Common misconceptions about Islam answered

Misconceptions # 1: Islam is a religion only for Arabs

Of the two billion Muslims worldwide, only 15% to 20% are Arabs. There are more Indian Muslims than Arab Muslims and more Indonesian Muslims than Indian Muslims! Belief that Islam is only a religion for Arabs is a myth that was spread by the enemies of Islam early in its history. This mistaken assumption is possibly based on the fact that most of the first generation of Muslims were Arabs, the Quran is in Arabic and the Prophet Muhammad was an Arab. However, both the teachings of Islam and the history of its spread show that the early Muslims made every effort to spread their message to all nations, races and peoples. Furthermore, it should be clarified that not all Arabs are Muslims and not all Muslims are Arabs. An Arab can be a Muslim, Christian, Jew, atheist - or of any other religion or ideology. Also, many countries that some people consider to be Arab are not Arab at all - such as Turkey and Iran (Persia). The people who live in these countries speak languages other than Arabic as their native tongues and are of different ethnic heritage. It is important to realize that from the very beginning of the mission of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), his followers came from a wide spectrum of geographic and religious origins -- there was Bilaal, the Abyssinian slave; Suhaib, the Byzantine Roman; Ibn Salaam, the Jewish Rabbi; and Salmaan, the Persian. Islam teaches that God's revelations to mankind have always been consistent, clear and universal. Islam is meant for all people regardless of race, nationality or linguistic background. Taking a look at theMuslim World, from Nigeria to Bosnia and from Malaysia toAfghanistan is enough to prove that Islam is a universal message for all of mankind -- not to mention the fact that significant numbers of Europeans and Americans of all races and ethnic backgrounds are accepting Islam as their way of life.


Misconception # 2: Muslims worship Muhammad

According to Islamic belief, the Prophet Muhammad was the last Messenger of God. He, like all of God's prophets and messengers such as Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus - was only a human being. Some people have the mistaken assumption that Muslims worship Muhammad because Christians worship Christ. This is one of the reasons that they called Muslims by the incorrect name "Muhammadans" for so many years! Muhammad, like Jesus, never claimed divine status. He called people to worship only Almighty God and he continually emphasized his humanity so that people would not fall into the same errors as others did with regard to Jesus. In order to prevent his deification, the Prophet Muhammad always said to refer to him as the Messenger of God and His slave. “Muhammad was God's final messenger - entrusted to communicate the message not only in words but also to be a living example of the message. Muslims love and respect him because he was of the highest moral character and he brought a religion of pure monotheism, or Islam. Even when Islam was in its very early stages, God revealed that Muhammad "was sent as a mercy to all of mankind" - thus informing us that the message of Islam would become very widespread. Muslims strive to follow the great example of Muhammad (peace be upon him), but they do not worship him in any way. Additionally, Islam teaches Muslims to respect all of God's prophets and messengers - but respecting and loving them does not entail worshipping them. All true Muslims realize that all worship and prayer must be directed to Almighty God alone. Suffice it to say that worshipping Muhammad --- or anyone else --- along with Almighty God is considered to be the worst sin in Islam. Even if a person claims to be Muslim, but he worships and prays to other than Almighty God, this cancels and nullifies his Islam. The Declaration of Faith of Islam makes it clear that Muslims are taught to worship God only.

This declaration is as follows: "There is nothing worthy of being worshipped except God, and Muhammad is the Messenger of God".


Misconception # 3: Muhammad wrote the Quran

In addressing this misconception, it is interesting to note that no other religious scripture claims to be the direct word of God Almighty in total as clear and as often as the Holy Quran. As God clearly says in the Quran: "if it had been written by man, you would have found many discrepancies therein". [An-Nisaa’ 4:82]

{...وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِندِ غَيْرِ اللَّـهِ لَوَجَدُوا فِيهِ اخْتِلَافًا كَثِيرًا} النساء: 82



Transliteration: walaw kana min AAindi ghayri Allahi lawajadoo feehi ikhtilafan katheeran


At the time the Quran was revealed, the Arabs recognized that the language of the Quran was unique and that it was distinctly different from the language normally used by the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. It is important to note that the Arabs of that time were known for their beautiful poetry and Muhammad was known to be an illiterate man! The Quran clearly says that Muhammad was unable to read and write, so if this wasn't true, certainly his contemporaries would have protested and rejected him, refuting him in this regard. However, there are no reports of this. Of course there were people who rejected Muhammad's message, just like other prophets were rejected, but none for this reason. On the contrary, Muhammad, peace be upon him, had thousands of loyal followers and the results of their efforts spread Islam from Spain to China in just over a century!

It is also interesting to point out that even though the Quran is not poetry, the Arabs essentially quit writing poetry after it was revealed. It could be said that the Quran is a piece of Arabic literature par excellence -and Muhammad's contemporaries realized that they couldn't outdo it. Additionally, it is easy to prove that Muhammad did not possess a great deal of the knowledge that is expounded in the Quran, such as knowledge of historical events, previous prophets and natural scientific phenomenon, subjects about which Muhammad could not have known about. So, again, if this wasn't true, certainly his contemporaries would have rejected his claims.

Suffice it to say that not only is the Quran the most memorized and well preserved scripture on earth, it is also unequalled in eloquence, spiritual impact and clarity of message.


Misconception #4: Women in Islam

Even though many aspects of Islam are misunderstood by non-Muslims, the ignorance, misinformation and incorrect assumptions that are made with regard to Islam's treatment of women are probably the most severe. Numerous verses of the Quran make it clear that men and women are equal in the sight of God. According to the teachings of Islam, the only thing that distinguishes people in the sight of God is their level of God-consciousness. Due to this, many people are surprised to learn that Islamic Law guaranteed rights to women over 1400 years ago which women in Europe and America only obtained recently. For example, Islam clearly teaches that a woman is a full- person under the law and is the spiritual equal of a male. Also, according to Islamic Law, women have the right to own property, operate a business and receive equal pay for equal work. Women are allowed total control of their wealth, they cannot be married against their will and they are allowed to keep their own name when married. Additionally, they have the right to inherit property and to have their marriage dissolved in the case of neglect or mistreatment. Also, Islam does not consider woman an "evil temptress", and thus does not blame woman for the "original sin".

Women in Islam participate in all forms of worship that men participate in. Actually, the rights that Islam gave to women over 1400 years ago were almost unheard of in the West until het 900s. For example, less than fifty years ago in Britain and North America, a woman could not buy a house or car without the co-signature of her father or husband.

Islam gives great respect to women and their role in society by preserving their dignity and integrity as members of the community. It should be mentioned that the Prophet Muhammad's mission stopped many of the horrible practices that women were subject to in the society of his time. For example, the Quran put an end to the pagan Arab practice of killing unwanted daughters when they were born. Additionally, Islam put restrictions on the unrestricted polygamy of the Arabs of the time, and put many laws in place to protect the well-being of women.

Many of the misconceptions regarding the treatment of women in Islam are falsely attributed to the religion. In actuality, the real problem is that in many places, cultural traditions alien to Islam have come to overshadow its teachings either through ignorance or the impact of colonialization. Islam has clearly given women their rights. It is just that people unrightfully withhold them due to their culture.

I had a couple questions:

(1) Is Arabic more "perfect" than Mandarin Chinese?


(2) Are polytheistic religions (like Native American or Japanese Shinto faiths) equal to Islam?


(3) Are Muslim Women LEGALLY equal with men?


(4) Under Sharia Law is it legal to suggest Mohammad was NOT a Prophet but actually a liar, or deluded or even possessed by a demon?

I was also wondering when the Qur'an was completed? I mean, what was the day and year?

Misconceptions # 1: Islam is a religion only for ArabsI don't know where you got the idea that this is a common misconception. The world's four largest Muslim countries, where the overwhelming majority of the earth's Muslims live, are Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria, none of which are Arab nations. In the USA, most Arabs are Christians, and the largest population of Muslims are Afro-Americans and African immigrants.
Misconception # 2: Muslims worship MuhammadWhen "good, decent, religious people" advocate the assassination of a cartoonist who treated Mohammed like any other mortal human, it's hard to make the case that they don't "worship" him. Your argument is very difficult to take seriously. If Mohammed is not worshipped, then he is legally and morally open to the same criticism, rudeness and humor that applies to any other public figure such as politicians, entertainers, priests, athletes and business tycoons. No one tries to kill cartoonists who make fun of them--or even Jesus, whom some people actually do "worship."
Misconception # 3: Muhammad wrote the Quran.No one believes that Abraham wrote the Torah or that Jesus wrote the New Testament, so why would anyone think that Mohammed wrote the holy book for his religion?
Misconception #4: Women in IslamYou have a long way to go before anyone is going to believe you on this topic. In the most traditional Muslim societies, women are not allowed by law to go out in public without a male relative, to drive cars or to show their faces. Men have no such prohibitions. You can dissemble about this all you want with your clever, pious rhetoric, but you will never change our observation that you treat your women, at best, like second-class citizens, and, at worst, like LIVESTOCK.

The way you treat your women in those traditional Stone Age societies is ILLEGAL in the United States and most of the modern nations. It's called ABUSE. If you try that shit here, you might be arrested and imprisoned.

Get over it.

Islam just got owned.

In addition to the verses that say men and wemon are equal, the koran also says to beat your wife if she doesn't listen..... little contradictive isn't it? I'm glad most muslims don't follow that rule. The idea that they do is wrong, not the fact that the koran teaches it.

I had a couple questions:

(1) Is Arabic more "perfect" than Mandarin Chinese?

yes


(2) Are polytheistic religions (like Native American or Japanese Shinto faiths) equal to Islam?



no, but should be respected


(3) Are Muslim Women LEGALLY equal with men?


yes, and should be when applying the islamic laws



(4) Under Sharia Law is it legal to suggest Mohammad was NOT a Prophet but actually a liar, or deluded or even possessed by a demon?

uuuuh, idk

In addition to the verses that say men and wemon are equal, the koran also says to beat your wife if she doesn't listen..... little contradictive isn't it? I'm glad most muslims don't follow that rule. The idea that they do is wrong, not the fact that the koran teaches it.

no, not exactly, but to beat her, in a very light way, like with a pen :P i know it sounds redecilous, beat like with a pen, but it is.
also, there are many cases of beating and violence between married people, everywhere, not because "islam"

I thought this kind of cut and paste preaching is against the rules.

no, not exactly, but to beat her, in a very light way, like with a pen :P i know it sounds redecilous, beat like with a pen, but it is.


The Qu'ran says to beat your wife in a "light" way?...Or with a pen?

Can you possibly tell me where it says anything like that?

You have a long way to go before anyone is going to believe you on this topic. In the most traditional Muslim societies, women are not allowed by law to go out in public without a male relative, to drive cars or to show their faces. Men have no such prohibitions. You can dissemble about this all you want with your clever, pious rhetoric, but you will never change our observation that you treat your women, at best, like second-class citizens, and, at worst, like LIVESTOCK.

The way you treat your women in those traditional Stone Age societies is ILLEGAL in the United States and most of the modern nations. It's called ABUSE. If you try that shit here, you might be arrested and imprisoned.

Get over it.

ok, in islam, that's all bullshits, in islam the relegion, anyway, in muslim societies, well, more specificly, muslim arab societies, let's 70 years ago, in many countries, it was like, women , not illigal, but, immoral to go out, and to show her face, and etc... and guess what, that is exactly, the time, where those people, were back to stoneage like you said, but in islam, the relegion, all those are bullshits, and serious mistakes, according to islam, and yes human rights

and HEY HEY HEY, are you talking about today how we treat our woman? go educate your self... maybe you got a dark image from saudi arabia and others, wich i didnt visit before to see with my own eyes and judge, because your media is actually ignorant in some parts...for example about the tunisian revolution, hmm, some media news, american ones, are ignorant in many points, many

The Qu'ran says to beat your wife in a "light" way?...Or with a pen?

Can you possibly tell me where it says anything like that?

i have no idea
those links will help
http://www.themodernreligion.com/women/w_abuse_badawi.htm
http://www.islamawareness.net/Wife/beating1.html

Hmm, it says beating your wife is against Islamic rules..

But, it says that you can beat her after giving her two warnings..

Kind of hard to understand..

Hmm, it says beating your wife is against Islamic rules..

But, it says that you can beat her after giving her two warnings..

Kind of hard to understand..
(while effcorse woman is ecaul to man, sometimes more than a man if she deserve it, and some times less than a man if she deserve that, there's no strict line)
conclusion:
=>you can't beat your wife, only if it is serious, and if you beat, you must never hert, or leave traces, it must not be beating that phisycly herts, like for example a fother beat he's son very little, means, in a light way, that don't hert, as a punishement if talking didnt work or something, idk, i'm not a fother :P

It's still a little confusing..But, thanks for the links Shadow..

Now I see where you came up with the "pen" thing...From the siwak, right?

I was also wondering when the Qur'an was completed? I mean, what was the day and year?

You should read the Al-aqaid and you will see where Islamic beliefs get some of there modern belief systems from, Like Je=Had and stuff like that. Pay close attention when the book talks about Me Mekigal/s you might eVen learn something important and why the radical muslim wants to kill you

(while effcorse woman is ecaul to man, sometimes more than a man if she deserve it, and some times less than a man if she deserve that, there's no strict line)
conclusion:
=>you can't beat your wife, only if it is serious, and if you beat, you must never hert, or leave traces, it must not be beating that phisycly herts, like for example a fother beat he's son very little, means, in a light way, that don't hert, as a punishement if talking didnt work or something, idk, i'm not a fother :P
This is bull crap to reality brother, You beat your wife to save face and the punishment is meant to match the crime of what the rest of the family expects . Even if you don't want to beat her you will or be scorned by old traditional ways of the culture. Now don't land blast Me for ever family is different and expectations are different so some of your delusions may be true , but tell the truth your a Muslim trying to sugar coat things as to paint your Glorious people in a better light. Dude you don't go to paradise for telling fibs. I know it says you can be justified by your actions if your direction is by Allah and Allah him self justify those who act in his perfect will, but beating Eve is not the answer Allah is looking for. I understand the burning down of the house and dismantling the old way of greed. Lots of people feel that way , but unlike Joe Stack the guy that ran his plane into the I.R.S. building . We hold back for the day that is coming in the Glory of the 12 Iman

...HEY HEY HEY, are you talking about today how we treat our woman? go educate your self...

I lived in a Moslem country for several years (NOT Saudi Arabia). I was informed that women have no souls and are "lower than dogs in the eyes of God". They were indeed treated as such. That was my education in how Islam teaches how to treat women, regardless of what you have to say on the topic.

Epic fail. :(

This is bull crap to reality brother, You beat your wife to save face and the punishment is meant to match the crime of what the rest of the family expects . Even if you don't want to beat her you will or be scorned by old traditional ways of the culture. Now don't land blast Me for ever family is different and expectations are different so some of your delusions may be true , but tell the truth your a Muslim trying to sugar coat things as to paint your Glorious people in a better light. Dude you don't go to paradise for telling fibs. I know it says you can be justified by your actions if your direction is by Allah and Allah him self justify those who act in his perfect will, but beating Eve is not the answer Allah is looking for. I understand the burning down of the house and dismantling the old way of greed. Lots of people feel that way , but unlike Joe Stack the guy that ran his plane into the I.R.S. building . We hold back for the day that is coming in the Glory of the 12 Iman

yes, beat your wife without causing damage physicly, and yes beat, without herting physicly. i think you can see the link.

glory of 12 iman? huh?

I lived in a Moslem country for several years (NOT Saudi Arabia). I was informed that women have no souls and are "lower than dogs in the eyes of God". They were indeed treated as such. That was my education in how Islam teaches how to treat women, regardless of what you have to say on the topic.

Epic fail. :(

that's totally wrong! that's totally against islam!! that's not islam! maybe that what many people thought before, when the muslim civilisation, was back to the stone age after they gave up their noble relegion after all those golden ages, and i think things like that are attached to cultural things, formed by time, for example, the burka, is not an obligation in islam, but the hijab is, but effcorse, some times you find a woman with no hijab and covering her body better than a woman with hijab with a tight clothes that would explode soon

and what is that muslim country?
(i didnt saudi arabia, i didnt went their to see how they live, i don't trust your media that keep insulting them)


beleive me, tht guy who otld oyu that, tell him go educate your self, he's a backward :P
what can i say, he or they don't know nothing about islam, that kind of stuff and thinking, is what brought the muslim civilisation from the golden ages where it ruled to the world, when they were following islam during it, to the stone age later, (the arab in middle east and north africa, civilisation) where they don't follow islam, and where we became like, hmm, backwards sometimes before, well, about 200 years ago, a man used to buy many women, and puted them in he's house, 200 years or maybe more, because my fother told me about this one, and, he wasn't alive in that time, nor he's fother or he's grandfother, so, i don't know the time exactly when they were doing that,

that's totally wrong! that's totally against islam!! that's not islam! maybe that what many people thought before, when the muslim civilisation, was back to the stone age after they gave up their noble relegion after all those golden ages, and i think things like that are attached to cultural things, formed by time, for example, the burka, is not an obligation in islam, but the hijab is, but effcorse, some times you find a woman with no hijab and covering her body better than a woman with hijab with a tight clothes that would explode soon

and what is that muslim country?
(i didnt saudi arabia, i didnt went their to see how they live, i don't trust your media that keep insulting them)


beleive me, tht guy who otld oyu that, tell him go educate your self, he's a backward :P
what can i say, he or they don't know nothing about islam, that kind of stuff and thinking, is what brought the muslim civilisation from the golden ages where it ruled to the world, when they were following islam during it, to the stone age later, (the arab in middle east and north africa, civilisation) where they don't follow islam, and where we became like, hmm, backwards sometimes before, well, about 200 years ago, a man used to buy many women, and puted them in he's house, 200 years or maybe more, because my fother told me about this one, and, he wasn't alive in that time, nor he's fother or he's grandfother, so, i don't know the time exactly when they were doing that,

Yeah, uh huh, yeah.

See, the thing is, capitalism sounds all wonderful when you just read the theory too.

Doesn't it.

That's not capitalism!

That's not Christianity!

That's not what Marx said!

That's not the teachings of the prophet!


Get it?

I am sick of hearing "if only".

If only God would email us or something, just to tell us what he really wants us to do, instead of pissing around trying to guess.

Actually, I'm a little interested in exactly when that kind of stuff and thinking allowed Islam to rule the world.

Was I asleep?

Dang.
It would appear I was also asleep when a man could buy several woman and put them in his house.

Islam sounds awesome. Man got cash, man have women.

Islam is all about capitalism then!

...Right?

One thing I will point out, which may give fuel to the OP.

Back then, giving birth was a life-or-death thing. In half the cases or more, either the mother, or baby, or both would die in childbirth. Muslim men want a big family so their children can reap from the fields circa 700AD... Muslim men who have little to no children are considered part of a dying family line.

In comes the concept of multiple wives. As pure Qu'ranism dictates, the woman is to be revered to do her duties as nurturer and mother to the clan. She is not a slave and she is not property. Her #1 big job is to produce children... everything else should come to her with ease. Think about that notion.

In the big picture, you can point to nearly any religion and blame fault as no religion is perfect. But then again the Qu'ran was written 600 years after the New Testament and had plenty of time to adjust for society's needs.

I still revere the Qu'ran but it gets the same grain of salt as any other religious document.

Yeah, uh huh, yeah.

See, the thing is, capitalism sounds all wonderful when you just read the theory too.

Doesn't it.

yeah, but, true that islam is thinked to be applyed, but, heey, where are you islam? in japan, and other countries, you see islam, but you see no muslims, in some muslim countries, you see muslims, but you don't see islam.
well, i'm not saying there's no real muslims or good people, trhere's always good people, well, also, not everyone apply every everything of islam, some people apply little, some people apply more, and some people apply alot (wich is good), and some people, are just muslims by name, and not really muslims following islam

That's not capitalism!

That's not Christianity!

That's not what Marx said!

That's not the teachings of the prophet!


Get it?

I am sick of hearing "if only".

uuuh, what?

If only God would email us or something, just to tell us what he really wants us to do, instead of pissing around trying to guess.

not funny pinwheel

Actually, I'm a little interested in exactly when that kind of stuff and thinking allowed Islam to rule the world.

Was I asleep?

first, what i say, is not a point and stop, i'm not like, who know it all, and yes, many arab societies collapse, well, yes by crusades that christians did, and etc... and also, by forgetting islam and drinking wines and having fun with women and making them as "stuff" and also when rich people didnt help poor people, that's what also made it collapse, muslims will never get back their glory, intill they follow the way of god

Dang.
It would appear I was also asleep when a man could buy several woman and put them in his house.

Islam sounds awesome. Man got cash, man have women.

Islam is all about capitalism then!

...Right?

i said, that is not islam when some rich men were doing that, and it's not islam to treat women as animals as stoniphi said tht someone told him that women are less than a dog, and also it's not islam, that a women be sexual too, and it's not islam, that a woman sells her self by wearing hotty clothes and etc... and it's not islam, to treat women badly, get it?

Yeah, uh huh, yeah.

See, the thing is, capitalism sounds all wonderful when you just read the theory too.

Doesn't it.

Exactly. This is the culture that Islam creates. But no one wants to take stock of their ideology with any seriousness. We always make excuses that we weren't fundamentalist enough in following that ideology. A more honest approach would be to recognize that the flaws in your ideology create inherent problems when they encounter real life and real human beings.

Exactly. This is the culture that Islam creates. But no one wants to take stock of their ideology with any seriousness. We always make excuses that we weren't fundamentalist enough in following that ideology. A more honest approach would be to recognize that the flaws in your ideology create inherent problems when they encounter real life and real human beings.

uuh, execuse me, are you a muslims and know islam better than me? or studied islam?

One thing I will point out, which may give fuel to the OP.

Back then, giving birth was a life-or-death thing. In half the cases or more, either the mother, or baby, or both would die in childbirth. Muslim men want a big family so their children can reap from the fields circa 700AD... Muslim men who have little to no children are considered part of a dying family line.

In comes the concept of multiple wives. As pure Qu'ranism dictates, the woman is to be revered to do her duties as nurturer and mother to the clan. She is not a slave and she is not property. Her #1 big job is to produce children... everything else should come to her with ease. Think about that notion.



well, a wife, in first place, is to have the children and to take care of them and raise them, and effcorse, she have the rights to study, and to work, too, when it comes to work, if their family have ennuf money, she should put raising her children in the first place.
a mulitple wife rule: you must be ecaul to all of them as much as you can, because you can never be very ecaul.

to wife or wifes you had more than one: you must never cheat on your wife, and try to don't make her sad or angry (effcorse, you both have duties to do respect each other and etc.. also she musnt cheat on her husband, but sometimes, when a women runaway from her husban to another man [i didnt say to have an affair like s*x with him, because about that, that's not an exuce, that's cheating too, and effcorse, not only her get punished, but also her husband that was the first cause for that to happen) , because that husband keep beating her and not taking care of her and etc... well, that should be reviewed, according to the case ]

uuh, execuse me, are you a muslims and know islam better than me? or studied islam?

I study it almost every day. How can Muslims keep posting clarification about their religion all the time and not expect me to have learned anything? You can hardly get them to shut up about it. And why do you think I'm an atheist? It's in no small part due to the Bible and the Quran.

yes, beat your wife without causing damage physicly, and yes beat, without herting physicly. i think you can see the link.

glory of 12 iman? huh?

See, that's where Islam is flawed. If you justify beating your wife at all, even in a minor way, you are setting up the man as the ultimate bearer of wisdom and strength in the family and confirming the woman as practically worthless, like a misbehaving child instead of an adult human being. This breeds contempt for women. This is human nature and Islam seems to be ignorant of it.

I study it almost every day. How can Muslims keep posting clarification about their religion all the time and not expect me to have learned anything? You can hardly get them to shut up about it. And why do you think I'm an atheist? It's in no small part due to the Bible and the Quran.

aha, and how your being atheist should be my problem?

See, that's where Islam is flawed. If you justify beating your wife at all, even in a minor way, you are setting up the man as the ultimate bearer of wisdom and strength in the family and confirming the woman as practically worthless, like a misbehaving child instead of an adult human being. This breeds contempt for women. This is human nature and Islam seems to be ignorant of it.

aha, also the woman, many times, is who keeps things running in the house, like money and food and etc... like in family with no fother, or a family where the fother is irresponsible, and no a woman is not worthless, that's why i said before, men and women, are ecaul, but sometimes, the woman is more than a man, and some times a woman is less than a man...

That's not capitalism!

That's not Christianity!

That's not what Marx said!

That's not the teachings of the prophet!


Get it?

I am sick of hearing "if only".

YES. Kudos here.

And pinwheel was very funny and, more to the point, exactly on the mark.

aha, also the woman, many times, is who keeps things running in the house, like money and food and etc... like in family with no fother, or a family where the fother is irresponsible, and no a woman is not worthless, that's why i said before, men and women, are ecaul, but sometimes, the woman is more than a man, and some times a woman is less than a man...

Slaves used to run things like farms very well too, that doesn't mean anything.

aha, also the woman, many times, is who keeps things running in the house, like money and food and etc...

Such is not at all incompatible with women being treated as inferiors and oppressed. It is, in fact, a rather typical role for women in unequal societies - the point being that the prescription of proper roles to begin with is oppressive and unequal (men are typically afforded the self-determination to define their own role, in such societies).

And, likewise, the presentation of such a role as an argument against gender inequality is a tell-tale sign of somebody who doesn't recognize such in the first place (typically from being raised in an unequal culture that lacks in such awareness).

I don't mean to be terribly condescending there, but these are the exact same arguments that traditionalists have been making against feminism in my society for many, many decades now. And they remain uncompelling - "know your role!" is not the same thing as self-determination, and it is inevitable that whichever group is empowered to define everyone's roles will do so in a way that oppresses everyone else.

Slaves used to run things like farms very well too, that doesn't mean anything.

what do you mean?
why don't you just say directly and clearly what you got? :shrug:

Quad said it better than me. Responsibility doesn't make up for being treated like an inferior creature that can't even drive a car or talk to a man alone.

Such is not at all incompatible with women being treated as inferiors and oppressed. It is, in fact, a rather typical role for women in unequal societies - the point being that the prescription of proper roles to begin with is oppressive and unequal (men are typically afforded the self-determination to define their own role, in such societies).

And, likewise, the presentation of such a role as an argument against gender inequality is a tell-tale sign of somebody who doesn't recognize such in the first place (typically from being raised in an unequal culture that lacks in such awareness).

I don't mean to be terribly condescending there, but these are the exact same arguments that traditionalists have been making against feminism in my society for many, many decades now. And they remain uncompelling - "know your role!" is not the same thing as self-determination, and it is inevitable that whichever group is empowered to define everyone's roles will do so in a way that oppresses everyone else.

well, what means that a man and a woman are both equal, doesnt mean exactly ecaul in everything everything, i mean, this don't even exist in any an country, even in west, because, for example, like some simple stuff, mostly the woman is who cooks the food at home, and clean the house, and the man helps too anyway, but mainly still the woman do it, for example, a woman go to shoping as a hobby, and stay hours, whie a man, just go directly to he's targect of what he's going to, anyway, that's not what i meant, what i was talking about, that women, and men, have both same rights, to work, to study, to live, to talk, to .. to ..to ..to..
and yes i live in a muslim society, where men and women, are equal, in rights i mean, because ecaul exactly like i explained before, but still they have both the same rights,


in general, our freedom (i mean both men and women if you think i mean only one of them :bugeye: ), stops at the freedom of the other, means, we are free to do anything, but to respect others, for example, here in tunisia, in the public places, you can't be with your wife infront of all people and kissing each other by thong, or to say bad words and stuff..

Quad said it better than me. Responsibility doesn't make up for being treated like an inferior creature that can't even drive a car or talk to a man alone.

uuuuh, did i say women and men are not equal?
here's what i meant, this is an example
a fother, died, and left some money, and have two kids, one male and one female, both adults.
the female, work and take care of her children she'st he responsible of the house, while her husband is irresponsible.
the male, is the responsible on he's family, and he have ennuf money, but the female, is in more need for extra money, than that male, so, the female, will take more money from what the fother left, than her brother.

in that case, the man, is inferior than that woman in the domain of inheritance of their fother's money that he left before he die.


in another case, in a country, where there's a high unemployement, and women occupy most of the jobs. while there are many men, who are responsibles on a family, so, the priority of giving a job, will be given to those men, who are responsible on their families, also women who are responsible on their familes, and effcorse, the quality of that worker will be took in consideration, for example that woman, studied hard in her hall life, and then, she's working, but she's not responsible on a family, while that man is responsible on a family, but he never made an effort in studying and etc.. so it's he's fault, so better go find another job somewhere, also things like, that person studied hard and etc.. to reach that job, should be puted in consideration

ok, in islam, that's all bullshits, in islam the relegion, anyway, in muslim societies, well, more specificly, muslim arab societies, let's 70 years ago, in many countries, it was like, women , not illigal, but, immoral to go out, and to show her face, and etc... and guess what, that is exactly, the time, where those people, were back to stoneage like you said, but in islam, the relegion, all those are bullshits, and serious mistakes, according to islam, and yes human rights. and HEY HEY HEY, are you talking about today how we treat our woman? go educate your self... maybe you got a dark image from saudi arabia and others, wich i didnt visit before to see with my own eyes and judge, because your media is actually ignorant in some parts...for example about the tunisian revolution, hmm, some media news, american ones, are ignorant in many points, manyA dark image from Saudi Arabia??? Saudi Arabia has established itself as the "capital," as it were, of Sunni Islam, just as Iran is the capital of the Shiites. At least in the Middle East. We all know that most of the world's Muslims live in Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria, but it's the Saudis and the Persians who make all the noise and act like role models. Saudi Arabia and Iran have all of the key holy sites of Islam, don't they?

And I did say specifically that I was talking about the places that are still in the Stone Age, where an old-fashioned kind of fundamentalist Islam is practiced. Unfortunately this includes Afghanistan and much of northern Pakistan, as well as Saudi Arabia. Even in relatively "modern" Iran, women can't go out in public without covering their hair and dancing is forbidden (although done in private). In the tribal areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan, music is forbidden! Music, one of humanity's greatest inventions! How much of a retarded asshole do you have to be to ban music?

Music and dogs are the two most important things in my life, and even though I am an avowed pacifist I would take up arms against anyone who tries to deny them to me or to my country. So I will vote for massive military spending if the Taliban--which regards itself as the role model for all pious Muslims--ever gains enough power to launch a serious attack. Not just exploding underwear that doesn't go off.
It would appear I was also asleep when a man could buy several woman and put them in his house. Islam sounds awesome. Man got cash, man have women.The rationale behind polygamy in Islam has been twisted over the centuries, but originally it was a humanitarian practice. One of the things that was going on in Mohammed's time was massive warfare throughout the region; this is one of the main reasons Muslims still call it a "religion of peace," since arguably his main goal was to bring peace to the region. After years of war, the male population had decreased and there were a lot of widows. It was regarded as honorable for a man to take in the widows of his deceased brothers and other relatives, and treat them as his wives. If there were widows around who had no surviving male in-laws, then obviously the rule had to be stretched so that some guy with a prosperous household could take in an extra one or two.

In an era with no government social services, I'll have to give them a pass on this one. The motivation behind it was most definitely not evil, despite how it worked out in the long run.

A dark image from Saudi Arabia??? Saudi Arabia has established itself as the "capital," as it were, of Sunni Islam, just as Iran is the capital of the Shiites. At least in the Middle East. We all know that most of the world's Muslims live in Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria, but it's the Saudis and the Persians who make all the noise and act like role models. Saudi Arabia and Iran have all of the key holy sites of Islam, don't they?


actually, no, mecca and medina, are the relegious capital of muslims, because of the kaaba, the holiest place on earth for muslims.
kaaba in mecca: the n1 holy place

http://marrakchis.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/kaaba.jpg


medina: n1 too

http://airportail.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/masjid_nabawi_medina_saudi_arabia.jpg


iran? uuuh, nope

n2
Jerusalam (Al-Quds) ; Al-Aqsa mosque
http://www.ajib.fr/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/mosquee-al-aqsa-quds.jpg




And I did say specifically that I was talking about the places that are still in the Stone Age, where an old-fashioned kind of fundamentalist Islam is practiced. Unfortunately this includes Afghanistan and much of northern Pakistan, as well as Saudi Arabia. Even in relatively "modern" Iran, women can't go out in public without covering their hair and dancing is forbidden (although done in private). In the tribal areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan, music is forbidden! Music, one of humanity's greatest inventions! How much of a retarded asshole do you have to be to ban music?



yeah i saw once those stuff, and that's way away from islam, like puting metal sticks in some points of body where blood don't go out, and like, making smokes and saying random things called "magic", no, that's not islam, and you tell me you know islam :/
well, covering the hair, is a personnal thing, i don't think it should be forced, because, if not wearing it is wrong, that would be between that person and god, and not between him and anyother person.
well, not allowed to dance like the whores dance, or half naked dancing, or dancing for sexual desires, i have no problem with that, i mean, like on stage, but in parties, i don't think it would be not allowed, no?

music? uuuh, by islam, no music is not forbidden, anyway, there was once, some people, like, a branche, who consider pictures of people and music, is forbidden, while there's no quranic text that prooves that, while islam is based on quran, even if someone think music is forbidden, then, don't listen to it, why would they make it forbidden for all people? again, that's a personnal thing, if it is wrong (wich i strongly doubt that it is wrong) that would be between that person and god, and it's no one else buisness..



Music and dogs are the two most important things in my life, and even though I am an avowed pacifist I would take up arms against anyone who tries to deny them to me or to my country. So I will vote for massive military spending if the Taliban--which regards itself as the role model for all pious Muslims--ever gains enough power to launch a serious attack. Not just exploding underwear that doesn't go off.The rationale behind polygamy in Islam has been twisted over the centuries, but originally it was a humanitarian practice. One of the things that was going on in Mohammed's time was massive warfare throughout the region; this is one of the main reasons Muslims still call it a "religion of peace," since arguably his main goal was to bring peace to the region. After years of war, the male population had decreased and there were a lot of widows. It was regarded as honorable for a man to take in the widows of his deceased brothers and other relatives, and treat them as his wives. If there were widows around who had no surviving male in-laws, then obviously the rule had to be stretched so that some guy with a prosperous household could take in an extra one or two.
.


waow, now right here! you speak very good and clear! i like what you said here very much, but, that islam, still didnt extinct or desepeared, it still exist, wich you call "moderate" muslims, who live like everyone else but don't use drugs and don't drink alcohool and don't eat pork meat and don't make sex and other sexual things out of marriage, and to wear respectfull clothes, pray 5 times a day, and donate money to poor people, and effcorse beleive in one god and no one but god= those are the most important qualities in islam for a muslim, and yes, those people exist, and no they are not extremists like you see in tv or like in afghanistan that have been blew up and destroyed both by u.s.a (since afghanistan have alot of oil, my eyes will also go directly to u.s.a. ) and taliban

oh, and the n3 is kairouan

http://www.digitalphoto.pl/foto_galeria/3614_2007-1908.JPG

http://memberfiles.freewebs.com/75/04/49360475/photos/The-beautifull-old-side-of-Kairouan--3/0312_09.jpg

http://www.leonardfrank.com/Worldheritage/Kairouan01.jpg

and
inside1 (http://www.stockphotopro.com/photo-thumbs-2/AY79HM.jpg)
inside2 (http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/180238/180238,1237586370,8/stock-photo-tunisia-kairouan-the-great-mosque-the-prayer-hall-with-imposing-arches-and-roman-columns-taken-27029932.jpg)

I was also wondering when the Qur'an was completed? I mean, what was the day and year?

F*** you.
i went to the hellish depths of the internet to give you that date, translated and referenced.
people with short term memory loss should be banned from internet forums, since we can't whack them on the face.

Your English just got a lot better. Maybe conflict agrees with you.

well, not allowed to dance like the whores dance, or half naked dancing, or dancing for sexual desires, i have no problem with that, i mean, like on stage . . . .So you don't approve of ballet, modern dance, musical comedy, and any other type of dancing for the entertainment of others? Dance is an artform, currently one of most popular ones. To disapprove of it is to disapprove of one of the most important components of Western culture. "Half naked" is another way of saying "half clothed," so it means almost nothing. And to accuse a professional dancer, who has spent his or her whole life learning a craft that requires more energy than most professional sports, of dancing "like a whore" is a grievous insult. Sexuality is part of human nature and human culture. To suppress it so that it does not appear in public discourse is to remove reference to an important part of life from public life.
"moderate" muslims, who live like everyone else but don't use drugs and don't drink alcohol and don't eat pork meat and don't make sex and other sexual things out of marriage, and to wear respectful clothes, pray 5 times a day, and donate money to poor people, and effcorse beleive in one god and no one but god--those are the most important qualities in islam for a muslim, and yes, those people exist, and no they are not extremistsThey certainly qualify as "extremists" by our definition.Alcohol and other drugs have their place in life; some people are weak and cannot take them safely, but for most people they are just an interesting way of temporarily gaining a different perspective on the world. I have known engineers, attorneys and artists who did some of their most creative work after assimilating the inspirations they received under the influence of "recreational" drugs. Pork is one of the healthiest meats available, and the land required to grow feed for cows has a far more damaging impact on the environment than raising pigs. Beef is the most environmentally irresponsible meat that is commonly consumed. Raising a cow for milk produces ten times as much protein per dollar and per unit of grain as killing it for meat. Adultery--sex in which at least one party is married to someone else--is not a recommended practice, but as evils go it's pretty minor. Fornication--sex between two unmarried people--is inconsequential, and in fact is often appropriate. People need to find out whether their interests and habits are compatible before they get married, and for many people that includes their sexual interests and habits. Marrying someone you've never slept with can be a disaster. Clothing, like all aspects of appearance, goes through fashion cycles. What is "respectful" today will be considered "offensive" tomorrow. English women used to wear gloves and veils. Today that would be regarded as rude in most situations. It is always rude to wear a mask in public that completely obscures the face in the United States--except in specific situations like skiing, a Halloween party, or an extremely cold winter. It identifies you as a robber and you may be shot out of fear. Praying five times a day is a tremendous disruption of our business environment. Church bells that ring once on Sunday morning are tolerated, but broadcasting prayer calls over loudspeakers that cover an entire city five times a day, seven days a week, is a "public nuisance." Helping the poor is always a good idea, and Americans were the most charitable people on earth until President Roosevelt turned our country into a socialist workers' "paradise" in 1933 and began raising the income tax to its current confiscatory level. The government promised that it would use that money to take care of the poor, and the uncaring, incompetent, unaccountable motherfuckers had simply better keep that promise, or else give us our damn money back so we can do it ourselves.

So you don't approve of ballet, modern dance, musical comedy, and any other type of dancing for the entertainment of others? Dance is an artform, currently one of most popular ones. To disapprove of it is to disapprove of one of the most important components of Western culture. "Half naked" is another way of saying "half clothed," so it means almost nothing. And to accuse a professional dancer, who has spent his or her whole life learning a craft that requires more energy than most professional sports, of dancing "like a whore" is a grievous insult. Sexuality is part of human nature and human culture. To suppress it so that it does not appear in public discourse is to remove reference to an important part of life from public life.

well, i didnt say i disaproove dancing, but i did say i disaprove the hores dancing like in night clubs, that dance around a pillar for example


They certainly qualify as "extremists" by our definition.Alcohol and other drugs have their place in life; some people are weak and cannot take them safely, but for most people they are just an interesting way of temporarily gaining a different perspective on the world. I have known engineers, attorneys and artists who did some of their most creative work after assimilating the inspirations they received under the influence of "recreational" drugs. Pork is one of the healthiest meats available, and the land required to grow feed for cows has a far more damaging impact on the environment than raising pigs. Beef is the most environmentally irresponsible meat that is commonly consumed. Raising a cow for milk produces ten times as much protein per dollar and per unit of grain as killing it for meat. Adultery--sex in which at least one party is married to someone else--is not a recommended practice, but as evils go it's pretty minor. Fornication--sex between two unmarried people--is inconsequential, and in fact is often appropriate. People need to find out whether their interests and habits are compatible before they get married, and for many people that includes their sexual interests and habits. Marrying someone you've never slept with can be a disaster. Clothing, like all aspects of appearance, goes through fashion cycles. What is "respectful" today will be considered "offensive" tomorrow. English women used to wear gloves and veils. Today that would be regarded as rude in most situations. It is always rude to wear a mask in public that completely obscures the face in the United States--except in specific situations like skiing, a Halloween party, or an extremely cold winter. It identifies you as a robber and you may be shot out of fear. Praying five times a day is a tremendous disruption of our business environment. Church bells that ring once on Sunday morning are tolerated, but broadcasting prayer calls over loudspeakers that cover an entire city five times a day, seven days a week, is a "public nuisance." Helping the poor is always a good idea, and Americans were the most charitable people on earth until President Roosevelt turned our country into a socialist workers' "paradise" in 1933 and began raising the income tax to its current confiscatory level. The government promised that it would use that money to take care of the poor, and the uncaring, incompetent, unaccountable motherfuckers had simply better keep that promise, or else give us our damn money back so we can do it ourselves.

first of all; no one would force you for that, also, no, what is called extremism for us, is a person for example who think that women are inferior or inferior than dogs like you said, and who think that everyone must be forced on those things in the list, and etc... anyway that's a personnal thing, call it what you want, what i wanted to point, is muslims are not like you media show them, and mosques calling to praying is not annoying, and, what's your problem if people are like that? it's their buisness that your's, anyway, covering the woman face is not an order, and is not a part of islam, while either weraring hijab or not, it's a personnal thing,
praying five times a day, can be delayed if you can't pray them at their time you know, so it's not an obstacle to your buisness, because if you cant find the time to it, you can do it later when you have time for it, but you should do it afterall, but it's more f avorite to be prayed at their times

So when the Qur'an was completed?

So when the Qur'an was completed?
Muhammad received revelations over a period of 23 years. He was illiterate but his followers wrote his revelations down. The Qur'an did not exist as a book at the time of his death in 632. The third caliph Uthman ibn Affan ordered the preparation of an official, standardized version in 650. Here's the link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qur'an

http://marrakchis.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/kaaba.jpg

Ooh, look.
People dancing around a pillar.

Tsk.

Yes, I shouldn't have done that.
I know it. I'm bad. What is the Arabic for mea culpa?
But Shadow was insulting lap dancers, calling them hores.

Which is worse, insulting a rock or insulting beautiful lap dancers?
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_zENuDflPejY/RvaV5chYT4I/AAAAAAAAAio/mFkdOJqd1W0/s400/Amadinejad+with+dancer.jpg

Lap Dancers. Where half of the world's Oil money is (wisely? Probably not, but certainly better) spent
Not spent on arms, but legs.

You know you'd like a lap dancer shadow. you little hypocrite:)

But Shadow was insulting lap dancers, calling them whores.Um... As the Head Linguist around here I would say that's a pretty close call. It's certainly more accurate than "the Canadian Ballet," which is what Americans in Buffalo and the other border towns were calling them fifteen years ago.

As a sometimes good Catholic, I shouldn't approve of lap dancers.
They shouldn't be so attractive!
btw he did say hores.

Um... As the Head Linguist around here I would say that's a pretty close call. It's certainly more accurate than "the Canadian Ballet," which is what Americans in Buffalo and the other border towns were calling them fifteen years ago.

A lap dancer performs suggestive motions while rubbing up against a client. This sometimes results in a client orgasm. Both parties have their clothes on.

A whore AKA prostitute engages in vaginal, oral or anal sex which virtually always results in a client orgasm. Sometimes sadomasochism or role-playing is involved. Usually, both parties have their clothes off.

That seems different to me.

I didn't know that dnp.
That kind of lap dancer is definitely a semi whore.
I was thinking of respectable non touching lap dancers.
Maybe shadow is correct.
I thought that they just danced.

Experienced as I sound, I have never experienced a lap dancer.

Helping the poor is always a good idea, and Americans were the most charitable people on earth until President Roosevelt turned our country into a socialist workers' "paradise" in 1933 and began raising the income tax to its current confiscatory level.

WTF?

Social security eliminated the worst forms of privation in the elderly and poor. We weren't so goddamn charitable if so many people were starving.

F*** you.
i went to the hellish depths of the internet to give you that date, translated and referenced.
people with short term memory loss should be banned from internet forums, since we can't whack them on the face.
Scifes, relink your post, because if I recall there were NO peer reviewed published evidence reported in ANY of your links.

Oh, and post the date of the Qur'an right here in this thread in the following format: The Qur'an was completed on January 25th, 2011. (include citation)


Lastly, I've read the evidence and the consensus among EXPERTS is the date is NOT known. Do you understand that Scifes? It is NOT KNOWN. No one knows when the Qur'an was completed. EXPERT ARCHEOLOGIST'S have a date RANGE in mind, but NO ONE know's for sure. AND the reason why you needed to go to the "DEPTHS" of the Internet is because it took you that long to gather up enough crackpot "Islamic" experts.

As it stands there is NO contemporary evidence of Mohammad having existed and NO ONE knows when the Qur'an was completed.

More than likely "Islam" is a branch of Syrian/Persian Christianity that didn't believe in the Trinity - which was VERY COMMON 1400 years ago. This explains why so much of the Qur'an is the "Bible".

A lap dancer performs suggestive motions while rubbing up against a client. This sometimes results in a client orgasm. Both parties have their clothes on. A whore AKA prostitute engages in vaginal, oral or anal sex which virtually always results in a client orgasm. Sometimes sadomasochism or role-playing is involved. Usually, both parties have their clothes off. That seems different to me.Ask your wife if she thinks that's an important difference.
I was thinking of respectable non touching lap dancers. . . . I thought that they just danced.What in the world are you talking about? Why do you think they're called lap dancers if they're not dancing in your lap???
Experienced as I sound, I have never experienced a lap dancer.Neither have I, but I know what they do for their money. It's a form of "safe sex" that became popular in the HIV era.

F*** you.
Oh, and Scifes, the point in me asking the question is to generate reflection and thought processes - which is the POINT in this thread. One MAJOR misconception about Islam is that the Qur'an's origins are well known. Which they are NOT (I think even YOU can agree to that).

Another misconception is that the Qur'an is "Perfect". Which it is not. The sentence itself is meaningless. It'd be like saying: Green is the "Prefect" color. Chocolate is the "Perfect" flavor. Which is of course MEANINGLESS.


So, one last time, if you can find a PEER REVIEWED source in a reputable archeological journal on the origins of the Qur'an then please post the citation. If you can not, then, that's because it's not known. Because I promise you Scifes, if you can provide proof, then you can get a Professorial job at a major University as well as receive academic accolades the world over :)

Another misconception is that the Qur'an is "Perfect".

If you want to see how radically imperfect the Qur'an is, look at this link:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.htm

You guys' have NEVER had a lap-dance?

MY Gods! Get out and live a little :p

Ask your wife if she thinks that's an important difference.
I was describing the differences in job descriptions rather the morality of the jobs.

not funny pinwheel

I thought it was extremely funny, O.K. here you go. Rid your self of contempt for all other humans and when you see some one before you turn away say to your self , about the other person not your self silly " I LOve You" and watch and see the change that occurs on there face and how it acts like an infection in a crowd. You will start to believe when you witness the cascade effect of what you did.
Megalomaniac not because I think I am better richer or more powerful, but because I believe you love Me and I want to be considered your equal in your heart instead of a lower class species. I love you unconditional, Even you Hero Man and if you read this you know who I am talking to

You guys' have NEVER had a lap-dance?

MY Gods! Get out and live a little :p

I'm married I don't do that stuff

I didn't know that dnp.
That kind of lap dancer is definitely a semi whore.
I was thinking of respectable non touching lap dancers.
Maybe shadow is correct.
I thought that they just danced.

Experienced as I sound, I have never experienced a lap dancer.

Hi Captain , Love you brother and Me too, No Lap Dancing here either

Quad said it better than me. Responsibility doesn't make up for being treated like an inferior creature that can't even drive a car or talk to a man alone.

Not all Muslims are like that. A Lebanese Woman and her Husband are nothing like that and she I must say is a kick in the pants with berka ( Dyslexic , don't hurt Me) and all. Now she does not go flaunting her self in an American decadent type culture either , but is respectful by showing compassion and knows the meaning of Mercy . My heart is with Her Husband and her for the way thy Raise there children too. I consider it a blessing for my child to play with and know there children and a blessing for Me to know them too

Hey Shadow.
How come you know so much about lap dancing anyway?

While I have never experienced lap dancing, I do like a bit of Lapp dancing.

http://imagecache6.allposters.com/LRG/21/2159/7A4CD00Z.jpg
Lapp Dancers at my local Lapp Dancing Bar

The one on the right is my favourite. Her name is Helga.
For 5 euros she'll dance for an hour.
Definitely no touching.
I tried once, and my ears are still ringing.

I hope she never falls over while dancing.
She'd break your leg.

I actually think that the most common misconception about Islam at the moment is that it's worth all this discussion to begin with.

and if you read this you know who I am talking to

hehe, i think i know

Hey Shadow.
How come you know so much about lap dancing anyway?

While I have never experienced lap dancing, I do like a bit of Lapp dancing.

http://imagecache6.allposters.com/LRG/21/2159/7A4CD00Z.jpg
Lapp Dancers at my local Lapp Dancing Bar

The one on the right is my favourite. Her name is Helga.
For 5 euros she'll dance for an hour.
Definitely no touching.
I tried once, and my ears are still ringing.

I hope she never falls over while dancing.
She'd break your leg.

we don't have here those lap dancers, anyway, there's tv.
we watch alot of american movies and stuff :P

hmm, you call those lap dancers? well, i didnt mean those, i meant thosewho are in bars and etc... yes they are hores, nothing different, any dancer that dace to seduce or something, is a whore, yes even those arabian belly dancers.

oh, bytheway, i like their tradional clothes, where are they from? slovakia?

He likes the clothes the whores are wearing.

And American TV, apparently.

So they were allowed to show lap dancing on TV in Tunisia, I guess Ben Ali wasnt so bad after all.

oh, bytheway, i like their tradional clothes, where are they from? slovakia?

Lapland. That's the only place Lapp dancers come from.
It's not so much dancing, as jumping up and down stamping their feet.
Every now and again they bring their Reindeer along.
You should hear the racket they make!

That Helga can seduce me any time she likes.
Wah Wah Way Wah!

Lapland.
Every now and again they bring their Reindeer along.
That Helga can seduce me any time she likes.
Wah Wah Way Wah!

lol, seduce you how? they don't look like whores, or, do they remove their clothes later? :eek:
lol

Of course not.
They are respectable women.
And men and Reindeer.

So they were allowed to show lap dancing on TV in Tunisia, I guess Ben Ali wasnt so bad after all.

wll, hear that, police men, are not allowed to pray at the mosque, not allowed to marry a woman that wears hijab, hijab was once illigal, (not niqab, niqab is illigal and must be illigal) people who pray at the mosque, their names are saved, and they will spy on them, and follow them, people who express politics, are thrown to jail , and even tortured sometimes, etc... they were trying to remove islam, and also remove all educated people and etc... to make us like many americans citizens who thinks that paris is in australia, and japan is in europe, and UFOs come and kidnape people, education system is almost ruined, corruption, stealing money, they stole 60% of the tunisian budget! anyway western banks freezed those money to give them back later to tunisia.
and media? huh? we don't have media! maybe some good shows, but, we don't have media! i mean, our media is stupid, they treat us like if we were babies, and it's full with lying, and etc... the only news you see, or maybe most, (that was when ben ali is the presedent) ben ali received a letter, ben ali sent a letter, ben ali and he's wife leyla, invited, they have been invited, BEN alii, sent a letter again :bugeye: huh?
no debates at all at the tv. i can say, no one watch our media, idk who watch it, expet for some good shows, anyway, we only have 3 tv. channel! the national channel, we call koffa tv, means, bascket tv, because they only show ben ali's bascket and people who say, long live ben ali long live ben ali,
the other channel is private,hannibal tv. but effcorse, controlled by ben ali and etc... there's no expression freedom, nessma tv. funed by italy prime minister! the only thing they show, is immoral things and etc.. well, most times.
we don't watch our media, and if you meant the films, yeah there are many channels of films, like mbc2 mbc4 mbc action, mbc max, fox movies, fox series, dubai one, etc...
for news, also forigne channels like aljazeera and alarabiya and others, or just on web (and since half the internet is cencored, everyone knows the tricks to acces to those cencored sites, like usin the proxies, or the https, or the https://upload, upload instead of www, or login instead of www, and others, for facebook censored pages)

uuuuuh, nope, we don't have media,

Of course not.
They are respectable women.
And men and Reindeer.

ah ok :D

Great post!

I'd like to clear up a common misconception about Druze:

Druze are not Muslims!

I should probably clarify and expand elsewhere...

...In an era with no government social services, I'll have to give them a pass on this one. The motivation behind it was most definitely not evil, despite how it worked out in the long run.
Yes, but that's just all too common really, isn't it.
Hell, paved, intentions, and whatnot.

I suppose now it's merely a variation on a wealthy man having several mistresses.

Same thing really, only one mob has a little book that says it isn't alright and has to be all secretive about it, and the other mob have a little book that says it's just fine. Others have enough money to to give a hoot about what anyone else thinks at all.

Justifications are simply that, and little more.

Pesonally, there are far too many rules in these religions for my taste. If a man wishes to live by a book of rules, then he's perfectly entitled in my opinion to do so. I am not, however, entirely confident that men in general are overly concerned about keeping themselves to themselves. Neither do I mean that by "religion" I refer only to a belief in a god, or gods.
History would indicate that men in a position to do so will impose their will upon others, for all their talk otherwise.

Nod, smile, and keep a gun by the door.

Great post!

I'd like to clear up a common misconception about Druze:

Druze are not Muslims!

I should probably clarify and expand elsewhere...

who are "druze" ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druze

Not that wikipedia is a valid source!

ok, in islam, that's all bullshits, in islam the relegion, anyway, in muslim societies, well, more specificly, muslim arab societies, let's 70 years ago, in many countries, it was like, women , not illigal, but, immoral to go out, and to show her face, and etc... and guess what, that is exactly, the time, where those people, were back to stoneage like you said, but in islam, the relegion, all those are bullshits, and serious mistakes, according to islam, and yes human rights

and HEY HEY HEY, are you talking about today how we treat our woman? go educate your self... maybe you got a dark image from saudi arabia and others, wich i didnt visit before to see with my own eyes and judge, because your media is actually ignorant in some parts...for example about the tunisian revolution, hmm, some media news, american ones, are ignorant in many points, many
Saudi Arabia is where I got the impression and it was from a well to do Saudi that I got the impression . It was demanded of Him by his family . Now my friend who was a white woman from Minnesota she was out with the other woman in Saudi Arabia advocating for rights to drive a car and , well she got a pretty good beating for her part in the protest. She was not real happy about it and she said her Husband would say as he was beating her . I don't want to do this , but I have to leave marks on you so my family knows I beat you for what you did. O.K. All hear say from my friend that got the Beating . That Guys name was Taric . ( Can't remember his last name ) He sure liked to smoke the weed when he lived in Sacramento California and would call Me all the Time saying Get Me some weed Mekigal . Yeah as they say I gots to do what is asked of Me so I would get him the weed. So one time I went to his house for thanksgiving and there were many Muslims there , or to say Islamic peoples . They cooked a goat and we would rip a piece of meat off the goat and drag it threw a yogurt type stuff and eat it. Pretty good stuff. There was also a turkey there for people like my wife to eat if they didn't like goat and kooskie ( Rice stuff) Not a big rice fan my self , I leave that for the Chinese peoples . Wheat is more to my liken. Anyway they were all friends at the time in Sacramento, but said if they were in there own countries they would be enemies . One big guy from Kuwait was not being to friendly with a guy from Libya though. Not quite sure what the problem was , but Taric said they are enemies here too that 2 . Anyway miss those guys . They were fun to be around when they lived in Sacramento California . Non of them beat there wives when they lived there . It was when Taric moved back home to Saudi Arabia that he had to beat his wife. I bet he don't get to smoke as much weed living there. Man that guy could smoke the weed. Stoner extraordinaire

There was also a turkey there for people like my wife to eat . . . .Why do you call yourself a Gal if you're really a guy?

Very confusing!

Saudi Arabia is where I got the impression and it was from a well to do Saudi that I got the impression . It was demanded of Him by his family . Now my friend who was a white woman from Minnesota she was out with the other woman in Saudi Arabia advocating for rights to drive a car and , well she got a pretty good beating for her part in the protest. She was not real happy about it and she said her Husband would say as he was beating her . I don't want to do this , but I have to leave marks on you so my family knows I beat you for what you did. O.K. All hear say from my friend that got the Beating . That Guys name was Taric . ( Can't remember his last name ) He sure liked to smoke the weed when he lived in Sacramento California and would call Me all the Time saying Get Me some weed Mekigal . Yeah as they say I gots to do what is asked of Me so I would get him the weed. So one time I went to his house for thanksgiving and there were many Muslims there , or to say Islamic peoples . They cooked a goat and we would rip a piece of meat off the goat and drag it threw a yogurt type stuff and eat it. Pretty good stuff. There was also a turkey there for people like my wife to eat if they didn't like goat and kooskie ( Rice stuff) Not a big rice fan my self , I leave that for the Chinese peoples . Wheat is more to my liken. Anyway they were all friends at the time in Sacramento, but said if they were in there own countries they would be enemies . One big guy from Kuwait was not being to friendly with a guy from Libya though. Not quite sure what the problem was , but Taric said they are enemies here too that 2 . Anyway miss those guys . They were fun to be around when they lived in Sacramento California . Non of them beat there wives when they lived there . It was when Taric moved back home to Saudi Arabia that he had to beat his wife. I bet he don't get to smoke as much weed living there. Man that guy could smoke the weed. Stoner extraordinaire

i see that this is horrible, what you talked about, but even from the smoking weed thing, hmm, it's even forbidden in islam to smoke weed or drink alcoholic drinks or anything that can make you unconsious, or not very consious, anyway, so, that story, you poiting that it is, islam fault's, rather than their tradiontions and stuff? also, it's not like in only saudi arabia where a woman is get hitted by her husband or something, yes even in usa if you are asking, anyway, there's a difference, between, islam, the relegion and it's teaching, and what people do, for example, in christanity, it is forbidden to have sex before marriage, yet many christians do sex before marriage, and other things...

Why do you call yourself a Gal if you're really a guy?

Very confusing!

It is Sumerian . Gal= Great . It is an abbreviation of my Name . Some say it means Great Below , in a hymn to Tammuz Eres-ki-Gal is called The Lady of the Great House and it is the Ki-Gal that represents the Great house part of the name , and would you have it , my last name is Greathouse. Also Mekigal is the original form for the name Michael and what have you my name is Mikel . So it is a perfect fit to my real name . Also Mekigal is said to be the guy that invented the plow that kicked off the agricultural age. He is said to be the origin of the Micheal myth , Michaelmas celebrations and all. Deified as time went on. Even the Babylonians had a month named after him. The new testament even refers to him by the Statement the " Lord of the Harvest "
The funny thing to Me now is no one else uses the name but Me . I find that odd . As many people use Enki , Zeus, even Jesus and what have you, but I seem to be the only Mekigal . I like it . Like it was waiting for me to pick it up and be the Mekigal . Shine on harvest moon. Anyway as they say about crazy friggen artist and fools . We come from a place that is neither male or female but human

i see that this is horrible, what you talked about, but even from the smoking weed thing, hmm, it's even forbidden in islam to smoke weed or drink alcoholic drinks or anything that can make you unconsious, or not very consious, anyway, so, that story, you poiting that it is, islam fault's, rather than their tradiontions and stuff? also, it's not like in only saudi arabia where a woman is get hitted by her husband or something, yes even in usa if you are asking, anyway, there's a difference, between, islam, the relegion and it's teaching, and what people do, for example, in christanity, it is forbidden to have sex before marriage, yet many christians do sex before marriage, and other things...
I don't blame Islam . I blame tradition by the Saudi family that required there son to beat his wife for doing something they didn't approve of. Christan wives get beat too. Christians beat there kids also. In the faith they have a saying " Spoil the rod spoil the child and what that means is beat your child as to force them to obey you. This is primitive thinking. I never beat my children and they are perfect. I don't call them sinners either. I tell them they are brilliant and perfect and they believe Me as they look up to Me like I was God and act accordingly . They are gifted and the schools think they are special for it . They also raise the other children up from there selves feeling like failures because I also taught them to show and have Mercy . I have had teachers cry right in front of Me because of the compassion my children show for others. It don't hurt that my son is 6" 2" and is 13 years old . He is going to save the world when he gets older. I raised him for the task and his name means Ahkenoton Pharaoh or Man of Light the Great House. He will live to his name. He can't help it for the world calls his name to succeed

I am not against Islam. I saw nothing to be against in the Quran or Islam . I am against Unjust acts towards the common people of the earth . I live with a big face to fight for the oppressed meek people of the world that have small faces . I don't even hold it against the radical Muslim for Jihad. I like to call there acts Demolition. For I believe every act of rebellion is a reflection of society as a whole and it is the inability of the people that think they are better than others that cause a lot of the violent acts of protest. Slaves to society revolt and one reason is " We will die with our hands unbound " It is the meaning of being American and is breed into us from birth . We will die with our hands unbound. Now Me I have extra inclinations for my family were Architects of America starting in 1709 and Harmon my direct Relative lived next door to George Washington . Owned a tavern at the cross road where many discussions of freedom took place. My Grand Fathers 1st. Cousin won the Civil war in America at a battle just out side of Atlanta . It was General Sherman"s March to the sea and he had written the President that if he could Take Atlanta he could deliver victory to the North. What have you My relative gave his life in an act of bravery and his troops were inspired to take the day and advance on to take Atlanta with ease. I know it took all the men to make it happen , but there was much noted on his bravery and how all took notice and fought with more vigor even though there strength had already waned . So you can see where I come from . My genetic disposition . Free or Die

I don't blame Islam . I blame tradition by the Saudi family that required there son to beat his wife for doing something they didn't approve of. Christan wives get beat too. Christians beat there kids also. In the faith they have a saying " Spoil the rod spoil the child and what that means is beat your child as to force them to obey you. This is primitive thinking. I never beat my children and they are perfect. I don't call them sinners either. I tell them they are brilliant and perfect and they believe Me as they look up to Me like I was God and act accordingly . They are gifted and the schools think they are special for it . They also raise the other children up from there selves feeling like failures because I also taught them to show and have Mercy . I have had teachers cry right in front of Me because of the compassion my children show for others. It don't hurt that my son is 6" 2" and is 13 years old . He is going to save the world when he gets older. I raised him for the task and his name means Ahkenoton Pharaoh or Man of Light the Great House. He will live to his name. He can't help it for the world calls his name to succeed

true, but, about children some times, it's ok to beat them, not to heart them, but to beat them, that would heart them, immitionally, and not physicly, and sometimes it should be done, if talking and etc.. didnt work, not all children are the same, and i agree on not to spoil the children very much, but that's sometimes only, when it cant be solved with talking and etc... anyway, there are more punishements, that are stronger than beating, like, not to talk to your kid for a day, or half a day, ignore him means, well, true that you may not handle it, but, sometimes, it should be, after all, violence=produce violence, and so on, the prophet mohamed (pbuh), said, teach the children while they are playing, anyway, beating children, some category of them, according to the personnality, beating them with the stick on their hands, can be harmefull to them, like to be, less active than should be, or, idk, i'm no a sicologist, i'm talking about, strong beating, that can hurt physicly= heart sicologicly more

I am not against Islam. I saw nothing to be against in the Quran or Islam . I am against Unjust acts towards the common people of the earth . I live with a big face to fight for the oppressed meek people of the world that have small faces . I don't even hold it against the radical Muslim for Jihad. I like to call there acts Demolition. For I believe every act of rebellion is a reflection of society as a whole and it is the inability of the people that think they are better than others that cause a lot of the violent acts of protest. Slaves to society revolt and one reason is " We will die with our hands unbound " It is the meaning of being American and is breed into us from birth . We will die with our hands unbound. Now Me I have extra inclinations for my family were Architects of America starting in 1709 and Harmon my direct Relative lived next door to George Washington . Owned a tavern at the cross road where many discussions of freedom took place. My Grand Fathers 1st. Cousin won the Civil war in America at a battle just out side of Atlanta . It was General Sherman"s March to the sea and he had written the President that if he could Take Atlanta he could deliver victory to the North. What have you My relative gave his life in an act of bravery and his troops were inspired to take the day and advance on to take Atlanta with ease. I know it took all the men to make it happen , but there was much noted on his bravery and how all took notice and fought with more vigor even though there strength had already waned . So you can see where I come from . My genetic disposition . Free or Die

i respect your saying, free, or die, we win, or we die

We cannot judge a religion by the contents of its holy book. We can only judge it by the way its members behave. By that measure Islam is certainly no worse than Judaism or Christianity.

But it is also no better. The members of all three sects find in their holy books justification for considering themselves better than the others, justification for treating them unfairly and even cruelly, and justification for killing them and even going to war against them.

Jews, Christians and Muslims have been making war against non-Jews, non-Christians and non-Muslims (and even against people who claim to be of the same faith but practice it differently) since the religions were founded.

This violence in the name of Abraham's god far outweighs any good that these people occasionally do during their rest periods between their wars and conquests.

Fairly hard to argue otherwise, unfortunately.

We cannot judge a religion by the contents of its holy book. We can only judge it by the way its members behave. By that measure Islam is certainly no worse than Judaism or Christianity.

But it is also no better. The members of all three sects find in their holy books justification for considering themselves better than the others, justification for treating them unfairly and even cruelly, and justification for killing them and even going to war against them.

Jews, Christians and Muslims have been making war against non-Jews, non-Christians and non-Muslims (and even against people who claim to be of the same faith but practice it differently) since the religions were founded.

This violence in the name of Abraham's god far outweighs any good that these people occasionally do during their rest periods between their wars and conquests.

in islam, christianity, and jews, is not a problem as long they all beleive in god, and on the contrary, islam order us to respect christanity and jews relegion esspecially, because they also beleive in god ;)

Well, this would be the nicer interpretation. Nothing for the atheists though?

Well, this would be the nicer interpretation. Nothing for the atheists though?

nope :P
(p.s.: if you think atheists must be killed or something, no, try to convince them of the existence of god, and that's it, you did your duty, wether you could convince them to beleive or not to beleive, it's between them and god, god will judge after all)

That's likely a position as close as most theists will get.

in islam, christianity, and jews, is not a problem as long they all beleive in god, and on the contrary, islam order us to respect christanity and jews relegion esspecially, because they also beleive in god.You deliberately misread my post. That is intellectual dishonesty, a violation of the website rules.

My point was that it doesn't matter what your book tells you to do. All that matters is what you do. Christians, Jews and Muslims have been treating each other--and even those within their own religion who disagree with them about the minutiae-- with disrespect, intolerance, hostility, and deadly violence for hundreds of years.

This is not a misconception. This is an observation.

You deliberately misread my post. That is intellectual dishonesty, a violation of the website rules.

My point was that it doesn't matter what your book tells you to do. All that matters is what you do. Christians, Jews and Muslims have been treating each other--and even those within their own religion who disagree with them about the minutiae-- with disrespect, intolerance, hostility, and deadly violence for hundreds of years.

This is not a misconception. This is an observation.

there's a difference of what's in the quran, and what was going on in many parts in history, in tolerance between christians and muslims both in the muslim world and in the christian world, starting from the first days of islam in the arabia when muslims who were obsessed found peace and protection with a christian king of a city, forgot it's name, and of what's going on today and what happened in many chapters in history
so this thread is about, the misconceptions about islam, not about muslims or, history, or so on, all kinds of events happened during history, including how the maghreb countries and other arab countries gave the shelter to jews who runned from the holocusts, tunisian jews themselves say that, (not only in tunisia anyway..), also that big tolerance when a priest was murdered in tunisia, muslims went to the church to put flowers to him, (anyway the crime was planned, besides a protestations of hate words infront of a synagog, and bulldozing a histrical mosque, 400 years old mosque, anyway long story, a conspirecie wich never worked and failed hardly)..exemples also, are aloot

anyway, what rules did i break? LOL :bugeye:

anyway, what rules did i break?You've explained yourself so I apologize for the accusation. But in the future, to avoid misunderstanding, please don't completely ignore the main point of a post when you respond to it. It could be interpreted as intellectual dishonesty. We're having a lot of trouble with that these days and someone could overreact.

You've explained yourself so I apologize for the accusation. But in the future, to avoid misunderstanding, please don't completely ignore the main point of a post when you respond to it. It could be interpreted as intellectual dishonesty. We're having a lot of trouble with that these days and someone could overreact.

ok i see

Jews, Christians and Muslims have been making war against non-Jews, non-Christians and non-Muslims (and even against people who claim to be of the same faith but practice it differently) since the religions were founded.

Well of course. Enabling the formation of powerful in-groups that can direct violence and competition against outsiders is the entire point of hierarchical religions (i.e., the ones associated with societies that have attained the state level of organization or higher).



This violence in the name of Abraham's god far outweighs any good that these people occasionally do during their rest periods between their wars and conquests.

Doesn't make sense - the violence is the "good." They've managed to built and maintain large, powerful civilizations in the face of determined competition - by means of organized violence, and the demonstrated capacity for such. The violence isn't some drawback that cancels out the upside - it is simply the other side of the coin, the means by which the upside is brought about.

If there's some problem with "good" there, it's the silly supposition that you can maintain large states without employing systematic violence.

Well of course. Enabling the formation of powerful in-groups that can direct violence and competition against outsiders is the entire point of hierarchical religions (i.e., the ones associated with societies that have attained the state level of organization or higher).



Doesn't make sense - the violence is the "good." They've managed to built and maintain large, powerful civilizations in the face of determined competition - by means of organized violence, and the demonstrated capacity for such. The violence isn't some drawback that cancels out the upside - it is simply the other side of the coin, the means by which the upside is brought about.

If there's some problem with "good" there, it's the silly supposition that you can maintain large states without employing systematic violence.

Really! Just so cut and dried is it? So, is there no other way to maintain large states other than systematic violence?

no, not exactly, but to beat her, in a very light way, like with a pen

When Shadow is married..............

Shadow: Sorry wife, you have had two warnings. I hate to do it, but I must beat you.

Mrs Shadow: Oh, I suppose you are going to get your pen out.

Shadow: Yes, here is my pen. Prepare yourself.
(beats with pen)

Mrs Shadow: (laughing) Oh, that really hurts.

Shadow: Yes. Behave better next time.

Really! Just so cut and dried is it? So, is there no other way to maintain large states other than systematic violence?

You got any examples of large states that have been erected and maintained without such?

Last I checked, the defining feature of a state is "monopoly on violence." It's also important that such a monopoly be legitimated - an area in which religion plays an important role.

Last I checked, the defining feature of a state is "monopoly on violence." It's also important that such a monopoly be legitimated - an area in which religion plays an important role. It works better, for that role, if it eschews violence of its own - just as the state is more solidly legitimized by a religion of peace.

Part of their complementary role playing would likely be visible and much emphasized curbs on each other's behavior.

One hand washes the other - a large, organized, powerful, and peaceful religion is entirely possible, if the behavior of its State is reliably and competently supportive.

There's still always the threat of force: the legal system rests, ultimately, on force as a last resort.

Really! Just so cut and dried is it? So, is there no other way to maintain large states other than systematic violence?

USA? (oil, military manufacturing, banking, use the poor countries to keep their economy working good (not just usa effcorse) etc...):rolleyes:

When Shadow is married..............

Shadow: Sorry wife, you have had two warnings. I hate to do it, but I must beat you.

Mrs Shadow: Oh, I suppose you are going to get your pen out.

Shadow: Yes, here is my pen. Prepare yourself.
(beats with pen)

Mrs Shadow: (laughing) Oh, that really hurts.

Shadow: Yes. Behave better next time.

O_o
you have two warnings? and i hate to do it?whuut? LOL
and what? beating??
not like, somehow, those are, laws or something that if i didnt do i will be, somehow, be in hell? LOL
O_o""
:bugeye:

weird, that when talking about civilisations, and you talk about the arab expanding, you say it's terrorism, and violence, and islam, and blablabla, and if it is about mangolia, or rome, or something, it's so impressive, waow
i mean, what?? O_o

and weird, you still don't get the difference, between, the relegion of islam, and some muslim acts, or muslim leaders and kings around the history when is about conquesting, and etc... why i don't say that christanity told "christians" to make world war I and II, and to kill thousands if not millions of red indians, and etc.... etc.... O_o i see, so, christanity"told" them to do that? or is it in the bible? :shrug:

weird, that when talking about civilisations, and you talk about the arab expanding, you say it's terrorism, and violence, and islam, and blablabla, and if it is about mangolia, or rome, or something, it's so impressive, waow

Which no one seriously doubts in the slightest was accomplished largely by war, just to remind you.

Which no one seriously doubts in the slightest was accomplished largely by war, just to remind you.

war was done by each civilisation on earth, and by each civilisation that became larger and larger, rome for example too, mangolian dinasty, chinese dinasty, arab dinasty, it's history we all know, but this thread is about the misconceptions, not like, the bible told christians go invade that, and go kill millions of people, in world wars, and make ethical cleaning in america, or like quran told arabs to conquest and expand and etc...

why i don't say that christanity told "christians" to make world war I and II, and to kill thousands if not millions of red indians, and etc.... etc.... O_o i see, so, christanity"told" them to do that? or is it in the bible? :shrug:

Indeed, why don't you say that? Well, maybe the World Wars aren't such a great example (mostly Christian-on-Christian, those), but the other stuff? Sure.

Is your complaint that your targets are wrong on the issue, or just that they're hypocrits for failing to apply comparable scrutiny to their own religions?

Indeed, why don't you say that? Well, maybe the World Wars aren't such a great example (mostly Christian-on-Christian, those), but the other stuff? Sure.


what, other "stuff"? you mean, killing "non-christians"? i didnt know that red indians were christians :bugeye:
i didnt know that japanese were christians too in that time :rolleyes:
and etc...



Is your complaint that your targets are wrong on the issue, or just that they're hypocrits for failing to apply comparable scrutiny to their own religions?

no i'm not about the hypocrits for failing to compare their relegions too or whatever, i'm talking about, wether it's christanity or islam, or any other relegion of a certin civilisation, it's not that relegion that told them, expand, conquer, and etc... there's a difference between that relegion's teachings, and as for islam, the quran, and the history of the civilisaion, all civilisations had wars and maked wars and conquered in order to expand, and become greater, and even to survive

what, other "stuff"? you mean, killing "non-christians"? i didnt know that red indians were christians :bugeye:
i didnt know that japanese were christians too in that time :rolleyes:
and etc...

Reading comprehension fail.



no i'm not about the hypocrits for failing to compare their relegions too or whatever, i'm talking about, wether it's christanity or islam, or any other relegion of a certin civilisation, it's not that relegion that told them, expand, conquer, and etc... there's a difference between that relegion's teachings, and as for islam, the quran, and the history of the civilisaion, all civilisations had wars and maked wars and conquered in order to expand, and become greater, and even to survive

In what sense? The religions in question are integral parts of the civilizations in question - the killings and such could never have happened with the religions, and specifically the religious sanction for such. You can stand here and say that they were doing it wrong, but so what? That's not what the religious authorities said at the time, not what the masses of believers understood to be correct.

Not that I'm seeing any particular lack of clear Islamic teachings on those subjects in the first place.

Well, maybe the World Wars aren't such a great example (mostly Christian-on-Christian, those) . . . .Half of WWII was Japan attacking China and other nations in the vicinity. IIRC, the only population involved that had a significant Christian community was the Filipinos.

Well its good to see the scientific discussion in the comparative religion forum is so different from the usual nonsense in the religion forum. heh

O_o
you have two warnings? and i hate to do it?whuut? LOL
and what? beating??
not like, somehow, those are, laws or something that if i didnt do i will be, somehow, be in hell? LOL
O_o""
:bugeye:

Shadow never understands my posts. Heh Heh:)

Shadow never understands my posts. Heh Heh:)

you meant that what i'm saying is all bullshits ;)

Half of WWII was Japan attacking China and other nations in the vicinity. IIRC, the only population involved that had a significant Christian community was the Filipinos.

Which would further disqualify that war as much of an example of Christian-motivated statecraft.

One, two, three, four . . . is that all?

1. The faith also includes Persians.

2. They also claim Mohammad was "perfect" and that he took a visit up to "heaven" and visited with Jesus and "god." What does one have to believe to classify it as "worshiping?"

3. The Qu'ran came from notes taken of his sayings before his death. Then it was organized (somewhat) into the Qu'ran. To believe the Muslim god wrote it is an act of faith.

4. A Muslim is someone who believes what other Muslims believe. Much of it is not even in the Qu'ran. Muslims in parts of Islam chew kat leaves a mild narcotic, practice slavery and mutilate girl's pubic areas. Is any of that in the Qu'ran?

Islam has had a great history. Its civilization once dominated much of the world and it created a great age of science and prosperity---up until about 1200 AD however. Then it went into decline.

Our turn is next.

Brough
civilization-overview dot com

Which would further disqualify that war as much of an example of Christian-motivated statecraft.I think the Holocaust--the culmination of the thousand years of antisemitism that was one of the defining traits of European Christendom--pretty firmly qualifies WWII as Christianity at its peak.

2. They also claim Mohammad was "perfect" and that he took a visit up to "heaven" and visited with Jesus and "god." What does one have to believe to classify it as "worshiping?"

actually, to other earthes in other univerces, and yes threw wormhole



3. The Qu'ran came from notes taken of his sayings before his death. Then it was organized (somewhat) into the Qu'ran. To believe the Muslim god wrote it is an act of faith.


the quotes, or whatever, are not in the quran.... :bugeye:



4. A Muslim is someone who believes what other Muslims believe. Much of it is not even in the Qu'ran. Muslims in parts of Islam chew kat leaves a mild narcotic, practice slavery and mutilate girl's pubic areas. Is any of that in the Qu'ran?

no... a muslim is who beleive that there's no god but allah (allah also means god, so, there's no god but god, means, there's none but god) and mohamed is he's prophet
and islam, is based on quran, means, it's the source of the beleifs of that relegion, and what is forbidden and what's not, and etc...
islam, the relegion is against slavery, or forcing anyone on anything...
and ....



Islam has had a great history. Its civilization once dominated much of the world and it created a great age of science and prosperity---up until about 1200 AD however. Then it went into decline.
[/QUOTE]

go read history, and science and etc... was always something that have been passed from a civilisation to another, once greece and rome, once the muslim countries, like baghdad, andalus, kairouan, cairo, etc... and then europe, and etc.. always in history civilisations fell and rised...

Oh great, a new Mega fanatic/racist on sciforums
there was sandy here before, and ended up being banned

And EFC.

I think the Holocaust--the culmination of the thousand years of antisemitism that was one of the defining traits of European Christendom--pretty firmly qualifies WWII as Christianity at its peak.

In the first place: the Holocaust is something that happened during WWII, but was not the war itself. The issue was both world wars, taken together - and it's difficult to see those as anything other than Christian-on-Christian politics conflicts, even if certain parties did also oppress the Jews during the latter war. if Shadow had wanted to refer to the Holocaust, he would have said that, and not "the World Wars."

In the second place: the Holocaust (and World Wars) was as much about the rise of ethnic nationalism as anything to do with "Christendom." The defining political feature of "European Christendom" was monarchism, cutting across ethnic and national lines. The Holocause is what happened after that system had been replaced, and represented ethnic nationalism's attempt to assert itself by redrawing the ethnic make-up of Europe along consolodated lines.

Do you feel the Armenian Holocaust falls into the same niche?

And EFC.


I'll give you supremacist but good luck trying to prove he was a fanatic or a racist.

Hmm, great topic. I personally feel that the confusion surrounding Islam comes from two things-- an outside perspective at the inside (Non-Islamic Media trying to "explain Islam" in Christian/Jewish/etc values and ideas) and the fact that there is no one central authority for Muslims.

But let's be honest.

1- Belief is only obliged on the believing. Muslims don't expect non-Muslims to share the same religious views. But that's how nearly all religions are. I'm fairly certain that a Buddhist doesn't expect for me to follow their rules/laws-- but that a "practicing buddhist" will try his or her best to follow their rules/laws as best they can.

2- SHARIA IS ONLY FOR MUSLIMS. It is the code of conduct/religious values. It is an equivalent of Kosher. In fact, it is the Kosher of Muslims. Sharia describes a Muslim and explains what they ought to or ought not to do.

Now, sharia is applied through what are called "fatwa"-- AKA, legal ruling/verdict based usually on a precendent "usul." The entirety of these make up "fiqh" or laws. You will see that the Islam practiced in Pakistan is radically different than the one practiced in Saudi Arabia or Malaysia. In fact, there are competing groups within Nations that preach different forms of Islam.

Essentially, Sharia is the code for Muslims, which is explained and maintained by scholars who issue legal opinions pertaining to situations. For example-- can a Muslim eat glass that is prepared with a dash of grease? It is for the practicing Muslims to follow.



I'll add more to this later on. It's already 1 am, though!

I'll give you supremacist

Yes.


but good luck trying to prove he was a fanatic or a racist.

Race doesn't enter into it, since the question is about religion. As for fanatic, I think I would call anyone with opinions too tightly allied with the legal firm of Mawdudi, Qutb and Adolf to be fanatical in their attitudes.

Hmm, great topic. I personally feel that the confusion surrounding Islam comes from two things-- an outside perspective at the inside (Non-Islamic Media trying to "explain Islam" in Christian/Jewish/etc values and ideas) and the fact that there is no one central authority for Muslims.

But let's be honest.

1- Belief is only obliged on the believing. Muslims don't expect non-Muslims to share the same religious views. But that's how nearly all religions are. I'm fairly certain that a Buddhist doesn't expect for me to follow their rules/laws-- but that a "practicing buddhist" will try his or her best to follow their rules/laws as best they can.

2- SHARIA IS ONLY FOR MUSLIMS. It is the code of conduct/religious values. It is an equivalent of Kosher. In fact, it is the Kosher of Muslims. Sharia describes a Muslim and explains what they ought to or ought not to do.

But you'll recognize that Islamic, where it enters the legal code of an Islamic country, becomes law for everyone, including blasphemy statues and public religious observance. It would be difficult to imagine any reasonable secular more attached to such strictures. So in that sense, it is for everyone, and this is the problem.

But you'll recognize that Islamic, where it enters the legal code of an Islamic country, becomes law for everyone, including blasphemy statues and public religious observance

Does it? Where in the world is sharia law applied to non-Muslims? In which country? Also, what is your personal opinion about laws? Should all people in a country follow the same law? US laws are not based on native American law, they are based on European legal systems which are derived from the church. Should they apply to everyone?

Islamic perspectives on law are applied to non-Muslims in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and a host of other countries from cases I can't even recall. Sam: don't be disingenuous, okay? It's too early in the morning for that.

And your accidental digression about everyone following the same law - particularly as this must include laws pertaining to religious observance - pretty much proves my point. Which it wasn't actually too early for.

Islamic perspectives on law are applied to non-Muslims in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and a host of other countries from cases I can't even recall. Sam: don't be disingenuous, okay? It's too early in the morning for that.

And your accidental digression about everyone following the same law - particularly as this must include laws pertaining to religious observance - pretty much proves my point. Which it wasn't actually too early for.

Now all you have to do is name one law from sharia which is applied differently to Muslims than to non-Muslims in any country of your choice. Go ahead. Personally, I don't see a problem with having different laws in one country, for example, there seems to be no point in applying Judeo-Christian laws to native Americans who have their own legal systems. But I am interested in your viewpoint. Do you think non-Muslims should have their own system of law in Muslim dominant countries? Do you think Muslims should have their own legal systems in non-Muslim countries?

You're a Christian of European origin but you seem content to impose your religion, laws and politics on native Americans so I don't think you believe in minorities having their own systems. But maybe you do?

Now all you have to do is name one law from sharia which is applied differently to Muslims than to non-Muslims in any country of your choice. Go ahead.

Blasphemy law, Pakistan. (http://theundergroundsite.com/index.php/2011/01/pakistan-prime-minister-will-not-amend-blasphemy-law-bibi-transfers-jails-15139)

Blasphemy law, Pakistan. (http://theundergroundsite.com/index.php/2011/01/pakistan-prime-minister-will-not-amend-blasphemy-law-bibi-transfers-jails-15139)

And? This is based on sharia how? Pakistan like India follows the UK legal system

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_the_United_Kingdom

Hmm, great topic. I personally feel that the confusion surrounding Islam comes from two things-- an outside perspective at the inside (Non-Islamic Media trying to "explain Islam" in Christian/Jewish/etc values and ideas) and the fact that there is no one central authority for Muslims.

But let's be honest.

1- Belief is only obliged on the believing. Muslims don't expect non-Muslims to share the same religious views. But that's how nearly all religions are. I'm fairly certain that a Buddhist doesn't expect for me to follow their rules/laws-- but that a "practicing buddhist" will try his or her best to follow their rules/laws as best they can.

yes, christians, and muslims, and jews, can share with muslims some relegion views ;)
just said some idk how much to say much or some


2- SHARIA IS ONLY FOR MUSLIMS. It is the code of conduct/religious values. It is an equivalent of Kosher. In fact, it is the Kosher of Muslims. Sharia describes a Muslim and explains what they ought to or ought not to do.

Now, sharia is applied through what are called "fatwa"-- AKA, legal ruling/verdict based usually on a precendent "usul." The entirety of these make up "fiqh" or laws. You will see that the Islam practiced in Pakistan is radically different than the one practiced in Saudi Arabia or Malaysia. In fact, there are competing groups within Nations that preach different forms of Islam.

Essentially, Sharia is the code for Muslims, which is explained and maintained by scholars who issue legal opinions pertaining to situations. For example-- can a Muslim eat glass that is prepared with a dash of grease? It is for the practicing Muslims to follow.



I'll add more to this later on. It's already 1 am, though!

the sharia laws, the real one, that is based on the relegion, is not applied today, and it's even more fair than the normal laws, for example, cut the hand of who steals, but,not every thief's hand, who stole because he was hungry, he had too, and etc... he don't get punished, if you kill a person, you are judged by death, inless it's in a self defence, or other exeptions, (atfer investigation)
if a woman cheats on her husband, while her husband was good to her, and very fair to her and doing right with her, she's punished (that would be decided by the court, the punishement i mean), anf if her husband was not good with her, means, it was he's fault, because he was ignoring her and etc... it's him who ger punished (also the court decide the punishement, wich is usually get hitted by whiping) also, the husband, or the wife, can just forgive ther other, and so, none get punished
if a thieft, who is a hungry person stole from you, and you beated him, you have to give donate to him, either by food or money, idk how much exactly it should be, so those are the main, things that have miss comprehension about,
also there's nothing that says that a woman must not work, or leave her home, or etc... the prophet mohamed(pbuh)'s wife, used to work in commerce, the first univercity in the world, was established by a muslim woman, from kairouan (tunisia) in morroco, the univ is called the univercity of al karawein, don't know how to spell it in english, who invented the arab esterlabe, is meriem esterlabi, she's also a muslim woman, and other examples...
however, the real sharia,the fair one, is not applied today, and i bet that it is hard to apply(so i don't say can't), esspecially in this modern time

and it have nothing to do with what is called "usul" usul means like, origine, or traditions, traditions are not always good, islam is against applying the traditions, just because, their ancestors did that, it must be reasenebal, means, don't harm or something too, the islam is not practiced differently, but, how some people manupulate it, and how in some countries, things are, messy, messed up, like in afghanistan, and the fanatical sharia law, as far as i know, and other example from different places

however, there are some groups in islam, that have nothing to do with islam, and are radical, for them, for example, it's forbidden to stare at the women, while they do, and they do nasty things, (sex? maybe?) and they have nothing based on islam, like a group called, soufia, or something, they use somehow, "holy" water, when you enter their group, and other bullshits...however, those are limited groups, and, what they do, or what's in their thinking, have nohing to do with islam,

But you'll recognize that Islamic, where it enters the legal code of an Islamic country, becomes law for everyone, including blasphemy statues and public religious observance. It would be difficult to imagine any reasonable secular more attached to such strictures. So in that sense, it is for everyone, and this is the problem.

Tunisia is a muslim country, and?

i would actually agree on anything you would say, on some people, with fanatical thinking, and even some groups, with fanatical acts, who do things, and assosiate it to islam, and etc.. while it have nothing to do with islam

but to start listing, things and saying islam say so, islam do so, that's very ignorant, because i don't expect you studied islam, and knowing about it for your hall life and etc...

i would agree with you, if you named a specific group or something, and not assosiate it to islam and it's teachings

And? This is based on sharia how?

What, are you serious? :bugeye: Enough already. Man.

I note shadow's in no confusion about the collusion of conservative stoogism.

Tunisia is a muslim country, and?But sharia has not been as thoroughly institutionalized in government-enforced law in Tunisia, the way it has been in, for example, Saudi Arabia, where all the girls in a school were allowed to burn to death because the firemen were not allowed to rescue them as it would have required them to touch them.

There are many Muslim countries that are quite liberal in that regard. The world's largest Muslim country is Indonesia and they don't enforce the female dress code, for example. Pervez Musharraf, the former president of Pakistan, made a point of frequently posing for photographers with his pet dogs, making it clear to the West that dogs are not considered "unclean" in his country.

Pakistan even had a female president. Of course, she was assassinated.

There are many Muslim countries that are quite liberal in that regard. The world's largest Muslim country is Indonesia

It would be nice if we had some actual definition of what "Muslim country" is supposed to mean, while we're on the topic. Sometimes it seems to be simply "any country whose population is predominantly Muslim," other times it seems to mean something having to do with Sharia or whatever.

And as to the former, I'd note that we do not tend to use that sort of labelling on other countries without some hesitation - people who call the USA a "white country" or a "Christian country" are not typically engaging in vanilla statistical descriptions, nor entitled to any such presumption of innocence. There seems to me some unaknowledged hazard in this practice of assigning huge swaths of countries to "Islam" as if such were some geographic, apolitical property.



Saudi Arabia, where all the girls in a school were allowed to burn to death because the firemen were not allowed to rescue them as it would have required them to touch them.

It was actually worse than that - not only were men not allowed to go inside to rescue the girls, the girls themselves would all have made it out safely on their own power in the first place, had they not found their exit blocked by the Morality Police, who forced (as in, with physical beatings) all of the girls to remain inside the burning building because they were not properly attired to appear in public. But then, some cleric did get fired over that one, IIRC, so let's not make it more emblematic of Saudi practice than is warranted.