Mohammed book banned

[Vintage Paw]

The Satanic Versus likely wouldn't have been published today. I find it pretty fucking sad, tbh.

 

[Fictionist]

Sounds like I support their freedom to read it or use it as bog roll to me.
Like I said I don't give a toss what they do with it.

As for you, Mr Fictionist, Harry Potter it is not. No fucker will ever read it.

I think you misunderstood me, and 'popular opinion' as regards a book is not of any consequence.

 

[Fictionist]

Mohammedan SC India: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammedan_Sporting_Club
Mohammedan SC London: http://www.mohammedan.co.uk/index2.html
Mohammedan as a term: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammedan

From what some are saying the two sporting clubs linked to above have made a mistake in misunderstanding the correct name for their religion, and according to some have effectively called themselves "niggers". Unlikely at best.

The point is that the term appears to have been used predominantly by non-Muslims, and not by Muslims themselves. I find the use of Wikipedia and reference to football clubs unconvincing as the basis for an argument which might suggest otherwise.

 

[Aldebaran]

I think we should set up a fund to buy a copy for JHE as soon as the thing is published.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

About "Mohammeddan".
It is introduced by Christian (or Christianity-influenced) Orientalists of an other century who had no clue that in Islam the Prophet is not worshiped like Christians worship Jesus. The basis for it is ignorance about Islam but I don't think that was with the same bad intentions the word got used later on.
JHE is addicted to it. It makes him and everyone who still uses it a fossil. That's all.

salaam.

 

[Fictionist]

I think we should set up a fund to buy a copy for JHE as soon as the thing is published.

salaam.

And a copy of 'The Life of Muhammad' by Ibn Ishaq, just to help make sense of it all.

 

[scooter]

Just getting back to the subject of Ayesha for a second. It's fairly irrelevant what her age was. Back in 7th century Arabia such child betrothals were fairly common. What Muhammed did was just the norm of the time in which he lived. Child brides didn't necessarily have sex with the man, they were just "betrothed" to him for some point in the future.

The hadith are not exact on her age (somewhat contradictory) but whichever end of the spectrum it is - 6 or 16 - doesn't really matter because either way it was not uncommon in those times.

There may be many things on which you can bash islam (excessive authoritarianism, overly militaristic) but not that.

 

[Fictionist]

^


Your evidence?

 

[scooter]

mm? don't understand the question?

 

[Fictionist]

You stated that such marriages were the norm. You also stated that such a situation was not indicative of a relationship being sexual. What evidence do you have to support such assertions?

 

[scooter]

What evidence do I have for child marriages being common in pre-islamic Arabia?

Well I'd have to get back to you on the specifics, but how about we just take for granted the word of pretty much every historian who's ever written on the subject?

I think you'll find it's pretty common knowledge.

 

[Fictionist]

It is reliance on such generalities that worries me, the lack of any reference to original sources (such as exist).

 

[scooter]

Out of interest, what are you saying then?

That such marriages were rare and that Mohammed was alone in going this route?

 

[Fictionist]

I would suggest that there is scope for greater research into the subject, that there are differences regarding the conclusions reached regarding the available texts and archaeological evidence, that there is still scope for research, and that the accepted 'Islamic historiography' is open to question on every level.

 

[scooter]

mmm fortunately we don't have to rely on islamic versions of history which are, as you say, susceptible to bias on occasion. Even our modern secular western investigations into the history of pre-islamic Arabia support the conclusion that child marriages such as the one Muhammed engaged in were common at the time.

Google it tomorrow for half an hour if you can be bothered. I'm not saying anything all that controversial.

 

[Fictionist]

I don't 'Google' - I search for (and read) 'original sources' whenever possible.

And you should do the same.

 

[isvicthere?]

Well, maybe a british publisher will pick it up.

I won't hold my breath.

Or maybe a Canadian publisher?

 

[Agent Sparrow]

I don't 'Google' - I search for (and read) 'original sources' whenever possible.

And you should do the same.

You can get loads of academic sources on google you know.

 

[Fictionist]

You can get loads of academic sources on google you know.

It can be useful. I think that my orginal post doesn't read particularly well (and might be deemed a little rude or dismissive).

 

[Darios]

Does anyone else see the word 'nigger' there? Might just be me, then.

Yep it's just you.

*wipes tear*

Yet more Urban gold. This one's getting bookmarked.

 

[Kinsbergen]

About "Mohammeddan".
It is introduced by Christian (or Christianity-influenced) Orientalists of an other century who had no clue that in Islam the Prophet is not worshiped like Christians worship Jesus.

Calvinists don't worship John Calvin, so why should "Mohammedan" imply the worship of Mohammed?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Go away, L&L.

 

[Fictionist]

What FM said!