How peaceful is Islam?

Siorac said:
I don't think this is an acceptable viewpoint in Islam. Isn't the Koran supposed to be the word of God, true and timelessly valid in its entirety?

If it is acceptable and the religion and its texts are under scrutiny to grow and change with time, that's great.
Click to expand...

Not really, look at the ruling over nail polish. When the quran was revealed there was no ayat/hadees about if you can perform wudu or not while having nail polish on, that was decided later(because nail polish didnt exist back then). The way I view it is the same with Ayesha, if she was considered an adult back then(along with other 9 year olds) then am fine with the marriage. If she wasnt and was an exception, then its sick and wrong.

and as uzz has said, various sources give her age from 9-13 as well.

See @Silva this is how you actually converse.
 
MJJ said:
ummm wanna expand on that?
Click to expand...

Are you saying an anti Jewish conspiracy hasn't plagued the world for centuries?

You need to have a rethink. Jews have been accused of some insane things by Muslims and Christians. Sacrificing children etc. This is before the modern ones, such as Jews control the world etc...

Its all kinds of crazy, the peioke who push this stuff are dangerous and it's often by religious nuts or the very worst people, conspiracy theorists.
 
UnitedinRed said:
Are you saying an anti Jewish go spiracy hasn't plagued the world for centuries?

You need to have a rethink. Jews have been accused of some insane things by Muslims and Christians. Sacrificing children etc. This is before the modern ones, such as Jews control the world etc...

Its all kinds of crazy, the peioke who push this stuff are dangerous and it's often by religious nuts or the very worst people, conspiracy theorists.
Click to expand...

I just want some proof considering you believe that women cant walk around alone in pakistan.
 
Silva said:
He fecked a 9 year old girl. Would you be okay with Mo fecking your daughter at the age of 9? If Allah's giving out exceptions to feck 9 year old girls, I'd really rather go to hell than be near the arsehole.
Click to expand...
Pretty much everyone else in this thread is capable of debating this maturely. I think it's time for you to grow up and decide how you want to articulate yourself going forward.

Either way, we're done debating.
 
LeChuck said:
Pretty much everyone else in this thread is capable of debating this maturely. I think it's time for you to grow up and decide how you want to articulate yourself going forward.

Either way, we're done debating.
Click to expand...

Thats way more mature then my response to him, think I need to do the same in the future.
 
MJJ said:
Not really, look at the ruling over nail polish. When the quran was revealed there was no ayat/hadees about if you can perform wudu or not while having nail polish on, that was decided later(because nail polish didnt exist back then). The way I view it is the same with Ayesha, if she was considered an adult back then(along with other 9 year olds) then am fine with the marriage. If she wasnt and was an exception, then its sick and wrong.

See @Silva this is how you actually converse.
Click to expand...

Sorry but you're fine with it only because you believe you will be punished by a higher power if you didn't agree with it. If you were looking at it without bias, I refuse to accept you would think it was fine.
 
MJJ said:
Not really, look at the ruling over nail polish. When the quran was revealed there was no ayat/hadees about if you can perform wudu or not while having nail polish later, that was decided later. The way I view it is the same with Ayesha, if she was considered an adult back then(along with other 9 year olds) then am fine with the marriage. If she wasnt and was an exception, then its sick and wrong.

See @Silva this is how you actually converse.
Click to expand...
Nail polish didn't exist back then, 9-year-olds, however, did. They were children, even back then. They weren't anywhere close to being a full-grown adult and a healthy male would not find them sexually desirable, no matter what arbitrary conventions contemporary society had.

In my opinion, Muhammad was either a paedophile and that's not nice; or he married for pure political reasons. Neither is an act of an infallible prophet, in my opinion. This is, honestly, why it's a bit easier to relate to Christianity than Islam: at least their cult figure is actually godlike and leads by example, even if he's just made up (as far as I'm aware there's no conclusion among historians whether Jesus really existed or he's just an amalgamation of several different figures).
 
MJJ said:
I just want some proof considering you believe that women cant walk around alone in pakistan.
Click to expand...

That was someone else.

Proof? There is none. That's the whole point! It's paranoia at its very worst and inciting hatred.

Are you denying the anti Jewish conspiracy?
 
UnitedinRed said:
Are you saying an anti Jewish conspiracy hasn't plagued the world for centuries?

You need to have a rethink. Jews have been accused of some insane things by Muslims and Christians. Sacrificing children etc. This is before the modern ones, such as Jews control the world etc...

Its all kinds of crazy, the peioke who push this stuff are dangerous and it's often by religious nuts or the very worst people, conspiracy theorists.
Click to expand...
Anti-semitism isn't anti-Jewish conspiracy. The former exists and has been for centuries, the latter doesn't.
 
UnitedinRed said:
Sorry but you're fine with it only because you believe you will be punished by a higher power if you didn't agree with it. If you were looking at it without bias, I refuse to accept you would think it was fine.
Click to expand...

Erm not really, otherwise I would think homosexuality is wrong as well which I dont.

Siorac said:
Nail polish didn't exist back then, 9-year-olds, however, did. They were children, even back then. They weren't anywhere close to being a full-grown adult and a healthy male would not find them sexually desirable, no matter what arbitrary conventions contemporary society had.

In my opinion, Muhammad was either a paedophile and that's not nice; or he married for pure political reasons. Neither is an act of an infallible prophet, in my opinion. This is, honestly, why it's a bit easier to relate to Christianity than Islam: at least their cult figure is actually godlike and leads by example, even if he's just made up (as far as I'm aware there's no conclusion among historians whether Jesus really existed or he's just an amalgamation of several different figures).
Click to expand...

Again, there is no real proof for this. I have pointed out that kids as young as eleven used to war back then so they were considered adults. The age when a person hit puberty is twelve right now, I believe. So its not that much of a stretch to believe she was considered an adult back then.

From what we know of his life, I find either hard to believe. He was known as trustworthy and truthful among the quraish before he became a prophet, thats not the act of someone who would marry for pure political reasons or is an paedo.
 
MJJ said:
Not really, look at the ruling over nail polish. When the quran was revealed there was no ayat/hadees about if you can perform wudu or not while having nail polish on, that was decided later(because nail polish didnt exist back then). The way I view it is the same with Ayesha, if she was considered an adult back then(along with other 9 year olds) then am fine with the marriage. If she wasnt and was an exception, then its sick and wrong.

and as uzz has said, various sources give her age from 9-13 as well.

See @Silva this is how you actually converse.
Click to expand...

I think what @Silva and the others are saying here, is that human biology hasn't changed enough in that time for that position to be credible now. If anything, people are developing and maturing faster than before. Therefore, if it isn't acceptable now for a nine year old to marry and have sex then it should not have been then either. It doesn't matter whether back then she was considered an 'adult' or not, because physically she wouldn't be different from how nine year olds are now in the 21st century. That's before you start talking about the actual ability to consent and all that other stuff that @Eboue earlier pointed out.
 
UnitedinRed said:
That was someone else.

Proof? There is none. That's the whole point! It's paranoia at its very worst and inciting hatred.

Are you denying the anti Jewish conspiracy?
Click to expand...

You have no proof that there is an anti-jewish conspiracy going on for centuries? Shouldnt there be some sort of proof given that its being going on for centuries and even you know of it?
 
Siorac said:
Nail polish didn't exist back then, 9-year-olds, however, did. They were children, even back then. They weren't anywhere close to being a full-grown adult and a healthy male would not find them sexually desirable, no matter what arbitrary conventions contemporary society had.

In my opinion, Muhammad was either a paedophile and that's not nice; or he married for pure political reasons. Neither is an act of an infallible prophet, in my opinion. This is, honestly, why it's a bit easier to relate to Christianity than Islam: at least their cult figure is actually godlike and leads by example, even if he's just made up (as far as I'm aware there's no conclusion among historians whether Jesus really existed or he's just an amalgamation of several different figures).
Click to expand...
Voila. Abu-Bekr (Aysha's father) was a very good friend of Muhammad (and the first person outside of Muhammad's family who became Muslim) but he was also a very powerful tribe leader. Aysha was as close to princess as it was possible back then in Arabia. With that marriage, Muhammad and Abu-Bekr cemented their friendship. And Abu-Bakr became the first Muslim caliph after Muhammad's death.

While it can be argued that it was a common thing to do back then (and indeed it was, especially if Aysha was 12-13 years old, instead of 9 - see Daenerys Targaryan), it definitely doesn't look like the act of an infallible prophet, and a person who was purified in that way that he was unable to do sin.
 
Amethyst said:
I think what @Silva and the others are saying here, is that human biology hasn't changed enough in that time for that position to be credible now. If anything, people are developing and maturing faster than before. Therefore, if it isn't acceptable now for a nine year old to marry and have sex then it should not have been then either. It doesn't matter whether back then she was considered an 'adult' or not, because physically she wouldn't be different from how nine year olds are now in the 21st century. That's before you start talking about the actual ability to consent and all that other stuff that @Eboue earlier pointed out.
Click to expand...

Thats why I said if, I also dont think thats necessarily true. There is a lot we dont know about past civilizations and I believe that children being considered adults at 18/21 is a quite new concept. It wasnt so in the past.
 
Amethyst said:
I think what @Silva and the others are saying here, is that human biology hasn't changed enough in that time for that position to be credible now. If anything, people are developing and maturing faster than before. Therefore, if it isn't acceptable now for a nine year old to marry and have sex then it should not have been then either. It doesn't matter whether back then she was considered an 'adult' or not, because physically she wouldn't be different from how nine year olds are now in the 21st century. That's before you start talking about the actual ability to consent and all that other stuff that @Eboue earlier pointed out.
Click to expand...
I'm saying the Abrahamic god is a sick bastard. The amount of revolting things he did the old testament and the Quran should be enough to disqualify him from worship. He should be a devil figure in world culture, a sick, twisted being who is willing to order rape and genocide to people who won't suck his dick on a daily basis. He's an egomaniacal, narcissistic and insecure little baby. To think almost half the world wants to spend eternity with him is bewildering.
 
Revan said:
Voila. Abu-Bekr (Aysha's father) was a very good friend of Muhammad (and the first person outside of Muhammad's family who became Muslim) but he was also a very powerful tribe leader. Aysha was as close to princess as it was possible back then in Arabia. With that marriage, Muhammad and Abu-Bekr cemented their friendship. And Abu-Bakr became the first Muslim caliph after Muhammad's death.

While it can be argued that it was a common thing to do back then (and indeed it was, especially if Aysha was 12-13 years old, instead of 9 - see Daenerys Targaryan), it definitely doesn't look like the act of an infallible prophet, and a person who was purified in that way that he was unable to do sin.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but this is pure garbage.

There are irrefutable instances of the closeness of Abu Bakr (RA) and the Prophet (SAWS) long before Aisha (RA) was even born. There are reams and reams of it, in fact.

And there are political marriages, but this definitely wasn't one of them.
 
Siorac said:
Anti-semitism isn't anti-Jewish conspiracy. The former exists and has been for centuries, the latter doesn't.
Click to expand...

:lol: Of course it doesn't.

And anti semitism (doesn't apply to any Semitic race bar Jews as the term was coined in the 19th century to relate specifically to Jews) is the same thing.
 
MJJ said:
You have no proof that there is an anti-jewish conspiracy going on for centuries? Shouldnt there be some sort of proof given that its being going on for centuries and even you know of it?
Click to expand...

Conspiracy theories like religion require no proof. Which bit are you struggling with?

Its kind of the point.
 
UnitedinRed said:
Conspiracy theories like religion require no proof. Which bit are you struggling with?

Its kind of the point.
Click to expand...

Right now, am kind of struggling with how someone can believe women arent allowed to walk in Pakistan and that there has been an anti-jewish conspiracy going back centuries.
 
MJJ said:
Also, it was you :lol:
Click to expand...

I was referring to more than freedom of movement. I based it on a fairly extensive bit of research done by The US in 1994 regarding life in Pakistan. In regards to freedon movement of movement, it stated that in major cities its not a problem but in rural Pakistan, it was.

The education stuff was based on official stats. It doesn't calculate rates for men only so a comparison couldn't be made.
 
MJJ said:
Right now, am kind of struggling with how someone can believe women arent allowed to walk in Pakistan and that there has been an anti-jewish conspiracy going back centuries.
Click to expand...

So now they're not allowed to walk at all? How do they get about?
 
UnitedinRed said:
I was referring to more than freedom of movement. I based it on a fairly extensive bit of research done by The US in 1994 regarding life in Pakistan. In regards to freedon movement of movement, it stated that in major cities its not a problem but in rural Pakistan, it was.

The education stuff was based on official stats. It doesn't calculate rates for men only so a comparison couldn't be made.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you know this, but the data you're using is 21 years old.
 
UnitedinRed said:
I was referring to more than freedom of movement. I based it on a fairly extensive bit of research done by The US in 1994 regarding life in Pakistan. In regards to freedon movement of movement, it stated that in major cities its not a problem but in rural Pakistan, it was.

The education stuff was based on official stats. It doesn't calculate rates for men only so a comparison couldn't be made.
Click to expand...

erm times have changed a bit dude, even in rural pakistan its not that much of an issue. And both males and females are allowed the same rights in education under islam although females tend to be married at a younger age but thats an asian problem, not a religious one.

UnitedinRed said:
So now they're not allowed to walk at all? How do they get about?
Click to expand...

:lol: I couldnt be bothered writing it all again.
 
MJJ said:
erm times have changed a bit dude, even in rural pakistan its not that much of an issue. And both males and females are allowed the same rights in education under islam although females tend to be married at a younger age but thats an asian problem, not a religious one.



:lol: I couldnt be bothered writing it all again.
Click to expand...

And that's a good thing pal. Hopefully it continues to other marginalises groups across the region.
 
UnitedinRed said:
No way? Serious.

Of course I do, it was the only data available.
Click to expand...

Wouldnt it be better asking any of the posters here rather than going on out-dated information or worse repeating it? We have a very diverse group afterall.

Although this is exactly the problem with this place at times, you had a fixed viewpoint about Islam in your mind and googled information to confirm it rather than actually learning.
 
UnitedinRed said:
No way? Serious.

Of course I do, it was the only data available.
Click to expand...
Well, interestingly enough, this brings me back to my earlier point to you in this thread. You can't make sweeping generalisations on half assed dated research an pass them as substantiated fact, on an environment that has changed significantly in even just the last 5 or so years. The fact that this needs to be pointed out to you is especially galling.
 
MJJ said:
Wouldnt it be better asking any of the posters here rather than going on out-dated information or worse repeating it? We have a very diverse group afterall.

Although this is exactly the problem with this place at times, you had a fixed viewpoint about Islam in your mind and googled information to confirm it rather than actually learning.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
UnitedinRed said:
And that's a good thing pal. Hopefully it continues to other marginalises groups across the region.
Click to expand...

Not just for them, personally I think women rights can be a lot better in the Asian countries but that doesnt have a lot to do with religion. The worse is when men treat them as objects and actually consider staring at women a past-time. Still these things will change with time, hopefully.
 
MJJ said:
Wouldnt it be better asking any of the posters here rather than going on out-dated information or worse repeating it? We have a very diverse group afterall.

Although this is exactly the problem with this place at times, you had a fixed viewpoint about Islam in your mind and googled information to confirm it rather than actually learning.
Click to expand...

Not really. Individual views don't really tell you a lot in all fairness. If you were to ask me about East Lancs for example, I would probably make it sound worse than Pakistan for example.
 
UnitedinRed said:
Not really. Individual views don't really tell you a lot in all fairness. If you were to ask me about East Lancs for example, I would probably make it sound worse than Pakistan for example.
Click to expand...

:lol: still better than a study from 1994 dude! And dont bet on it, am very criticial about Pakistan to my friends :lol:
 
UnitedinRed said:
Thats not really the problem is it? Its those posters who shout down any kind of debate on religion. That chap yesterday for example.
Click to expand...

Thats the other extreme which I dont like, religion should be open to debate. Thats the only way we can build understanding and move forward as people.
 
LeChuck said:
Well, interestingly enough, this brings me back to my earlier point to you in this thread. You can't make sweeping generalisations on half assed dated research an pass them as substantiated fact, on an environment that has changed significantly in even just the last 5 or so years. The fact that this needs to be pointed out to you is especially galling.
Click to expand...

This was pretty extensive tbh.

Do you have a more recent study, as opinion doesn't hold much weight? I don't doubt its improved ten fold though. Be interesting to know.
 
UnitedinRed said:
Thats not really the problem is it? Its those posters who shout down any kind of debate on religion. That chap yesterday for example.
Click to expand...
Of course it's the problem. You have an agenda, you do a 1 min google, post the first thing you see and think it's fact. There's no debate to be had with that kind of laziness and ignorance.

The guy yesterday had good intentions, and he made some valid points in another thread (which weren't about Islamophobia but about the ramifications of colonialism).
 
LeChuck said:
Of course it's the problem. You have an agenda, you do a 1 min google, post the first thing you see and think it's fact. There's no debate to be had with that kind of laziness and ignorance.

The guy yesterday had good intentions, and he made some valid points in another thread (which weren't about Islamophobia but about the ramifications of colonialism).
Click to expand...

Shivab had a good point about the bias in the thread title but he didnt really help himself by saying you cant debate about religion at all. Thats exactly how the mullahs manipulated Islam, by making sure no one questioned them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.