what do women get out of islam?

[DiamondHearts]

Do you think the fact that most of these countries are military dictatorships or kingdoms not play a role?

During the Ottoman, Mughal, and Safavid dynasties for example when Islam was a state religion and women were better off, can you explain this?

 

[Fugu-dono]

I'm not insinuating anything. I'm telling you outright, he is wrong.

That's a little harsh to say someone is wrong isn't it!? Could it be that you are wrong? Not everyone knows everything. Are you somehow implying that you do?

Unlike many other posters on this forum, I'm not ignorant of Muslim culture. I'm a Muslim, and a student of Islamic theology.

Perhaps you are, and perhaps you're not ignorant. People in the forum will make conclude that themselves whe you present your arguments in context of the topic. Don't accuse others of being ignorant either may I suggest.

There is information readily available on websites such as islamicity.com, islaam.com and cair.net, etc where you can find information about Islam. In our time, there is no excuse for ignorance. If one seeks proper knowledge, then one must pursue it.

I'm well aware. Admittingly these forums do make good place for free advertisement. I'm glad you're aware of that too.

Islamic laws are extremely logical, yet the actions of the practitioners aren't always so. Most of the Muslims, however, are peaceful, honest people who follow their religion. Invasion or conflict, will obviously push people to resistance (but this isn't a political discussion so I will not elaborate on this point).

Yes, logical. I can somewhat agree. However if one have been taught all their life something is right and logical it's likely there will be an attachment to that train of thought. What there is flaw in your argument. What if the teachings were misinterpretted? What if there is political or militaristic agenda in some teacher's motive. Then what? Bias.

As for most muslim people being peaceful and honest, I agree with that too. I have several wonderful muslim friends.

You will find Islam is one of the most just religions on the planet. Women have rights equal to men. We take great pride in the care of our women. Women have been the heads of state of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, etc.

Well most religion would say that they are just wouldn't they? You are merely making statements here. I want lots of facts to back this one up please.

Equal rights? Yes, that's the topic. Your country perhaps, and perhaps countries you've visited. Now stop stating things we already know and present legit facts, plus backing by some Islamic authority that the religion stand for equality of women to men. I want to see issues like honour killing, and FGM addressed too. Evidence that they are actively trying to prevent such things happening to back up that they don't endorse such tradition.

This is the Islamic way, yet you are only informed by posters like Michael that we are villians and our culture is evil. Where is your conscience and human dignity?

Now you are assuming that I'm only informed by Michael. Could it be that I have done my own research and have several friends in Muslim communities like Auburn and Lakemba in Australia and elsewhere. Some are even agreeing with me that not everything that is ever done in the name of Islam is politically correct.

It is an unfounded myth that women in Muslim countries are treated worst than in the West.

So all articles relating to inequality of women in many of the Islamic nations were just myths? Funny you should say that when the revelation was revealed to Muhammad is somewhat mythic too. Anyhow not to be blasphemous about it (my apologies if I insult you or your belief in any way), I would say that there are plenty of legit articles out there with substantial evidence.

How many cases do we see in the US news of husbands killing their wives, especially in the south? How about women cheating on their husbands, and divorce cases where the couples fight over the children ruining their lives? Has America ever had a woman head of state? Problems exist everywhere, and there are bad people in all cultures, yet we cannot use this to mock the rest of those who are good people.

My apologies as I have little understanding of US. I do realise the hypocrisy of the argument. I will not deny my meagre knowledge that those things obviously do occur in US. I think most people though are aware of US's imperfection just like anywhere else. Personally for many of those things like divorces, though I don't condone it I don't necessarily agree it's politically correct either. Regardless women are given rights on the matter equal to men so I can't see a big deal there in context of the topic.

US women as head of the state? No I supose you have a point but there are many women who hold extremely powerful positions in the US. There's even a possibilty the next one may be a woman.


Mind you I must say I don't just nitpick on your religion DiamondHearts. I also have issues with many other religion, including Christianity. Please don't take it personally ne.

 

[Michael]

Ottoman Empire

The women's movement in Turkey has its roots in the 19th century Ottoman society when educated urban women started to discuss and write about women's rights. At the time Islamic law was the source of family law. Ottoman women activists such as Fatma Aliye questioned patriarchal interpretations of Islam. In 1911 the call to embrace feminism came from the so-called White Conferences in Istanbul. The Ottoman Empire adapted its first codified family law in 1917.


Firstly it appears the prior to this time women were not treated with equality and that Islam was interpreted fundamentally (at least in regards to female equality). Regardless, this was a profound period of change all over the planet. From China to South America. After the Industrial Revolution and conquest by marauding Europeans - - I think people, specifically in urban areas, were attempting to modernize and catch up to the Europeans. Part of this was an embrace of a freer more liberal society. Even the Emperor in China thought having two wives was a sign of being stuck in the past and divorced one.

Mughal Empire,

The language of the court was Persian although most of the subjects of the Empire were Hindu. Women had a significant role in family life and played an active role in Mughal tribal society - especially apparent when women fought on the battlefield (3). This is important and unique to this society because during the same time, in other parts of the world, women were oppressed. Women were also allowed to voice their political opinions, and were relied on for political advice. The Mughal Empire was run by Muslim emporers, however India was and still is Hindu dominated. During the time of the Mughal Empire, there was a lot of mixed culture. There was combined Islamic, Persian, and native Indian themes. This time also promoted spread of wealth.

It looks to me that this was a pluralistic society. IMO if society is not overtly dominated by a male-patron deity based religion then there is a good chance women will be treated with equality. Don't the Hindu have female representations of their God-Head?

Regardless, it's certainly not uncommon for accumulation of wealth and an expanding merchant class to be associated with liberal society and better equality with women. I think the Mughal Empire fits well within the frame work I proposed.

Safavid Empire

Unlike with many other dynasties founded by warlords and military chiefs, one of the unique aspects of the Safavids in the post-Islamic Iran was their origin in the Islamic Sufi order called the Safaviyeh. This uniqueness makes the Safavid dynasty comparable to the pre-Islamic Sassanid dynasty, which made Zoroastrianism into an official religion, and whose founders were from a priestly class.

Even though Safavids were not the first Shia rulers in Iran, they played a crucial role in making Shia Islam the official religion in the whole of Iran. Ismail I made conversion mandatory for the largely Sunni population. The Sunni Ulema or clergy were either killed or exiled. Ismail I, despite his heterodox Shia beliefs (Momen, 1985), brought in Shi'a religious leaders and granted them land and money in return for loyalty. Later, during the Safavid and especially Qajar period, the Shia Ulema's power increased and they were able to exercise a role, independent of or compatible with the government.

Timur is one of the best-documented members of the dynasty and therefore there exists much information about the female members of his family in his Zafarnamas, his biographies. Through these documents, the general roles of women in a high class family can be understood today. In general, women were expected to manage important aspects in family life in the absence of the male figures in their lives, as well as they were expected to care for children. Women were able to oversee production of food and clothing needed by the family. The women of these households had broad responsibilities and therefore were able to exercise their own personal freedom through the choices they made. It is hard to point out exactly how many paintings survive representing women from the Timurid court. It was a time ruled by men in which histories, biographies, and even poetry was meant to represent the life of the ruler and his court. However there are many manuscripts and miniatures that survive in which women were represented.

In his study, "Women in Safavid Iran: The Evidence of European Travelers," Ronald W. Ferrier uses the accounts of Safavid women by European travelers to supplement indigenous sources. He is careful to note that the travelers were mainly familiar with the upper levels of Persian society in Isfahan (the Safavid capital in Iran) which allowed them little direct contact with female society.
There were six types of women in Safavid Iran: "the married wives of those in the upper reaches of society"; the " large rural sector living in a more communal manner in tribal associations up and down the countryside and in permanent agricultural settlements in villages and small towns"; "those engaged in arts and crafts and industrial activities in a more organized manner" within towns and cities; those "who had contracted temporary marriages"; "the slaves of both sexes"; and the prostitutes (Ferrier, 384-385). The ways that these women particpated in the life of society may have differed, but in general, the women's appearances were admired. Persian men of high social status did however seek consorts from the Georgians or the Circassians, who were allegedly the most attractive.

Regular marriages were in the fullest sense of the term "arranged" marriages, usually done "by an attorney between people of a compatible temperament and comparable social status" (Ferrier, 386). "Lifelong celibacy was an unacceptable state, regarded almost as unnatural and impious" and "men were encouraged to experience sex at the earliest practical age, but girls were carefully protected until their wedding nights" (Ferrier, 386).
Divorce was available to both the male and the female, and remarriage was easy. "Although in the case of persons of rank there was a strong feeling of aversion to husbands being divorced by their wives" (Ferrier, 388). Additionally, "if a husband repudiated his wife he was obliged to return her dowry, but if it was the wife who sued for divorce she forfeited it" (Ferrier, 388).
Ferrier continues by stating that after marriage, the "quality of life for women wholly depended upon the disposition of their husbands" (Ferrier, 389). The travelers reported that the women "gave themselves up to idleness of body and spirit" and that "in this indolent atmosphere, there was little incentive or choice to be anything but passive objects of self-gratification" (Ferrier, 389-390). We know that this is not entirely true because on the one hand, these male travelers would have never been allowed into the women's quarters or baths, so they would not have seen what the women were exactly doing. Additionally, we have evidence of Safavid female patrons of the arts, which shows that some women had an active role in society.
Some women acquired power and wealth by being prostitutes, whose activities included singing and dancing, in addition to providing sexual gratification. Some prostitutes even "traveled in troupes with their own simple transport and organization" (Ferrier, 395). Additionally, the shah maintained a group of twenty-four of the most talented performers, whom he rewarded with lavish presents. The European travelers assumed that there were so many Persian prostitutes (which ranged from 12,000 to 40,000 in Isfahan, depending on which traveler's account you read) and their demand was so high that they were able to charge higher prices than in any other country, because "sexual desire was stimulated by warm climates and also by the skills of girls who were marvels of enchantment" (Ferrier, 394,396). This may also be because "respectable" women kept chaste until marriage and men were encouraged to have sexual experiences at the earliest practical age (Ferrier, 386).


I'm not sure if women were treated all that different than other women? I'm not sure what's going on with the religion either? I certainly appears that Iran started out Sunnie and then converted to Shia. Perhaps Shia are more liberal than Sunni in regards to women - although I doesn't seem like women are treated really any differently than really many other women around the world at that time? Does it?

Michael

 

[Michael]

Does the Qur'an specifically state that polyandry or lesbianism can not be practiced?

MII

 

[Michael]

I'm not being anti-Islamic but I think a fundamental religous discriminatory belief set in the context of a patriarchal male deity will not bequeath the gentler gender true equality. Hell Xians wondered whether females even had a soul. Speaking of which - what exactly do women get when they go to heaven? 72 well oiled up Brad Pitts???

THE SAME ambiguity about women that we find in scripture perdures throughout Christian tradition—for if Christianity contained from the beginning a commitment to woman's dignity and capacity for eternal life, a terrible bias plagued even the smartest and most influential of male theologians. In the third century, Tertullian taught that women are the second Eve: Just as Eve "softened up with her cajoling words he whom the devil himself could not attack," so too all women are "the devil's gateway." In the fifth century, Augustine allowed that women's souls were capable of being the image of God equally with that of men; but a woman as female, that is, in her sexual body, is not in the image of God, and can be considered such only when taken together with man who is her head. Eight hundred years later, Thomas Aquinas defined woman as a "defective male," misbegotten when the male seed at conception is not up to full strength. And in the 16th century, Martin Luther wrote to the effect that women must live under the power of their husbands: "This punishment, too, springs from original sin. . . . The rule remains with the husband, and the wife is compelled to obey him by God's command. He rules the home and the state, wages wars, defends his possessions, tills the soil, builds, plants, etc. The woman, on the other hand, is like a nail driven into the wall. She sits at home . . . look[ing] after the affairs of the household, as one who has been deprived of administering those affairs . . . that concern the state. . . . In this way is Eve punished."


creepy that these were the moral backbones of society isn't it? No wonder a return to the Roman/Greek enlightenment would take 1500 years and a minor ice age....


Michael

 

[DiamondHearts]

That's a little harsh to say someone is wrong isn't it!? Could it be that you are wrong? Not everyone knows everything. Are you somehow implying that you do?

Whereas, everything presented by Michael is just his opinion and the opinion of some lunatics at anti-Muslim racist websites like jihadwatch, my opinions are based on actual knowledge of Muslim culture and the study of Islamic history from many sources. My ancestors themselves were involved in the administration of the late Mughal empire.

May I ask, how much knowledge and experience do you have with Muslim culture to make such a deduction?

I believe I have a right to comment on a culture in which I grew up, study, and am an active member in.

Perhaps you are, and perhaps you're not ignorant. People in the forum will make conclude that themselves whe you present your arguments in context of the topic. Don't accuse others of being ignorant either may I suggest.

I will accuse those of ignorance who show themselves ignorant.

Yes, logical. I can somewhat agree. However if one have been taught all their life something is right and logical it's likely there will be an attachment to that train of thought. What there is flaw in your argument. What if the teachings were misinterpretted? What if there is political or militaristic agenda in some teacher's motive. Then what? Bias.

What makes you believe I have not formed my beliefs from my own reason and logic. I follow beliefs which are logical, I don't just need anyone to spoonfeed me anything.

Equal rights? Yes, that's the topic. Your country perhaps, and perhaps countries you've visited. Now stop stating things we already know and present legit facts, plus backing by some Islamic authority that the religion stand for equality of women to men. I want to see issues like honour killing, and FGM addressed too. Evidence that they are actively trying to prevent such things happening to back up that they don't endorse such tradition.

If you need to see Islamic views, please read the past pages as both I and Qa' Dark have presented many examples.

If you want specific topics discussed, please present them and explain exactly what you want from us.

So all articles relating to inequality of women in many of the Islamic nations were just myths? Funny you should say that when the revelation was revealed to Muhammad is somewhat mythic too. Anyhow not to be blasphemous about it (my apologies if I insult you or your belief in any way), I would say that there are plenty of legit articles out there with substantial evidence.

Articles proving Islam condones inequality? Or one or two Muslims committing crimes? If I was to say that, I'm sure I can find Christian Americans committing crimes, does this mean Christianity is an inhumane religion?

Mind you I must say I don't just nitpick on your religion DiamondHearts. I also have issues with many other religion, including Christianity. Please don't take it personally ne.

You don't have to worry, as I am only defending my religion and erasing false misconceptions which are commonplace thanks to people like Michael. You are free to ask me any questions, I will respect respectfully and diligently if able.

I only wish Michael would provide links from where he copies his posts, so I could find the origin of these strange ideas.

 

[Michael]

If DarksidZz ever makes a poll on the subject, I'm going to nominate Michael as the all time 'hardest working' poster on Sciforums!

All that lengthy meticulous research...wooah!

Thanks

So you're in sinuating that Michael's arguments are baseless? Isn't that just dismissing the argument with ignorance?

That does seem to be the strategy.

That aside, why do you think that Islamic countries in both the East and Middle East and West for that matter, both democratic and dictatorship alike, treat women legally unequal?

Do you think the fact that most of these countries are military dictatorships or kingdoms not play a role?

Again, there are a couple things.

1) A Dictator may alleviate the situation (as I pointed out) but a Dictator doesn't force men to behave as sexist nor do they for men to support discriminatory laws. The men choose to do so - many with the full support of the religious community.

You may choose to blame Pervez Musharraf or Hamid Karzai or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for inequality in the Law but that doesn't excuse the male members in the populous and in their ill treatment of women. (see school fire and horribly burned alive female children)

2) There are many dictators that have given women equality. Take the North Korean leader Kim Jung Il or Mao Zedong. One could argue from this stand point what's more important is the philosophy the Dictators bases their rule upon, one being religion and the other being communism.

3) I already researched the three Empires and gave you my summation. They were each unique cultures. One of them mainly comprised of Hindu people. You're argument is I don't live in the culture therefor my opinion can't be valid - that is a blatant logical fallacy - one that Fugu-dono alluded to. Also, unless you just did a quick time travel either do you. Lastly, while I am not a Communist nor grew up in North Korea, I think I can safely say that the system hasn't worked well.

Michael

 

[GeoffP]

In Islam, all 'slavery' is prohibited except what the West considers prisoner of war. Slavery in America was much different than in Africa and Middle East. Slaves could earn their freedom easily, and were treated as human beings. It is illegal for example to beat slaves like they did in America. As a matter of fact, the Americans killed millions of Blacks. This is defined as genocide.

As a matter of fact, untold millions - though I've heard as many as five milliion - of Africans disappeared into the Middle East, most as sexual slaves and the rest (and probably their male offspring) castrated, when not killed outright. This, too, is genocide.

There is information readily available on websites such as islamicity.com, islaam.com and cair.net, etc where you can find information about Islam. In our time, there is no excuse for ignorance. If one seeks proper knowledge, then one must pursue it.

...you realize, of course, that CAIR - founded by the Muslim Brotherhood and with ties to Hamas and other terrorist organizations - has been recognized as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in terrorism? And yet you choose to cite them. Curious. As I recall, islamicity is also not a particuarly nice place. Something about some fatwas.

Islamic laws are extremely logical, yet the actions of the practitioners aren't always so. Most of the Muslims, however, are peaceful, honest people who follow their religion. Invasion or conflict, will obviously push people to resistance (but this isn't a political discussion so I will not elaborate on this point).

Ah yes, that extreme appeal to logic. So logical! Half inheritances for women! Stoning for adulterers! Death to apostates and homosexuals! Logical, logical. And they would only be more logical, you see, if you kaafirs would only believe. How much more sense they would make to you then! Like...apartheid to whites in South Africa. Bhumputra in Malaysia. Pro-Japanese laws in Mongolia in 1935. Of course! You need only belong for the veil to fall from your eyes.

Let your indulgence rule.

You will find Islam is one of the most just religions on the planet.

Except to religious minorities, women and homosexuals.

Women have rights equal to men. We take great pride in the care of our women. Women have been the heads of state of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, etc.

Q 4:3, 11, 34. Men are made greater than women, and "have a degree over them". Hard to interpret that phrase differently, I'm afraid.

We greatly respect and honor our women. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be to him) said....If a women gets on a bus with full seats, men get up and offer them their seat.

Or make them get to the back of the bus.

Problems exist everywhere, and there are bad people in all cultures, yet we cannot use this to mock the rest of those who are good people.

Rather it is the system that is in question here, not the people. And your marriage of politics and religion is not good.

Do you think the fact that most of these countries are military dictatorships or kingdoms not play a role?

Are they ever going to stop being dictatorships?

During the Ottoman, Mughal, and Safavid dynasties for example when Islam was a state religion and women were better off, can you explain this?

During the Ottoman, Mughal, and Safavid dynasties for example when Islam was a state religion and religious minorities were worse off, can you explain this?

Whereas, everything presented by Michael is just his opinion and the opinion of some lunatics at anti-Muslim racist websites like jihadwatch

Islam is not a race.

I believe I have a right to comment on a culture in which I grew up, study, and am an active member in.

Ah. So you have no right to criticize Western religion or culture then? You know, you have yet to answer for this.

What makes you believe I have not formed my beliefs from my own reason and logic. I follow beliefs which are logical, I don't just need anyone to spoonfeed me anything.

Logical? You also believe most vehemently in the judicial murder of apostates; not in some godforsaken past of islamic dictatorships, but now, in the present ones. I can only assume that this would apply to your idea of an idealized sharia as well. Logic is clearly nothing to you. Where is your conscience and human dignity?

If you want specific topics discussed, please present them and explain exactly what you want from us.

We have, and I have, and when I do you engage in deceptive double-talk and illusion. When I call you on this, you retreat into your shell and hide and spout off about how immoral I must be to dissect your position so. If you had any morality, courage or convinction whatsoever - ye who were touted to imminently crush me - you would respond to my posts. Yet you hide. Why?

Articles proving Islam condones inequality? Or one or two Muslims committing crimes? If I was to say that, I'm sure I can find Christian Americans committing crimes, does this mean Christianity is an inhumane religion?

It depends on a) whether they commit these crimes in the name of religion, b) whether or not their holy book has any literal support for same and c) whether or not their crimes have any legitimate standing. Yet, even so, it is not a question of whether Christianity is good or bad: Christianity is under control, and will remain so. Is islam similarly under control to the secular good?

You don't have to worry, as I am only defending my religion and erasing false misconceptions which are commonplace thanks to people like Michael. You are free to ask me any questions, I will respect respectfully and diligently if able.

Actually, you won't. Or is it that you do not respond to me because you're not able?

I only wish Michael would provide links from where he copies his posts, so I could find the origin of these strange ideas.

I provide countless references to my work, yet your attacks are principally on basis of the supposed racism of these ideas, without ever acknowledging that they arise from a rational reading of reputable sources. Would only that the chains of isnad were so well sourced!

 

[S.A.M.]

As a matter of fact, untold millions - though I've heard as many as five milliion - of Africans disappeared into the Middle East, most as sexual slaves and the rest (and probably their male offspring) castrated, when not killed outright. This, too, is genocide.

Link please.

 

[GeoffP]

"The Hideous Trade" by Jan Hogedoorn. He estimates that as few as 10% of all slaves imported from Africa to the ME survived, which would tend to belie the "slavery in islam is ok" business. Men and boys were castrated on the spot. To which I add, in the enlightened modern islamic world:

http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topi...=158677&version=1&template_id=45&parent_id=25

http://za.today.reuters.com/news/ne...RIDST_0_OZATP-SLAVERY-MAURITANIA-20070321.XML

And even:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/009139.php

 

[S.A.M.]

"The Hideous Trade" by Jan Hogedoorn. He estimates that as few as 10% of all slaves imported from Africa to the ME survived, which would tend to belie the "slavery in islam is ok" business. Men and boys were castrated on the spot. To which I add, in the enlightened modern islamic world:

http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topi...=158677&version=1&template_id=45&parent_id=25

http://za.today.reuters.com/news/ne...RIDST_0_OZATP-SLAVERY-MAURITANIA-20070321.XML

And even:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/009139.php

Is that unpublished work?

http://www.amazon.com/s/102-0517270...eywords=Jan Hogedoorn&sourceid=Mozilla-search

 

[GeoffP]

Article. Admittedly, I'm having a tough time finding the original. Probably in Dutch.

 

[S.A.M.]

Article. Admittedly, I'm having a tough time finding the original. Probably in Dutch.

That the only thing he ever write?

 

[GeoffP]

Might not even be online access.

 

[S.A.M.]

Umm of course, an obvious seminal work.

http://www.google.com/search?q=Jan+...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

 

[WildBlueYonder]

I'm not insinuating anything. I'm telling you outright, he is wrong.

well said, as the authority figure here

Unlike many other posters on this forum, I'm not ignorant of Muslim culture.

uh, good, slap in the face for all those that disagree with you, well put

I'm a Muslim, and a student of Islamic theology.

normally, that would be looked upon as an expert, but a strange thing happened on the way to the future. islam showed its teeth, 19 men looked straight into the jaws of death, not flinching, not wavering, and plunged airplanes into building, in the name of allah
that is not a religion of peace
my contention is, that you are not muslim enough, that you only show your sweet side here, but if any of us were in a muslim country, you would denounce us to the authorities or take matters into your on hands.
what would Mohammad do?

There is information readily available on websites such as islamicity.com, islaam.com and cair.net, etc where you can find information about Islam. In our time, there is no excuse for ignorance. If one seeks proper knowledge, then one must pursue it.

that is why we use the internet, to see

Nothing but present facts? And you say I'm brainwashed.

that would be me, you haven't proved you're not, vis-a-vis your responses as of yet

Islamic laws are extremely logical, yet the actions of the practitioners aren't always so.

steal, cut right hand; adultery, cut head; chrisitan, charge jizya tax; insult islam, cut head
yes, very logical indeed

Most of the Muslims, however, are peaceful, honest people who follow their religion.

I would agree with you there, but its not because they are muslims, but because they are average decent human beings, just like my american neighbors, most are law-abiding, decent folk

Invasion or conflict, will obviously push people to resistance (but this isn't a political discussion so I will not elaborate on this point).

it was islam that started this, attacking the Byzantine & Sassanid empires, then marching as far as its armies would go, treating the vanquished as 3rd class citizens until they converted

You will find Islam is one of the most just religions on the planet. Women have rights equal to men. We take great pride in the care of our women.

then why do muslim women (& men) run to the West for asylum? why do millions have a better life in the West, a chance for education, business ownership, professions?

Women have been the heads of state of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, etc.

we don't deny this, but they were from the elites of your societies

We greatly respect and honor our women. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be to him) said, "The best of men is the one who is best to his wife." In Muslim nations, when women walk in the road, men move out of the way to let them through. If a women gets on a bus with full seats, men get up and offer them their seat. If elders or women enter the room, we lower our head in respect. This is the Islamic way, yet you are only informed by posters like Michael that we are villians and our culture is evil. Where is your conscience and human dignity?

no, its the implied threat of true islam that people like me feel we must warn, expose the true face of that islam, who is the model muslim? who is the star of the hadiths?
what would Mohammad do? conquer, kill, use force, act just among muslims, treacherous among infidels, fair among muslims, boot upon the neck of unbelievers, kill jews, kill hindus, charge the jizya tax on people of the book

It is an unfounded myth that women in Muslim countries are treated worst than in the West. How many cases do we see in the US news of husbands killing their wives, especially in the south? How about women cheating on their husbands, and divorce cases where the couples fight over the children ruining their lives?

honor killings, my guess is that its not reported in the news often, unless its a convert to Christianity, in which case its, "kill the infidel!!!"

Has America ever had a woman head of state?

Hillary might do the same here

Problems exist everywhere, and there are bad people in all cultures, yet we cannot use this to mock the rest of those who are good people.

yet you just did, poor southern folk

 

[Michael]

Logical? You also believe most vehemently in the judicial murder of apostates; not in some godforsaken past of islamic dictatorships, but now, in the present ones.

Is that true???

Sam certainly doesn't think like such. She's all for Hindu temples (to the various Avatars of the Hindu God-Head) being built in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Imagine a huge Shiva shrine and adjoining a Synagogue and all Muslim men gay night club - all just up the road from the Kaaba. I'm pretty positive that Sam wouldn't give two craps if a Muslim decided to convert to either ancient Arab paganism, Hindu pseudo-Polytheism or even *gup* Atheism.. bwaahaaahaaa haaaa :mufc:

If more Muslims were as liberal maybe the countries with majority Muslim populations would be a hell of a lot better off. But, if DH is pro-murder in the modern age, then really, places like Pakistan are only going to continue to go to hell in a hand-basket. It's really almost impossible to have a "logical" conversation when one said maintains Islam is peaceful and yet calls for the murder of another human based on that person's peaceful beleif.

Michael

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Is that true???


If more Muslims were as liberal maybe the countries with majority Muslim populations would be a hell of a lot better off. But, if DH is pro-murder in the modern age, then really, places like Pakistan are only going to continue to go to hell in a hand-basket. It's really almost impossible to have a "logical" conversation when one said maintains Islam is peaceful and yet calls for the murder of another human based on that person's peaceful beleif.

Michael

fraid so, see below for a few examples, :

http://www.domini.org/openbook/pal20030729.htm
Muslim Convert to Christianity Butchered
29 July 2003

The body of a Muslim convert to Christianity who went missing in mid-July, has
been returned to his family, slaughtered and cut into four pieces by Islamic
extremists.

http://www.everystudent.com/wires/abdul.html
My religious views were radically challenged when I left my country because of its civil turmoil and went to Europe for the continuation of my studies. By the providence of God and because of various circumstances, I ended up enrolling in an International Christian School.
A question I once asked my teacher revolutionized my worldview. I asked, "How come your word of God says one thing and our word of God says something different?" My teacher, not knowing much about Islam at all, gently asked, "How do you know the Qur'an is the word of God?" I was taken aback by that response. I had lived in a world in which everyone simply presupposed that the Qur'an was dictated word for word by God to the Prophet Muhammad and no one ever questioned that assumption. That brief encounter forced me to start on a journey, engage my Christian friends in hours of cordial discussion and debate about the truthfulness of the Christian faith.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52004
Posted: September 16, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Michael Ireland
© 2006 Assist News Service
Somali Christian sources report Ali Mustaf Maka'il, a 22-year-old college student and cloth merchant who converted from Islam to Christianity 11 months ago, was shot and killed in the Manabolyo quarter of Mogadishu.

"this is from a Jordanian-palestinian girl, so title is sarcastic"
http://thesugarcubes.net/?p=220
End of the World: A Muslim Convert to Christianity and Bush is Concerned
23Mar06
WHEELING, West Virginia (Reuters) - President Bush said on Wednesday he was deeply troubled that an Afghan man could face the death penalty in Afghanistan for converting to Christianity from Islam.
An Afghan judge said this week a man named Abdur Rahman had been jailed for converting from Islam to Christianity and could face the death penalty if he refused to become a Muslim again.
Sharia, or Islamic law, stipulates death for apostasy. The Afghan legal system is based on a mix of civil and sharia law.

http://archives.tconline.org/Stories/april02/cairo4.html
The year since has not been easy. Nader, now about 30 and still unmarried, has told a few trusted friends of his decision, but has yet to reveal it to his family.
He worries about the consequences of making his faith public—which could include anything from rejection to death.

 

[Kadark]

Mike, I apologize sincerely for not being able to respond promptly to your messages. I have witnessed a rather hectic schedule which seemingly knows no end. Would you be so gracious in outlining your main points you're trying to make? Please take in to consideration that we are in the "religion" section - not "politics". I'll see if I can reply tomorrow to you.

 

[Michael]

OK, I get that there are some crazies out there, but, I did not think that DH advocated anything of the such. That's what I was questioning.

Debating on a forum is fine and dandy and I could just as easily take the other side and give it a go, but I would be a little shocked if any one here would call for the death of someone else just because they changed their ideas on God.

Which is why I asked.

I mean - that's crazy.

What if Sam became a Scientolgist (something I have worried may happen to her - being so close to Bollywood and all)?

Michael