Is Islam getting on your nerves too?
- Thread starter Aldebaran
- Start date
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
The pope’s comments about Islam and violence last week were more than simply misjudged, writes Eamonn McCann in an interesting article.
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
I wouldn't touch this thread with a ten-foot chador.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
I get as pissed off with rabid atheists as I do with rabid 'believers' in whatever faith.
The rabid atheists are a cult unto themselves imo - not accepting that anything beyond the narrow confines of 'proof' and 'evidence' and in the meantime trampling over any other views with arrogance. Latter day equivalent of world is flat til you prove it otherwise.
Who can truly say?
I'm agnostic and proud
I'll say a prayer to whichever Divine if things are going badly for someone and day to day disbelieve in all of the religious guff that has caused/been a vehicle for war upon war upon war upon war throughout the centuries - simply because we, as humans, would rather blame it on something else than take responsibility for our own actions.
And we watch atrocities on all sides and comment from our own prejudiced and often comfortable and removed viewpoint mainly influenced from comfy capitalist propoganda media machines.
The rabid atheists are a cult unto themselves imo - not accepting that anything beyond the narrow confines of 'proof' and 'evidence' and in the meantime trampling over any other views with arrogance. Latter day equivalent of world is flat til you prove it otherwise.
Who can truly say?
I'm agnostic and proud
I'll say a prayer to whichever Divine if things are going badly for someone and day to day disbelieve in all of the religious guff that has caused/been a vehicle for war upon war upon war upon war throughout the centuries - simply because we, as humans, would rather blame it on something else than take responsibility for our own actions.And we watch atrocities on all sides and comment from our own prejudiced and often comfortable and removed viewpoint mainly influenced from comfy capitalist propoganda media machines.
cesare said:
If there's a ghod I didn't create who's got a problem with it, I'm sure they'll smite me down.
In the mean time, I believe in:
[ ] tooth fairy
[ ] bun-bun
[ ] santa claus
[ ] batman
[ ] hastur
[ ] jehovah
[ ] allah
[ ] krishna
[ ] dagon
[ ] hastur
[ ] odin
[ ] coyote
[ ] crom
[ ] hastur ... &&**^*^^&^&*^*%&
+++ lost connection +++
Johnny Canuck2 said:
You approach is the typical non-Muslim, by which I mean that you have no insight in the core reasons behind it.
What you see as inequity was in my reading of it meant as protection and help for women. Widows (and their children) but also considering that before Islam women were in the tribal structured society part of a man's heritage. (not everywhere the case, there are records that pre-islamic women had multiple spouses too, but not in Mecca or that part of the Arabian peninsula.)
I agree that, considering human nature and especially in patriarchal societies, abuse of these Quranic instructions was/is almost inevitable. Yet if you look closely to those verses you see that following those commands strictly is humanly impossible. Hence contemporan interpretations proposing the view that it was in fact meant to prevent men, who before could marry, divorce, take as much women as they liked, from doing so. I find it an acceptable interpretation but don't agree completely with it although there is much to say for it too.
I tend to endorse the view that it was meant as protective measure and that the restrictions and commands imposed on the man who wants to opt for polygamy are meant to make him think not twice, but very long before engaging himself in it.
These days there are several Islamic nations where polygamy is forbidden, or discouraged or otherwise restricted. In my view every woman should be able to demand immediate divorce if her husband decides to engage himself in a second marriage withouth her conscent. Such right is endorsed by Al Qur'an when you read the commands concerning marriage, adressed to the man.
salaam.
is jesus the redeemer?
I have often wondered if western leaders preaching about adopting democratic standards has forced proponents of alternative system of rule to become imbedded in their belief. I think bush and reegan before him are aware of the fact, knowing it will inhibit social\moral growth. A stable middle east can't benefit america.
Some have mentioned the treatment of women in Islam, but the hypocrisy is that women in the west are protrayed as whores in the media (the sun, zoo, nuts and other publications (and these are best selling)) aimed at men. The law is only now changing so that women have an equal share of monies in the event of a dirvorce. Law have had to be passed in order for women to be treated fairly in society, it isn't natural to western thinking.
Anyone watching 'north country' will take my point.
I think democracy is a universal constant, every nation's citzen would relish advocacy, but the bitter truth that democracy comes at a price, and some countries are unwilling\unable to pay the price.
I have often wondered if western leaders preaching about adopting democratic standards has forced proponents of alternative system of rule to become imbedded in their belief. I think bush and reegan before him are aware of the fact, knowing it will inhibit social\moral growth. A stable middle east can't benefit america.
Some have mentioned the treatment of women in Islam, but the hypocrisy is that women in the west are protrayed as whores in the media (the sun, zoo, nuts and other publications (and these are best selling)) aimed at men. The law is only now changing so that women have an equal share of monies in the event of a dirvorce. Law have had to be passed in order for women to be treated fairly in society, it isn't natural to western thinking.
Anyone watching 'north country' will take my point.
I think democracy is a universal constant, every nation's citzen would relish advocacy, but the bitter truth that democracy comes at a price, and some countries are unwilling\unable to pay the price.
zion said:
It does not conflict with Al Qur'an (it would not be in constitutions of Islamic nations if it would).
I referred to proselytisers who invade Islamic nations, even when they transgress the Law of the country they stealthly enter and even when their activities bring the people they approach in life-danger (think "Taliban" and you know what I talk about).
Most certainly you have a point in some cases, but not in mine. It is not about "being scared", it is first of all about being rightfully angry for the disruption of society and families such proselytisers aim to cause within Islamic nations and among Muslims.
Next I tend to conclude that humans who declare of themselves that God needs them to be known must be extremely deluded, extremely arrogant or extremely dumb. If you believe in God and then think and say God needs humans to be known, your belief must have some gaps of the size of the planet.
salaam.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Aldebaran said:
I don't think you're disagreeing with what I said.
What I said was that prima facie - on the face of it - giving greater rights to one human being as compared to another, is an inequality. However, there may be circumstances that attenuate that inequality.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Aldebaran said:
Prior to the Islamic conquest, much of North Africa, as well as Syria, Egypt, Asia Minor, were christian. They didn't subscribe to tribal religions.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
Aldebaran said:
Fair play, and thanks for replying. I know it's something I've asked for before and I accept that it might only be me that's interested and therefore a selfish request.
As background - before I worked for myself, my workplace was an example of every gender, disability, creed, nationality ... one of each lol. And all by accident, not design. We all pretty much liked each other and all rubbed along well day to day, never any personal/faith related shit happened. The muslim girl was pretty strict in her observances and cos she was/is tiny the ramadan season used to play havoc up her metabolism so we changed her hours with her approval so she'd work sun up, sun set then - she never used to inflict her views on anyone else, twas practicalities. It wasn't such a big thing - nothing was a big thing, we could be celebrating Easter or Diwali or anything, we had more celebrations in the year for us all to join in than you could shake a stick at.
When the anti Islam War On terror thing started there were loads of terrible examples of people just homing in on muslims that they'd worked next to for years and giving them severe grief about their religion - awful, nothing before 9/11 then these people were absolutely hounded as if they, personally, were responsible, their lives were made an absolute misery when the day before no-one had given their religion a second glance - because they were working with them and knew them in and out of work.
That's what I saw. That's what I still see now and it gets worse with every new battlefield - somewhere yonder and nothing to do with our muslim people in our country. Makes me sick. FFS, those people that just read and watch the media justification. Switch. It. Off.
Boogie Boy
Rockin' on the 1210s
Aldebaran said:
That has to be the funniest thing I've read in a while, it really is.
BB
Boogie Boy
Rockin' on the 1210s
cesare said:Fuck off
Why? Can you not recognise the inherent humour in the statement which I originally made reference to?
BB
taffboy gwyrdd
Embrace the confusion!
In the Tao Te Ching, Lao Tzu gives us the following wisdom:
Failing the Great Integrity (kind of living in harmony with / as "god")
We resort to virtuousness
Failing virtuousness we resort to moralizing.
Failing moralizing, we resort to dogma,
The most superficial form of faith and loyalty.
This gives us a 4 stage analysis with which to analyse those who have or profess some kind of spiritual faith.
Most established orthodox religions average between the lower 2 most of the time, at least in their outward face. Individuals may well achieve something higher.
Being a younger religion, and not having had anything like a parallel to "Christianity"'s reformation, Islam and its adherents DO tend to resort to moralizing and dogma all too quickly. But plenty Christians do to. Of all the religions, the monotheists are by far the most reactionary. Islamic reactionary thought is just newer to us, that's why it could be more annoying.
Failing the Great Integrity (kind of living in harmony with / as "god")
We resort to virtuousness
Failing virtuousness we resort to moralizing.
Failing moralizing, we resort to dogma,
The most superficial form of faith and loyalty.
This gives us a 4 stage analysis with which to analyse those who have or profess some kind of spiritual faith.
Most established orthodox religions average between the lower 2 most of the time, at least in their outward face. Individuals may well achieve something higher.
Being a younger religion, and not having had anything like a parallel to "Christianity"'s reformation, Islam and its adherents DO tend to resort to moralizing and dogma all too quickly. But plenty Christians do to. Of all the religions, the monotheists are by far the most reactionary. Islamic reactionary thought is just newer to us, that's why it could be more annoying.
Crispy said:
Oliver cromwell gave england democracy, even though it had institutions and traditions. The french revolution brought france liberty. Really what it takes is the will of the people. There isn't a problem with Islam teaching\law, as at one stage or another their practices were our own, and may be again.
muser said:
When did he do that?
When he drove the members out of Parliament, perhaps?
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Johnny Canuck2 said:
That isn't entirely true though - is it?
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
muser said:
How exacxtly do you 'give' democracy to a country? Cromwell was the focal point of an organisation that helped England become a Republic, and then bottled it when the Levellers attempted to use the reasoning that he'd encouraged within the NMA tried to hold him to his word.
It's weird - I've been watching 'History of Britain' on UK TV History, and it's amazing how at so many times in the last 1,000 years of history that this country could have embarked on a completely different future, but for me, it was Cromwell's suppression of the Levellers that is the key one - possibly also proof about the corrupting nature of power as well.
Anyway, I just get pissed at any faith that can't take someone else criticising it TBH...as for that article linked to earlier...file under tin foil hat...
Dissident Junk
picking oakum
Aldebaran said:
What, then, is a pre-Islamic woman if not a woman from that part of the peninsula? You go further South pre-650 and it is the Persian empire (largely Zoroastrian), further North and its the Byzantine empire (Christian). Who are these pre-Islamic women, if not the women of a couple of relatively small tribes?
Dissident Junk said:
The Arabian peninsula is not confined to the region of the hidjaz.
The very long and ancient history of the Arabian peninsula does not start with Islam and at no time of recorded history its population was confined to "a couple of relatively small tribes". (The history of the Arabian peninsula not being the subject of this thread you are free to make one if you are interested.)
salaam.
Similar threads
