Fantasea said:No fault divorce, available to all in the US is even easier. You can even buy a kit at many internet sites with all the forms and instructions.
My apologies, and I've got much more where that came from; especially on Muhammed and his under-aged bride Aisha (she was nine when he 'consumated' the marriage).akyron said:Wow Montalban that was a long post.
Thanks. I seem to be only able to write in the 'sledge-hammer' style of posting.akyron said:I wish you had just summarized and provided the links instead of swamping us. It was interesting though.
It's most often the case that apologists for Islam cite 'bad' Christians. For instance, I am aware that King John of England married an eleven year old (maybe 13's old). However NO ONE looks up to King John as an example of behaviour for all time. Muslims look to Muhammed.akyron said:Allow me to summarize:
Religious Fanatics=Nutballs
Be careful what you say:
Thanks for that. When you consider that all of the references are from English-speaking sites, I shudder to think of what's being passed off to Muslims in Arabic.akyron said:MY favorite part was the Fatwah of the week
example: I never knew that is not good to do istinja with your right hand, I have been trying note to use my left hand for Istinja, but I can't seem to reach the back area and clean myself properly with my left hand, so I then finish off with my right hand, is that ok, since I know I wasn't able to clean properly with my left? I'm so confused.
The answer is even funnier
akyron said:Is it acceptable in Islam, when husband divorcing his wife by just writing a statement of divorce without witness? Would not be necessary to have two witnesses when husband divorcing wife?
Nope. You have to say it as you write it. Cheaper than a lawyer eh?
Write I divorce <insert ex wife here>. Say" I divorce <insert ex-wife here."
Shoot her in the head if necessary. IE She puts up a fuss when you kick her out in the street.
Writing the word divorce is one of the metaphors of divorce, so divorce does not take effect [by writing it] unless it is accompanied by intention according to the view of most preponderant opinion of scholars, may Allaah have mercy on them. If someone writes the word divorce while uttering it, then it takes effect.
Well that was easy. Having witnesses is desirable though if you can get a couple of your buddies to come over and help you deal with her.
Nice religion. Not!
akyron said:I do not believe it can get much easier than writing it and saying it.
The woman need not be present or agree either.
I wonder what it was that caused women to be held in such low esteem in those days?bellisaurius said:By quaranic standards considering female testimony, the actual rule is:
"O believers, when you contract a debt one upon another for a stated term, write it down, and let a scribe write it down between you justly, and let not any scribe refuse to write it down, as God has taught him; so let him write, and let the debtor dictate, and let him fear God his Lord and not diminish anything of it.....And call in to witness two witnesses, men; or if the two be not men, then one man and two women, such witnesses as you approve of, that if one of the two errs the other will remind her; and let the witnesses not refuse, whenever they are summoned.....And fear God; God teaches you, and God has knowledge of everything. (emphasis added) (Q. 2:282) "
Which applies to a particular circumstance about property. In fact, it seems to apply in particular to a woman's memory (which is not a bad an implication as saying women aren't as important as men, merely more likely to forget. And what woman in america doesn't have the same feeling about men?). Later, in the hadith literature (kind of the commentary to the koran), a belief begins to show through (which, given hadith literature is given about the status of papal statements, isn't at the full level of scripture, means one can't hold it against the religion as against the person who wrote it and the culture that expounds on it) that women aren't as reliable in men in most court cases, which violates some rules about divorce that are in the koran.
Other religions seem to maintain text and practices that have a similar view of women. They may not neccessarily view them as less then men, but they still may veiw them as less reliable in certain circumstances. For example, women are not allowed to give evidence in rabbinical courts, or women aren't allowed to become priests, or that in the bible a woman couldn't be held for contracts made (see numbers30:2-15). This line has been a part of western jurisprudence until recently (and considering the line was about women living in their father's household, may have been an innapropriate use, much like the use of the quaranic statement as it became interpreted through existing custom),
26 X World Champs said:Do you have any clue how bigoted your last two posts were? It's comments like what you've written that makes all of our lives more dangerous...and prove again that that bigotry in the USA is equal to bigotry in all the countries that hate the USA....
bellisaurius said:By quaranic standards considering female testimony, the actual rule is:
"O believers, when you contract a debt one upon another for a stated term, write it down, and let a scribe write it down between you justly, and let not any scribe refuse to write it down, as God has taught him; so let him write, and let the debtor dictate, and let him fear God his Lord and not diminish anything of it.....And call in to witness two witnesses, men; or if the two be not men, then one man and two women, such witnesses as you approve of, that if one of the two errs the other will remind her; and let the witnesses not refuse, whenever they are summoned.....And fear God; God teaches you, and God has knowledge of everything. (emphasis added) (Q. 2:282) "
Which applies to a particular circumstance about property. In fact, it seems to apply in particular to a woman's memory (which is not a bad an implication as saying women aren't as important as men, merely more likely to forget. And what woman in america doesn't have the same feeling about men?). Later, in the hadith literature (kind of the commentary to the koran), a belief begins to show through (which, given hadith literature is given about the status of papal statements, isn't at the full level of scripture, means one can't hold it against the religion as against the person who wrote it and the culture that expounds on it) that women aren't as reliable in men in most court cases, which violates some rules about divorce that are in the koran.
bellisaurius said:Being an engineer, I get to work around a lot of Muslims, and so far they seem to have the traditional American macho talk about the wife at home, but in their actions they're about as whipped as the rest of us.
bellisaurius said:Wow, you guys pull out all the guns on this site, montalban. I think I'm going to like it here. It will take me a bit to respond to the breadth of your posts, but hopefully something comes out.
alienken said:Akyron, I think your on to something for two reasons. 1.I have days when I am stuck in a vehicle with no AC. All day in Houston traffic the heat doubles my road rage aggravation. By the end of the day I am looking for a reason to punch someone! 2. I like agreeing with people that 26x disagrees with.
I thought you were going to debate me on this! :2wave:bellisaurius said:Wow, you guys pull out all the guns on this site, montalban. I think I'm going to like it here. It will take me a bit to respond to the breadth of your posts, but hopefully something comes out.
And so you suggest converting them to Christianity? If it is ancient history, like that cited in the Koran, which you despise, look at the Christians' glorious and 'peaceful' history. The Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, nothing but peace and love, both of them. Do not be so quick to judge others based on their professed faith. Perhaps, instead of picking and choosing, it is time to admit it: all organized religion is, in the end, evil. People like the expression 'toeing the party line', but no one mentions toeing the religious line. Being bound by God, rather than man, is quite powerful, and most religions use this power to threaten its members, and in the end punishing free will. To pick and choose is simply a matter of faith, of belief. And it just so happens that you have chosen Christianity, a religion that is, in this case, your very tool of oppression.Montalban said:And to the topic at hand; regarding violence we can see that this ideal man, Muhammed spends much time talking of hate and war and violence.
"As for those who are slain in the cause of God, He will not allow their works to perish. ... He will admit them to the Paradise He has made known to them." (47:8 )
"Let those who would exchange the life of this world for the hereafter, fight for the cause of God; whether he dies or triumphs, We shall richly reward him. ... The true believers fight for the cause of God, but the infidels fight for the devil. Fight then against the friends of Satan ..." (4:74,76)
"The believers who stay at home (apart from those that suffer a grave impediment) are not the equals of those who fight for the cause of God with their goods and their persons. God has given those that fight with their goods and their persons a higher rank than those who stay at home ..." (4:95,96)
"Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. ... lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way ..." (9:5)
"Those that make war against God and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land. They shall be held up to shame in this world and sternly punished in the hereafter: except those that repent before you reduce them ..." (5:34,35)
"Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme" (8:39)
"Prophet, rouse the faithful to arms. If there are twenty steadfast men among you, they shall vanquish two hundred; and if there are a hundred, they shall rout a thousand unbelievers, for they are devoid of understanding." (8:65)
"Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given ... and do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (9:29)
"Allah's Apostle (Muhammed) said, 'Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords.'"
(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 4:52:73)
"Allah's Apostle (Muhammed) said, 'The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.'"
(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177)
"The Prophet (Muhammed) said: 'When the slave runs away from his master, his prayer is not accepted; he is an infidel.'"
(Hadith No. Muslim 32)
"The Prophet (Muhammed) said: 'Then go to the persons who do not join the congregational prayer and order their homes to be burnt...'"
(Hadith No. Muslim 234)
"Narrated 'Abdullah: Allah's Apostle (Muhammed) said, 'The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims.'"
(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 9:83:17)
"The Prophet (Muhammad) said: 'Do not stone the adulteress who is pregnant until she has had her child.' After the birth she was put into a ditch up to her chest and the Prophet commanded them to stone her. Khalid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and there spurted blood on the face of Khalid and he cursed her. The gentle Prophet prayed over her and she was buried."
(Hadith No. Muslim 682)
"Bani An-Nadir and Bani Quraiza fought, so the Prophet (Muhammad) exiled Bani An-Nadir and allowed Bani Quraiza to remain at their places. He then killed their men and distributed their women, children and property among the Muslims, but some of them came to the Prophet and he granted them safety, and they embraced Islam. He exiled all the Jews from Medina. They were the Jews of Bani Qainuqa', the tribe of 'Abdullah bin Salam and the Jews of Bani Haritha and all the other Jews of Medina."
(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 5:59:362)
"Narrated Anas: 'Some people from the tribe of 'Ukl came to the Prophet (Muhammed) and embraced Islam. The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the camels of charity and to drink, their milk and urine. They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment (became healthy) they turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away. The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were (caught and) brought, and the Prophet ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die.'"
(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 8:82:794)
There doesn't seem to be an Islamic equivalent of ‘turn the other cheek’, or ‘blessed are the peacemakers’. What about ‘love thy neighbour’? (Mat 5:43)*
One of the closes texts you’ll find is Sura 8:61
“But if they incline to peace, you also incline to it, and (put your) trust in Allah. Verily, He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower.”
http://www.quraan.com/index.aspx?tabindex=1&tabid=27&bid=8
This means, if your enemy has stopped fighting you, and you want to stop fighting, then okay, call a halt to hostilities.
The closest to 'love thy neighbour' are passages about how you should treat your 'brother' and by this they mean another Muslim.
"O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people." (Koran 5:51)
"O ye who believe! Take not for friends Unbelievers (non-Muslims) rather than believers: Do ye wish to offer Allah an open proof against yourselves?"
(Koran 4:144)
"Thou seest many of them turning in friendship to the Unbelievers (non-Muslims). Evil indeed are (the works) which their souls have sent forward before them (with the result), that Allah's wrath is on them, and in torment will they abide."
(Koran 5:80)
I must stress that these are teachings revered by Muslims! They saw it as clever that Muhammed massacred PoWs; that it was prudent that he order assassinations; that he was a real man that he slept with so many women!
Assassinations
During his live, Muhammed commended people who killed his personal enemies; one was a woman who lampooned him with witty poetry
"Muhammad And His Personal Enemies
Ka`b bin al-Ashraf
Sallam Ibn Abu'l-Huqayq (Abu Rafi)
Al-Nadr bin al-Harith
`Uqba bin Abi Mu`ayt
`Abdullah bin Ubai bin Salul al-`Aufi
Umaiya bin Khalaf Abi Safwan
`Amr b. Jihash
An anonymous man
Ibn Sunayna
Abd Allah Ibn Sa`d Ibn Abi Sarh
Abu `Afak
`Asma' Bint Marwan
The Meccan Ten:
Ikrimah Ibn Abi Jahl
Habbar Ibn al-Aswad
Miqyas Ibn Sababah al-Laythi
Abd Allah Ibn Sa`d Ibn Abi Sarh (more detail in the above article)
Al-Huwayrith Ibn Nuqaydh
Abd Abbah Ibn Hilal Ibn Khatal al-Adrami
Hind Bint Utbah
Sarah the mawlat of `Amr Ibn Hashim
Fartana
Qaribah
Al-Yusayr b. Rizam and Khalid b. Sufyan b. Nubayh
Ibn Sunayna"
http://www.answering-islam.org/Muhammad/Enemies/index.html
it is time to admit it: all organized religion is, in the end, evil.
Couldn't hurtanomaly said:And so you suggest converting them to Christianity?
It is a nonsense argument you propose. You are judging in fact mixing up two very different things; Christianity and Christians. Take someone I'll called "John Doe". He is a Christian. He goes out and kills 10 people. If you can cite which of Christ's teachings he used to 'justify' his actions, then you can examine Christianity by his actions, else it's as relevant as me claiming that the USA is against human life, based on the fact that some Americans have gone to war.anomaly said:If it is ancient history, like that cited in the Koran, which you despise, look at the Christians' glorious and 'peaceful' history. The Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, nothing but peace and love, both of them.
Ah, well here then we have the heart of your 'argument'; you're just anti-religious. So let's condemn all ideologies of faith, based on the fact that some members of these faiths do horrendous things.anomaly said:Do not be so quick to judge others based on their professed faith. Perhaps, instead of picking and choosing, it is time to admit it: all organized religion is, in the end, evil.
How is Christianity oppressive? Again it's a silly argument. The USA is a democracy. It bombs Iraq, therefore democracy is oppressive! That is the line of 'logic' you take (and in this case I use 'logic' in the most liberal of definitions). Cite me the teachings of Jesus you believe to be oppressive, and we can go on from there.anomaly said:People like the expression 'toeing the party line', but no one mentions toeing the religious line. Being bound by God, rather than man, is quite powerful, and most religions use this power to threaten its members, and in the end punishing free will. To pick and choose is simply a matter of faith, of belief. And it just so happens that you have chosen Christianity, a religion that is, in this case, your very tool of oppression.
Would you tolerate any of the following religious practices?anomaly said:For these reasons, I suggest that if we cannot abolish organized religion, we must completely tolerate the religions of others. The only ones who should be allowed to criticize a particular faith should be those who are believers in the said faith.
Well considering you make several unconnected leaps IMO, your in effect saying no one has the right to be critical of anyone else; except perhaps yourself?anomaly said:But Christians criticizing the faith of Islam is uncalled for, and it only hurts Christianity, as it attracts radical Muslims who only wish to destroy you. Quite unwise, IMO.
Voltaire said something on the same lines; something like "If there was no God, man would need to invent Him".vandree said:He is a wise man who invented God.
Plato
aquapub said:Sure, all Muslims aren't terrorists. All criminals aren't Democrats, but they almost always poll in favor Democrats, just as Muslim polls nearly always show overwhelming support for Bin Laden.
Remember Palestinians dancing in the streets on 9/11?
Islam is a bloody violent religion at its core. Unlike (YES I SAID UNLIKE) Christianity, violence doesn't come from misguided followers who miss the message. Islam TEACHES violence. If a Muslim slaughters an infidel, all it indicates is that they read the Koran.
aquapub said:Sure, all Muslims aren't terrorists. All criminals aren't Democrats, but they almost always poll in favor Democrats, just as Muslim polls nearly always show overwhelming support for Bin Laden.
Remember Palestinians dancing in the streets on 9/11?
Islam is a bloody violent religion at its core. Unlike (YES I SAID UNLIKE) Christianity, violence doesn't come from misguided followers who miss the message. Islam TEACHES violence. If a Muslim slaughters an infidel, all it indicates is that they read the Koran.
Religious intolerance is, my friend, perhaps the lowest thing we find in our society today. Plain and simple. Your mind is perverted by the very teachings you swear by, it is distorted by them, and your sense of cultural norms will obviously be quite different than one of another culture. Your lack of understanding is troubling.Montalban said:Couldn't hurt
It is a nonsense argument you propose. You are judging in fact mixing up two very different things; Christianity and Christians. Take someone I'll called "John Doe". He is a Christian. He goes out and kills 10 people. If you can cite which of Christ's teachings he used to 'justify' his actions, then you can examine Christianity by his actions, else it's as relevant as me claiming that the USA is against human life, based on the fact that some Americans have gone to war.
Conversely, by your rationale, we can't condemn Nazism based on the fact that an individual Nazi, such as Oskar Schilder was an exceptionally good person, who despite being a Nazi Party member of some years saved about 1,000 Jews.
Yours is a very mixed up rationale.
Ah, well here then we have the heart of your 'argument'; you're just anti-religious. So let's condemn all ideologies of faith, based on the fact that some members of these faiths do horrendous things.
Note in post 152 I didn't just 'pick and choose' Islamic text. I cited original Islamic text plus Islamic advice sites that are now giving advice on how Muslims should behave. Again this simple little fact (you overlooking this) makes your comments what they are. It is not a mere quote mine of taking scripture out of context; because I cited Muslims saying how these texts should be applied.
How is Christianity oppressive? Again it's a silly argument. The USA is a democracy. It bombs Iraq, therefore democracy is oppressive! That is the line of 'logic' you take (and in this case I use 'logic' in the most liberal of definitions). Cite me the teachings of Jesus you believe to be oppressive, and we can go on from there.
Would you tolerate any of the following religious practices?
suttee - carried out, but not exclusive to Hindus it is the practice of throwing a widow onto a funeral pyre of her late husband, so that she can continue to serve him in the next life
female genital mutilation - also known as clitorotomy, the practice of removing a girls clitoris in order to make her less likely to seek extra-marital sex; a practice done by many African and Middle Eastern cultures (not exclusive to Muslims)
paedophilia - The Children of God, aka "The Family" (arguably a 'cult' and not a religion) believe in 'free love' to the degree that children are initiated into sexual practices... all at the behest of their late founder.
Well considering you make several unconnected leaps IMO, your in effect saying no one has the right to be critical of anyone else; except perhaps yourself?
:2razz:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?