Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(July 5, 2011 at 11:49 am)Rayaan Wrote: It is certainly degrading to the woman. But that's the point. When you do something really bad, a disciplinary action is allowed for those things which are mentioned in the Quran, such as this. But you can also forgive her.
I'm glad you raised the romance angle Rayaan. I think that's a very challenging view to westerners. They just can't compute it.
Yes there are similar exhaltations in the bible, but these are secular practices seen as applicable in the culture of the time but always open to interpretation. Because it's in the text and therefore you don't think about it - that's anti god in my view. It's religion over observance. Works over faith. Words over what you're really thinking. I don't think God want's empty rituals... I don't see how that is doing anything that would please him.
Forgiveness is civilized, and in my opinion secularism could never justify forgiveness over retribution.
July 5, 2011 at 1:35 pm (This post was last modified: July 5, 2011 at 1:36 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(July 5, 2011 at 12:08 pm)Rayaan Wrote: Yeah, the Quran doesn't have a verse which specifically says that the wife can strike her husband. But it does not prohibit such a thing either.
Islam ensures equality between men and women. What it does not provide is identicality. Modern cultures enforces identicality on men and women. Men and women are not identical. They are different, have always been, and will always be different. The psychological pressure that modern society leverages on women to mimic men and become identical to them has destroyed many a women's life forcing them into situations against their very innate nature. Islam ensures that there is equality between sexes, even though the roles may be different. It ensures that in areas where women are natural leaders, men play a supporting role and it ensures that in areas where men are natural leaders, women play a supporting role.
I'm absolutely speechless here. I don't think we have any grounds for a discussion beyond this point with regards to this issue.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
(July 5, 2011 at 12:08 pm)Rayaan Wrote: Islam ensures equality between men and women. What it does not provide is identicality. Modern cultures enforces identicality on men and women. Men and women are not identical. They are different, have always been, and will always be different. The psychological pressure that modern society leverages on women to mimic men and become identical to them has destroyed many a women's life forcing them into situations against their very innate nature. Islam ensures that there is equality between sexes, even though the roles may be different. It ensures that in areas where women are natural leaders, men play a supporting role and it ensures that in areas where men are natural leaders, women play a supporting role.
So, its societies fault that women want not to be beaten, and because men and women are different, the man is justified hitting a woman when he knows better? If Islam ensured equality, there would be no mention whatsoever of it being okay to hit women, which you have already stated the Quran does. If Islam ensures equality, then why does the Quran not say it's okay for the woman to hit the man? You can dress it up as religion all you want but sexism is sexism. The fact that you keep making excuses for such sexism is quite telling though.
I'm curious, do you believe it's okay to hit a woman, or are you just making an inept attempt to justify your holy verses?
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
July 5, 2011 at 3:19 pm (This post was last modified: July 5, 2011 at 3:32 pm by Judas BentHer.)
(July 4, 2011 at 11:34 pm)Rhythm Wrote: lol, I'm only saying that Julian gave it a go, with regards to attempting some civility towards the christians of his day. It didn't work out, especially for him, obviously. Can you give me that?
I surely can.
Quote: That this token effort does not stand up to our very much improved concept of civility is obvious, and expected. None the less, it was an effort.
True. It will forever remain in history as that example, at the very least. The effort and no matter even if it enjoyed a peripheral success, was a success none the less no matter the degree. Julian had a lot of guts.
Quote:missing words are the bane of my existence btw.
Sucks, doesn't it? Especially when the "edited" message at the top of my post makes it so obvious and gives me away.Reminding me with a message in it's own right; shoulda not been so optimistic all the words were there and proof read instead, dummy.
Quote:I'm going to rephrase my argument here, not so much for you, but as is my habit, for lurkers (who outnumber us)...
*waves to reading lurkers*
Per the rest of your observation below this excerpt, well said.
(July 5, 2011 at 11:49 am)Rayaan Wrote: In short, I'll say this for now:
People who profess the Islamic faith do commit mistakes. Many have committed atrocities, but just as your attitude towards them is not (necessarily) representative of reality, neither is their attitude (necessarily) representative of Islam.
It's my personal opinion of that what you admit in your own words are mistakes and atrocities committed by some Muslims, that addresses what those particular individuals interpret from the Koran and that does inspire their committing mistakes and atrocities that are demonstrated in reality. So what are you talking about? Except to apologize and excuse certain Muslims mistakes and atrocities by claiming it's not representative of Islam!
When Imam's, you do know what those are, address the public at large and most especially speak to those Muslims listening, and profess violence, Fatwah, etc... is necessary, right, correct, a duty, part of the struggle (Jihad) are we suppose to ignore that?
Or is there to be another excuse that that is not representative of Islam?
You'll do well to understand that many people here know the history of Islam. And apologize, make excuses, claim attrocities are not representative of Islam as you like, it doesn't serve the truth of the matter of what is the history of Islam as represented by those claiming to be Muslim and as such representatives of Islam.
"In life you can never be too kind or too fair; everyone you meet is carrying a heavy load. When you go through your day expressing kindness and courtesy to all you meet, you leave behind a feeling of warmth and good cheer, and you help alleviate the burdens everyone is struggling with."
Brian Tracy
(July 4, 2011 at 10:00 pm)Judas BentHer Wrote: And yet Julian's Paganism was more in keeping with Hellenistic Paganism, even though he was raised in the Christian tradition he stepped away and thus became an apostate. While his uncle, Constantine, professed himself a Christian after a vision of a cross in the sky just before a battle that he claimed was delivered as a sign along with a psychic message that where that symbol preceded his armies he would not suffer defeat, even Constantine remained a Pagan throughout his life. Converting unto Christianity only on his death bed. A bit of Pascal's wager, one would think.
That's the story, anyway. Unfortunately....
Quote:It is admitted on all sides, however, that Constantine's vision
of the cross is probably not historically true. The only
authority from whom the story has been gathered by historians is
Eusebius, who confessedly was prone to edification and was
accused as a "falsifier of history."
Xtians controlled the books. Another most likely made up story is that of the fucking pope turning back Attila the Hun from Rome in 452. Rome in 452 was no longer the capital of even the Western Empire ( it had been moved to Ravenna in northern Italy decades earlier) and moreover Rome had been thoroughly sacked by the Goths in 410 and must not have looked like a very inviting prize. But these are xtians and not above lying after all.
(July 5, 2011 at 1:46 pm)FaithNoMore Wrote: If Islam ensures equality, then why does the Quran not say it's okay for the woman to hit the man?
The reason why the Quran only speaks on the men's role in striking a wife because it was the women that were normally on the receiving end, not the men.
In early times, men were seeking ways against woman in marriage prior to Islam including the maltreatment of them. That's why the Quran is only addressing the male context of abuse, especially in regards to women that did not need to be addressed, and also tells the men not to pull the trigger too quickly as it says, "[first] advise them," and if they persist, then "forsake them in bed" for a period of time, and if they still persist, only then you may "hit or strike lightly" (in a disciplinary manner). Then the Quran says, "But if they obey you, do not seek a way against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand" (Surah 4:34). So, this is a warning to the men to be careful in not abusing their powers because they are the ones who used to perpetrate the action most of the time, not the women. That's why the Quran is limiting only the husband's role by setting up such a valid course of action as mentioned in the verse above.
Quote:The reason why the Quran only speaks on the men's role in striking a wife because it was the women that were normally on the receiving end, not the men.
And the men who wrote that bullshit had a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
The reason why the Quran only speaks on the men's role in striking a wife because it was the women that were normally on the receiving end, not the men.
In early times, men were seeking ways against woman in marriage prior to Islam including the maltreatment of them. That's why the Quran is only addressing the male context of abuse, especially in regards to women that did not need to be addressed, and also tells the men not to pull the trigger too quickly as it says, "[first] advise them," and if they persist, then "forsake them in bed" for a period of time, and if they still persist, only then you may "hit or strike lightly" (in a disciplinary manner). Then the Quran says, "But if they obey you, do not seek a way against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand" (Surah 4:34). So, this is a warning to the men to be careful in not abusing their powers because they are the ones who used to perpetrate the action most of the time, not the women. That's why the Quran is limiting only the husband's role by setting up such a valid course of action as mentioned in the verse above.
Why is it that the word of Allah doesn't completely condemn the violence? Why is the holy word of an omnipotent being so flawed?
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Because Faith, sometimes you just have to slap a bitch, everyone knows that.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
(July 5, 2011 at 1:46 pm)FaithNoMore Wrote: If Islam ensures equality, then why does the Quran not say it's okay for the woman to hit the man?
The reason why the Quran only speaks on the men's role in striking a wife because it was the women that were normally on the receiving end, not the men.
I thought Islamic law was good in ALL times. If that's the case then they should've put something in there about women. DERP.
*waves to reading lurkers* 
