Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

On 12/14/2019 at 4:09 AM, Marocc said:

Veil is not necessary – hijab is. And just because someone somewhere who calls him-/herself Muslim does something doesn't make that something good/normal/correct.

No a hijab is not mandatory for being Muslim, are you a Salafi?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 295
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is a lie.

You can actually often tell a hell of a lot about someone by what they're wearing. At 83, or whatever you are, you should know this already.

You are engaging in a similar defective argument people make defending Trump. You try deflect from the  issue of Muslim extremism by raising criticism of  Western states' foreign policies and/or human

17 hours ago, Goddess said:

Turns out you are the liar.

So,  here is a woman who does not agree that Islam supports the beating of wives, and she provides support for her views, but you call her a liar. 

I would have thought that you'd be willing to support a Muslim woman who doesn't think spousal abuse is supportable in Islam, but no - you must have it your way, Islam is evil, Muslim men are evil, Muslim women are victims.  You aren't Muslim, you aren't a scholar and yet you seem to think you have the only "correct" version of Islamic teachings.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2019 at 1:09 AM, Marocc said:

Veil is not necessary – hijab is. And just because someone somewhere who calls him-/herself Muslim does something doesn't make that something good/normal/correct.

Dictating what women can or can't wear is just as wrong coming from Muslims as it is coming from non-Muslims.  Too many Muslims disagree with you about the necessity of hijab to let your claim that non-covering women aren't Muslim go unchallenged. 

You practice your faith your way, and let others practice their way.  God can sort things out in his own time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Goddess said:

Muhammad's fathers-in-law (Abu Bakr and Umar) amused him by slapping his wives (Aisha and Hafsa) for annoying him. According to the Hadith, the prophet of Islam laughed upon hearing this.

They did not do it to amuse him but because they felt the two women had done wrong. And again it is not a punishment where they are to inflict injury or pain, but a gesture to correct their behaviour.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2019 at 8:48 PM, Goddess said:

Yes, both women AND men are to dress modestly.  Yet only the instruction to women has given rise to many (and often quite brutal) interpretations.

Brutal?

I'm glad we agree on the modesty part. Now I'm sure even you can understand at least one problem with Samina Ali's speech.

Actually the dress of men is not a simple matter either, in my opinion, when it comes to what is modest enough and in what situation. The big difference is in that the definite rule on what constitutes men's awrah is agreed upon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2019 at 5:07 PM, Marocc said:

The Quran disagrees so you are still expected to provide a credible source. In case you want to argue regarding the Quran you are free to provide a credible source regarding it – such as tafser or professionally analyzed words and expressions within the Arabic text that could help prove your claim.

No, it doesn't. Here's what the Bible says, since you brought it up. 

It doesn't matter what the bible says. Christian churches prohibit violence against your wife and children. They have re-interpreted passages like the ones the defenders of Islam gleefully use to justify Islamic extremism. There has been no such reformation among Muslims, which is why beating your wife is still legal in Muslim states. We've even seen a court in the UAE giving instructions in how much you can beat your wife and children. http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/10/19/uae.court.ruling/index.html

There are almost no prosecutions for domestic violence in the Muslim world, and none, so far as I'm aware of, for domestic rape, which is not considered a crime.

Nor is wife beating and abuse the singular aspect of Islam which is straight out of medieval times. Christian churches oppose violence in all its forms, and don't even approve of the death penalty for mass murderers. Meanwhile people are executed in the Muslim world for blaspheme and adultery with the full blessing of Islam.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Argus said:

It doesn't matter what the bible says

No comment, but don't bring it up then.

51 minutes ago, Argus said:

Christian churches prohibit violence against your wife and children

So do mosques

52 minutes ago, Argus said:

They have re-interpreted passages

That's their shame

52 minutes ago, Argus said:

to justify Islamic extremism

I wonder what your definition of extremism is. Could it be.... Being a Muslim?

53 minutes ago, Argus said:

which is why beating your wife is still legal in Muslim states.

@Goddess is still busy delivering proof of a similar claim. Maybe you can spare her the trouble and do it yourself.

54 minutes ago, Argus said:

There are almost no prosecutions for domestic violence in the Muslim world, and none, so far as I'm aware of, for domestic rape, which is not considered a crime.

Sources? Reasoning? Anything?

55 minutes ago, Argus said:

Christian churches oppose violence in all its forms, and don't even approve of the death penalty for mass murderers.

Ok.

57 minutes ago, Argus said:

Meanwhile people are executed in the Muslim world for blaspheme and adultery with the full blessing of Islam.

So long as it is according to Islam.

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Marocc said:

I wonder what your definition of extremism is. Could it be.... Being a Muslim?

Pretty much, though he'll never admit it.  You wear a hijab, you're an extremist.  You attend mosque, you're an extremist.  You object to painting all Muslims as terrorists, rapists, misogynists - a progressive extremist.  

Edited by dialamah
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Marocc said:

Never said that. Would mean nothing to you since you don't know what it means.

Yes you did write a hijab was mandatory.

And yes you are indeed a Salafi, the most backward of the biggest Muslim cults.

Edited by QuebecOverCanada
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

Yes you did write a hijab was mandatory.

And yes you are indeed a Salafi, the most backward of the biggest Muslim cults.

I suppose if the hijab wasn't mandatory they wouldn't be throwing women into prison in Iran for not wearing one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dialamah said:

Pretty much, though he'll never admit it.  You wear a hijab, you're an extremist.  You attend mosque, you're an extremist.  You object to painting all Muslims as terrorists, rapists, misogynists - a progressive extremist.  

If you believe the basic tenets of Islam about the way to treat unbelievers, women, homosexuals, etc., then yes, you're an extremist who shouldn't be in a secular, democratic society. That's because the basic tenets of Islam are themselves extremist. There is nothing ISIS is doing that Mohamed didn't do.

This is not rocket science. Only ideologues who can't bring themselves to countenance any criticism of non-Christian religions would argue about this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Argus said:

There is nothing ISIS is doing that Mohamed didn't do.

I know many of you aren't big on providing sources for your claims, but I urge you to provide 1 that says the Prophet Muhammad (Sallaa lahu alayhi wa sallam) ever burned anyone alive or approved of such action.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Argus said:

Only ideologues who can't bring themselves to countenance any criticism of non-Christian religions would argue about this.

:blink:

Not sure if I understand the sentence, but the end sounds vague to say the least. Who wouldn't argue with it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I suppose if the hijab wasn't mandatory they wouldn't be throwing women into prison in Iran for not wearing one.

That's not true of course. Not all laws applied by Islamic countries are applied according to Islam.

7 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

Yes you did write a hijab was mandatory.

But I didn't say not wearing one makes an individual a non-Muslim. Do you know why?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Announcements




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...