Islamic Ideology Council goes full retard (nvm - Satire tag went unnoticed)

Kittamaru

Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums.
Valued Senior Member
http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/201...ology-declares-womens-existence-anti-islamic/

Islamabad - Sharia Correspondent: The Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) concluded their 192nd meeting on Thursday with the ruling that women are un-Islamic and that their mere existence contradicted Sharia and the will of Allah. As the meeting concluded CII Chairman Maulana Muhammad Khan Shirani noted that women by existing defied the laws of nature, and to protect Islam and the Sharia women should be forced to stop existing as soon as possible. The announcement comes a couple of days after CII’s 191st meeting where they dubbed laws related to minimum marriage age to be un-Islamic.

After declaring women to be un-Islamic, Shirani explained that there were actually two kinds of women – haraam and makrooh. “We can divide all women in the world into two distinct categories: those who are haraam and those who are makrooh. Now the difference between haraam and makrooh is that the former is categorically forbidden while the latter is really really disliked,” Shirani said.

He further went on to explain how the women around the world can ensure that they get promoted to being makrooh, from just being downright haraam. “Any woman that exercises her will is haraam, absolutely haraam, and is conspiring against Islam and the Ummah,whereas those women who are totally subservient can reach the status of being makrooh. Such is the generosity of our ideology and such is the endeavour of Muslim men like us who are the true torchbearers of gender equality,” the CII chairman added.

Officials told Khabaristan Today that the council members deliberated over various historic references related to women and concluded that each woman is a source of fitna and a perpetual enemy of Islam. They also decided that by restricting them to their subordinate, bordering on slave status, the momineen and the mujahideen can ensure that Islam continues to be the religion of peace, prosperity and gender equality.

Responding to a question one of the officials said that international standards of gender equality should not be used if they contradict Islam or the constitution of Pakistan that had incorporated Islam and had given sovereignty to Allah. “We don’t believe in western ideals, and nothing that contradicts Islam should ever be paid heed. In any case by giving women the higher status of being makrooh, it’s us Muslims who have paved the way for true, Sharia compliant feminism,” the official said.

The CII meeting also advised the government that to protect Islam women’s right to breathe should also be taken away from them. “Whether a woman is allowed to breathe or not be left up to her husband or male guardian, and no woman under any circumstance whatsoever should be allowed to decide whether she can breathe or not,” Shirani said.

What...? No, really... WHAT!?

*shakes head* I just... I don't even know...

10698643_10204549790005814_977310107040341026_n.jpg


Is this REALLY the ideology of Islam? Because if so, the only response I can think of is that the leadership involved in such a decision needs a big ol' helping of boot to the head...


EDIT - Thank you gmilam, for pointing out this was a satirical piece! I somehow completely missed that when I was first linked to the page XD
 
Last edited:
I opened this thread thinking you were bound to be just another intolerant islamophobe, but yeah...

"women by existing defied the laws of nature, and to protect Islam and the Sharia women should be forced to stop existing as soon as possible"

Whoa Nelly! What sort of laws of nature are these? Did this start off as a mental health conference that got hijacked by the specimens?

Do these guys have wives? Sisters? Mothers? Grandmas? Female Facebook friends?

m8jif5773w.jpg
 
Oh good lord... I missed that entirely! Thank you gmilam!
 
In terms of the expression of the title and the general sense of the article, I was subjected to censure for a much less serious infraction of site rules at the behest of one or two of the mod staff.

I would suggest that the tone of the above is almost certainly unacceptable also, and that it should be edited unless the intent was as written.
 
I dare say it doesn't apply here iceaura - GeoffP is only upset because it was I (one of "da ebil moderators") that posted this.

Honestly... if that had been an actual article, and such thinking was actually going on... who wouldn't look at it from the outside and go "God DAMN son that's stupid"?
 
I dare say it doesn't apply here iceaura - GeoffP is only upset because it was I (one of "da ebil moderators") that posted this.

To a degree, yes: it doesn't become standards for discourse when the rules aren't applied evenly. Granted, the misapplied censure to myself was some time ago, but on that basis the above is still inappropriate. I don't make the rules etc etc. Practically speaking, it is possible to criticise such a thing without such generalisation. Has Islamic ideology permitting women to own property, for instance, "gone full retard"? No, it has not; or at least some classical expressions thereof have not. Nuance.

Honestly... if that had been an actual article, and such thinking was actually going on... who wouldn't look at it from the outside and go "God DAMN son that's stupid"?

That is not relevant to this specific issue.
 
To a degree, yes: it doesn't become standards for discourse when the rules aren't applied evenly. Granted, the misapplied censure to myself was some time ago, but on that basis the above is still inappropriate. I don't make the rules etc etc. Practically speaking, it is possible to criticise such a thing without such generalisation. Has Islamic ideology permitting women to own property, for instance, "gone full retard"? No, it has not; or at least some classical expressions thereof have not. Nuance.

So... you are of the opinion that granting women rights is somehow wrong...?

That is not relevant to this specific issue.

Au contraire... that would seem to be the very crux of the issue; however, given your very admission that the primary motivation for this "complaint" is not the statement itself, but rather the person making it... well, I think you can guess how much credence I lend your thoughts on this matter.
 
So... you are of the opinion that granting women rights is somehow wrong...?

Forgive me for posing Tiassa's Dilemma #1, but are you stupid or merely dishonest?

The issue is whether your language is appropriate for an internet forum. Saying that "Islamic ideology has gone full retard" is a bit of an exaggeration and generalisation, since not all Islamic ideology is or has become "full retard". Do you really need me to spell out some alternative expressions for you? Here are some:

Islamic ideological process in Iran has gone badly awry for women's rights
Conservative Islamic ideology takes (another) wrong turn against women's rights
Conservative Islamic ideology is bad for women's rights
Me think Islamism not good for girl-type people


They are in descending order of complexity for your convenience. I assume you prefer the last one.

Au contraire... that would seem to be the very crux of the issue; however, given your very admission that the primary motivation for this "complaint" is not the statement itself, but rather the person making it... well, I think you can guess how much credence I lend your thoughts on this matter.

I'm surprised at your use of the word 'credence', given that you don't seem to have processed the rest of the post. Your posts often reflect a kind of "surface scan"; an Oprahesque or JerrySpringerific familiarity with the issues. The issue is not the person making the complaint, but the position of the person making the complaint in this case combined with the generalisation.

If you need this post explained to you, let me know via PM.
 
Forgive me for posing Tiassa's Dilemma #1, but are you stupid or merely dishonest?

The issue is whether your language is appropriate for an internet forum. Saying that "Islamic ideology has gone full retard" is a bit of an exaggeration and generalisation, since not all Islamic ideology is or has become "full retard". Do you really need me to spell out some alternative expressions for you? Here are some:

Islamic ideological process in Iran has gone badly awry for women's rights
Conservative Islamic ideology takes (another) wrong turn against women's rights
Conservative Islamic ideology is bad for women's rights
Me think Islamism not good for girl-type people


They are in descending order of complexity for your convenience. I assume you prefer the last one.



I'm surprised at your use of the word 'credence', given that you don't seem to have processed the rest of the post. Your posts often reflect a kind of "surface scan"; an Oprahesque or JerrySpringerific familiarity with the issues. The issue is not the person making the complaint, but the position of the person making the complaint in this case combined with the generalisation.

If you need this post explained to you, let me know via PM.

Actually, I think it is you that needs it explained - see, in the initial article, which I now know to be satire, it was made to seem as though this Council of Islamic Ideology was a governing/ruling/authoritative body regarding the interpretations of Islamic law... and indeed:

http://cii.gov.pk/

That would appear to be the case.

So, with that understanding, it would seem that if they, as the "official office of Islam" made a decision regarding Islamic Ideology... that it would be the "official decision" regarding Islamic Ideology, in much the same way the Vatican is the authority for Catholic ideology.

Is this not a reasonable consideration?
 
Actually, I think it is you that needs it explained - see, in the initial article, which I now know to be satire, it was made to seem as though this Council of Islamic Ideology was a governing/ruling/authoritative body regarding the interpretations of Islamic law... and indeed:

No. My comment has nothing to do with the article, or with Poe's Law. It had everything to do with your phrasing. Moreover, there is no really official voice for Islam; even within Sunni theology the writ of Tehran goes only so far. Finally, even if it had gone so far, and that Tehran was the voice of all Islam, from Wahhabi to Sufi, it would not mean that all Islamic theology had "gone full retard", since Islamic theology also contains many positive notes, as all religions essentially do.
 
No. My comment has nothing to do with the article, or with Poe's Law. It had everything to do with your phrasing. Moreover, there is no really official voice for Islam; even within Sunni theology the writ of Tehran goes only so far. Finally, even if it had gone so far, and that Tehran was the voice of all Islam, from Wahhabi to Sufi, it would not mean that all Islamic theology had "gone full retard", since Islamic theology also contains many positive notes, as all religions essentially do.

Fair enough - as I said, I was under the (as I now know mistaken) impression that they were the "voice of Islam" so to speak.
 
Well, such things happen.

It's easy when criticizing to fall into the habit of generality, especially for what is interpreted - Poe's law here - as something extraordinarily worthy of it. Some years ago, when an Islamist on SF told me that so-and-so was "Islamic law", I then replied with the immortal and much-vaunted phrase:

"Then Islamic law is comprised of cleverly-sculpted shit."

That was enough to earn me a formal ticket. In essence, it was something of an if-then rebuttal and, as anti-theological attacks go on SF, not that bad. I would say it was substantially more innocuous than the median anti-theological attack hereabouts. Neither was it an attack on Muslims, obviously - a point my opponents were, shall we say, loathe to recognise? But it was still wrong to generalise in such a manner: while Islamic law =/= 'Muslim', it's still a gap too far. I ought to have said:

"Then this Islamic law is comprised of cleverly-sculpted shit."

Which reads better and is more accurate and less objectionable. All Islamic law is not constructed of "cleverly sculpted shit", but that one - whatever it was - was.
 
A good point - and for that, I do apologize. My statement should have been more specific - that this group trying to dictate Islamic Ideology had been the ones to jump the shark, not Islam as a whole
 
Back
Top