived there? What about the Christians? Where the Arabs that lived and prospered in the Roman empire also "his own people"? Where the polytheist Arabs who denounced him "his own people"?

It should be noted that even though Roman's painted the Europeans as "unwashed barbarians" these same people were more democratically minded, open to female equality, had more gold and better calendars. Who knows what accomplishments Arabs had made before they were destroyed and subsequently demonized by apologists?


You can always recognize when someone is lying by their deeds SAM. Demonzing, destroying and murdering even your next door neighbors should send off alarm bells SAM.

It was wrong when the English did it, when the Romans did it, when the Americans did it and when Mohammad did it.
 
Michael, i dont intend to read all this drival but can i just point out that what you sugested in the first post is ridiculas in the extreem. If they had buried all there female children the sociaty would be gone in one generation

Its very hard to procreate with out eggs or incubators:p
 
Exactly my point. It's classic propaganda.

It's so utterly typical as to border on the absurd - how anyone in their right mind could buy into this baloney is unimaginable. So, we must assume that they are not in their right mind.

M
 
Michael, i dont intend to read all this drival but can i just point out that what you sugested in the first post is ridiculas in the extreem. If they had buried all there female children the sociaty would be gone in one generation

Its very hard to procreate with out eggs or incubators:p

Not at all, you only bury the extra females you produce. Its very common even today, only its called gender selective abortion.

Sex-selective abortion is the targeted abortion of a fetus based upon its sex. This is done after a determination is made (usually by ultrasound but also rarely by amniocentesis or another procedure) that the fetus is of an undesired sex. Sex selective infanticide is the practice of selective infanticide against infants of an undesired sex. One common method is child abandonment. Placing a child of the undesired sex for adoption is called sex selective adoption.

These practices are especially common in some places where cultural norms value male children over female children.[1] Societies that practice sex selection in favor of males (sometimes called son preference or female deselection) are quite common, especially in The People's Republic of China, Korea, Taiwan, India, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, New Guinea, and many other developing countries in East Asia and North Africa [1][2]; sex selection in favor of females appears to be rare or non-existent, although some legends of Amazons say that they practiced male infanticide. In 2005, 90 million women were estimated to be missing in seven Asian countries alone due, apparently, to prenatal sex selective abortion.[3] [2] However, other reasons for the sex ratio imbalance in certain countries have been proposed (see below). The existence of the practice appears to be determined by culture, rather than by economic conditions, because such deviations in sex ratios do not exist in sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean.[2] Sex-selective abortion was rare before the late 20th century because of the difficulty of determining the sex of the fetus before birth, but ultrasound has made such selection easier. However, prior to this, parents would alter family sex compositions through infanticide. It is believed to be responsible for at least part of the skewed birth statistics[2] in favor of males in mainland China, India, Taiwan, and South Korea.
 
Sam your right it is sadly present there, that being said it is oviously also unsustainable. Take china's one child policy as an example, female children are being aborted so that the "male line" is passed and now whats happerning?
Did you see the artical a while ago about the inability of men in china to find mates because of the ratio?

before you call my comments sexist gender bias i will point out that personally i find it compleatly stupid, and i actually would prefer a daughter (PB not so much because she know as well as i do that leads to worse morning sickness:p) if we were to only have one child
 
Except there is no evidence Arabs routinely buried their children in the dirt.

From one breath I hear Arabs were allowed to take 4 wives because of the over abundance of female and in the next I hear they buried all their female children.

Yup, sounds about like theostition,

Michael

Note: I Googled theostition (theist's superstitious beliefs) and me thinks I coined a new word :)
 
michael as you should well know male children have a much higher risk of death even in westen sociaties at every age level. Its really no wonder there were more females than males, actually thats a theory i have had about the way sociaty was surposed to be built, ie along a poligimost lines because the higher number of females to males, along with the ability for males to impregante multiple females at the same time and the advantage this would give to the children suggest that was the way early humans developed
 
Sam your right it is sadly present there, that being said it is oviously also unsustainable. Take china's one child policy as an example, female children are being aborted so that the "male line" is passed and now whats happerning?
Did you see the artical a while ago about the inability of men in china to find mates because of the ratio?

before you call my comments sexist gender bias i will point out that personally i find it compleatly stupid, and i actually would prefer a daughter (PB not so much because she know as well as i do that leads to worse morning sickness:p) if we were to only have one child

I was just commenting on your thesis that all female children would be killed, rather, just the superfluous ones. I believe thats probably why polygamy is permitted in Islam. Under all ideal conditions, more girls are produced than boys, more girls survive to adulthood and wars and such have less of an effect on the demographics of women.

Female infanticide has always been very common in Eastern culture, but after Mohammed, it disappeared from Muslim cultures.
 
An 18th century British colonist couldn't have put it better.

keep drinking the koolaid, it's apparently working well for you.



There is no evidence outside of Islamic apologists that Arabs routinely murdered their female children. As many worked, lived and even ruled the Roman empire, one could surmise that the opposite may be true. What we have here is a case of trying to justify conquest. And that's what we have. In one breath its "Mohammad was Arab ergo it's OK" in another "Arabs were animals ergo it's OK". Lets face it, the TRUTH is this: I believe in this fairy tale sky daddy ergo I must and will justify their conquest, destruction, murder and vilification.

This is what I'm saying, Arab people have such a hard time moving past their superstition because they've been taught and except that they were animals before it. Think about it: Did Arabs invade and murder their neighbors before it? No. They were peaceful traders. Unless we want to suggest Ghangus Khans slaughter of Muslims was "heroic" and "good for those animals" then we can not accept that it was any other way - any other way.

Get it?

Probably not, take another gulp of the koolaid.
 
Last edited:
Eastern people still routinely murder their female children. As did the Romans. Read Boudicca's Heirs, by Dorothy Watts

The overwhelming, almost shattering, fact is that while in the preceding Iron Age numbers of men and women were pretty much matched, soon after the Romans arrived there is a suddenly shift in the nation's graveyards - the number of women drops significantly. The only explanation, Watts concludes, is that the Romans brought with them, with all their "civilising" influences, the previously unknown practice of female infanticide - and female infanticide to the level of the worst of India or China today, that saw up to seven per cent of the women "lost".

You might ask where the babies' bodies went, but the Roman practice was that infants and young children were not -- at least until the influence of Christianity -- buried in "adult" graveyards, but in domestic or city contexts where bones, if they survive at all, will only occasionally be found. Also, children being abandoned were usually just dumped, rather than killed, so their bodies would usually have fallen to scavengers.

It is worth noting too that when the Romans went, so did the practice of female infanticide.

Looks like you have your own blinkers on, with the koolaid pacifier firmly fixed.
 
Back
Top