Tell me about Islam

Anonymous
Muslima wrote:

False!One of the fundamental teachings of Islam is that non-Muslims are guaranteed freedom to practise their religions and customs without any restriction as long as non-Muslims reciprocate by not being insensitive to the Muslim community. The Constitution, too, categorically restricts Most Islamic laws to Muslims. And one more time, Muslims are not required to live under sharia law, they are required to follow the law of the land they live in. In Islam obedience to the law of the land is a religious duty. The Qur'an commands Muslims to remain faithful to not only Allah and the Prophet Muhammad (saw), but also the authority they live under.


Not all non-Muslims. Only Christians and Jews.

Muslima wrote:
But as it aimed at putting an end to such issue, Islam laid down rules which would eventually lead to eradicating the practice. So it allowed Muslims to have intercourse with slave women taken as captives of just and legitimate wars. In so doing, the woman would automatically become free if she got pregnant. What's more, her child would also become free. Not only that, Islam also ordered a Muslim to treat the slave woman in every respect as if she were his wife. She should be well fed, clothed and given due protection. In the family environment, she had the opportunity to learn about Islam and was free to accept it or reject it. She also had the opportunity to earn her freedom for she could be ransomed.


There is absolutely nothing in the scripture about the wars having to be just to qualify for slave-making. In describing the beautiful life of female slaves of Muslims, you neglected to mention one thing: a female captive had no choice in whether to have sex with her owner. That is, slave owners had unrestricted rights to have sex with their female captives. There is no scriptural support for the female captives having free choice in the matter. In that regard, she is very different from a wife who at least theoretically consented to the marital union.

Furthermore, Islam may have introduced rules on slavery, but it never eradicated it, and never sought to. In Muslim societies, slaves were bought and sold. That's a fact.

There is nothing in Islamic scripture that ties slave-making to reciprocity; nowhere does it say "take slaves if slaves were taken from your own people." You made that bit up.

It's very disingenuous of you to say it was Islam's beauty that attracted slaves to it. What attracted slaves to it was the path to freedom it offered. If I was captured and became a slave, I'd sign up for Satanism if it made me a free woman. Furthermore, it is historically inaccurate to say that slaves who became Muslims were automatically freed since Muslim slaves were abound, all until 1960s in Saudi Arabia and to this date in Mauritania.

Muslima wrote:
Islam recognises no distinction of race or colour, black or white, citizens or soldiers, rulers or subjects; they are perfectly equal, not in theory only, but in practice.


But it most certainly recognizes the superiority of Muslims over non-Muslims. That's the fact of Sharia.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:One thing pp's need to understand that Islam does not promote equality. It promotes justice. Big difference. There is too much engrained or institutional prejudice against women, the scale needs to be adjusted. Married women in Islam are not compelled to work. Women are not required to financially support themselves. Here in the U.S. Where women make less than what men make for the same jobs, perhaps equality is not truly achievable. And even if it could be achievable in the future, perhaps women need safeguards because of their historical subjugation.

So..while Islam on the outside may look like a religion that oppresses womens rights, in fact it really does the opposite. It protects them from institutional mistreatment. And those who deny women their rights in an Islamic system are never acting in accordance with Islam.

Why doesn't Islam deal with institutional mistreatment then?
Anonymous
Muslima wrote:
Whoever among you cannot find the means to marry free, believing women, then he may marry from those whom your right hands possess of believing slave girls, and Allah is most knowing about your faith. You believers are of one another. So marry them with the permission of their people and give them their due compensation according to what is acceptable. They should be chaste, neither of those who commit unlawful intercourse randomly nor those who take secret lovers - Surah An-Nisa 4:25
This passage lays down in an unequivocal manner that sexual relations with female slaves are permitted only on the basis of marriage, and that in this respect there is no difference between them and free women.
But there IS a difference between female slaves and free women in that the free women need to consent to marriage. The opinion of female slaves on whether intercourse with their owners is desirable is not a factor.
Muslima
Member

Offline
Anonymous wrote:
Muslima wrote: So, what happens to the woman with NO male relatives and NO inheritance of any substance?


The question posed was about inheritance, not about widows who dont have relatives or any substance. That is a pretty illogical question given that of course someone who doesn't have money or any family to rely on will get a job if they can and want. Otherwise, they become the responsibility of the islamic state and the muslims in that state to a greater extent. Islam is not an individualistic society like the West. The wellbeing of each and every Muslim is the responsibility of all in the state.


OK. But you just finished telling us how Islam institutionalizes 1/2 rights for women in testimony and financial transactions. Also, as you pointed out yourself, there's a pervasive cultural attitude that women are under men's "protection" instead of autonomous. How do these things affect women's ability to function as equals in the workplace?

There are several verses in the Qur’an that discuss witnesses, without any reference to gender; some of these verses fully equate the testimony of males and female. The only verse in the entire Qur'an to equate the testimony of two women to that of one man is the so-called verse of debt (ayat al dayn), which occurs in Qur'an 2:282.

'O ye who believe! When ye deal with each other, in transactions involving future obligations in a fixed period of time, reduce them to writing Let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties: let not the scribe refuse to write: as Allah Has taught him, so let him write. Let him who incurs the liability dictate, but let him fear His Lord Allah, and not diminish aught of what he owes. If they party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable Himself to dictate, Let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her ..'

Part of Verse 2:282 which happens to be the longest verse in the Qur’an addresses this issue of women's testimony. This relatively long verse addresses fourteen diverse commandments regarding monetary transactions with long-term maturities in a society of illiterate people who had to employ the services of witnesses in lieu of receipts and written transactions. The spirit and aim of this verse is the registration and recordation of transactions and prevention of oblivion and possible denial on the part of the parties involved. However, in our time, with the majority of the population being literate and the existence of public institutions for maintaining records, no Muslim will seek a witness for non-monetary transactions, rather by using checks, promissory notes, money orders, credit cards, ect...will implement the spirit and purpose (not the apparent meaning) of the verse. Verse 2:282 was revealed at a time when women spent their time a home and had no role in economic affairs and no interest or knowledge of accounting, bookkeeping, and monetary transactions. This is definitely not the case today!
Muslima
Member

Offline
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

I am not Muslima but once again, she is correct here. Widows with no male relatives to support them become the ward of the state.

I am not at all seeing any attitude in Muslima's answers. She has been quite honest in her answers. If she paints Islam in flowery terms its likely because its simply an expression of her devotion and love for it. Nothing wrong with that. She has not been misleading at all in her answers. I am a Muslim also and validate her answers.


The point is, somebody had to tease this out of her before she admitted to it. All she offers initially is flowery stuff about how Islam offers "asylum" to prisoners, and that women get divorce, inheritance and other rights. Somebody else has to post the details, which aren't very flowery at all. Then she grudgingly admits it, and basically insults the person who provided the facts. That is indeed a form of deception.


Get your facts straight! I am not the one who started posting about asylum, inheritance, other rights ect. Have the decency to read what I write before attributing something to me. The only time I referred to the things you mentioned was in response to people posting fallacies concerning those rulings in Islam. Oh and I did not admit to anything, this is not a confession booth but I won't let you spread lies about Islam!
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

You want people to assume the out of wedlock birth was an immaculate conception based on gospel? But who other than Christians believe in the word of the gospel? Your "proof" is your OWN book though. And it requires me to assume the premise is true. The gospel is true perhaps to you but not to me or everyone else. So your reasoning is ill conceived. Try again.

I think the word " pedophile " was used in this thread, if not by you, then clearly by others.

There has been ample information provided by Muslima to explain Islamic inheritance, testimony, and divorce. I do not rely on Sharia though as Sharia is man made law. I rely on the Quran. Muslima might not have explained everything but she did a fairly decent job. Her "flowery" descriptions rubbed you the wrong way, huh? It sounds like you simply hated that she spoke devoutly about her faith.

Everything was explained to you. So in essence a Muslim woman under a true Islamic State is not required to support herself. She may but isn't required. Her brothers, uncles, father, are required to support her unless she is married. This is why inheritance laws gives men more money, so they can support women.

If a Muslim woman wants to divorce, she may, but has the addl hurdle of seeking a divorce through the court. A man needs two witnesses. The addl requirement acts as a safeguard for women in a system entrenched with institutional discrimination toward women, as it is in place to ensure a woman is not making a decision that will be more harmful to her in the long run. Moreover, men are not permitted to take back anything they bestowed to the wife during the marriage. This is in stark contrast to divorce laws in the US, where spouses often fight for who gets what, and women are in financial hardship after divorce.

Overall, it looks to me that Islam does a fine job of providing true "equality" because it is a more just system.

You follow me??


That sound you hear is everybody reading this smacking their heads against their screens. We don't follow you, Muslima (yes, it's clear from your rhetorical style that you're Muslima, just not logged in at the moment), because the errors in logic are overwhelming.
1. You said Jesus was born "out of wedlock," so it was explained that Joseph married Mary so there was no "out of wedlock birth" as you had claimed several times. So now you're on a different tangent about immaculate conception and how you don't believe the gospels - yet you call us Islamophobes for not taking the word of your holy book. Whatever....
2. You, Muslima, have been told multiple times that your descriptions are half-truths and therefore misleading. To the extent you got all flowery, it was for the purpose of throwing up a smoke screen and avoiding clarity and truth. THAT is the problem with your language and rhetorical style.
3. You haven't mentioned how divorced women lose custody of their children at a young age.

I'm satisfied if the facts get out there. Then DCUM readers can make up their own minds. The problem is, you're exhausting, and a person could spend an entire day tracking down your every logical fallacy and flowery smokescreen that's meant to camouflage the hard facts.


Hon, I am not Muslima. I assure you. I have to ask - are you basing your knowledge of Islam on Hollywood? Is it based on the movie, "Not Without My Daughter," or google research, perhaps? You may as well believe all rabbit stand on two feet and say "What's up Doc?" WTH?

So pardon me, it was technically not an "Out of wedlock" birth but now you say Mary had a shot gun wedding? In those days it was likely the most shameful and disgraceful of all acts. To justify it, I am to rely on the truth of YOUR OWN book, the gospel? So because the gospel said it's "immaculate" I must believe that to be truth? Is there any proof that is more universally acceptable that you can offer other than reliance on your own religous book?

You are terribly confused so let me clarify what we are debating here. You (or others) made the accusation that the islamic system is inequitable and therefore unjust toward women. Muslima and I (and possibly others, I don't know) explained the rationale behind islamic laws in the area of inheritance, divorce, and testimony. To explain the rationale, wouldn't I need to explain the Islamic system in more detail? I certainly wouldn't refer to gospel or the Torah to explain Islamic principles, would I? It simply wouldn't make sense to do so.

Contrast that with your assertion that Mary's conception was "immaculate" as a defense to my objection to Muhammad being called a pedophile. To defend Mary's pregnancy, you relied solely on your own religious book rather than any other universally accepted proof, such as scientific proof.

I was asked to explain the rationale for my religious principles, which I correctly and adequately did by explaining how things work in a true Islamic state. You were asked to defend mary's "immaculate" conception, which you could only do by relying on your religious book. You failed.

I hope I'm not wasting time here educating you on how to effectively argue a point.
Muslima
Member

Offline
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

You want people to assume the out of wedlock birth was an immaculate conception based on gospel? But who other than Christians believe in the word of the gospel? Your "proof" is your OWN book though. And it requires me to assume the premise is true. The gospel is true perhaps to you but not to me or everyone else. So your reasoning is ill conceived. Try again.

I think the word " pedophile " was used in this thread, if not by you, then clearly by others.

There has been ample information provided by Muslima to explain Islamic inheritance, testimony, and divorce. I do not rely on Sharia though as Sharia is man made law. I rely on the Quran. Muslima might not have explained everything but she did a fairly decent job. Her "flowery" descriptions rubbed you the wrong way, huh? It sounds like you simply hated that she spoke devoutly about her faith.

Everything was explained to you. So in essence a Muslim woman under a true Islamic State is not required to support herself. She may but isn't required. Her brothers, uncles, father, are required to support her unless she is married. This is why inheritance laws gives men more money, so they can support women.

If a Muslim woman wants to divorce, she may, but has the addl hurdle of seeking a divorce through the court. A man needs two witnesses. The addl requirement acts as a safeguard for women in a system entrenched with institutional discrimination toward women, as it is in place to ensure a woman is not making a decision that will be more harmful to her in the long run. Moreover, men are not permitted to take back anything they bestowed to the wife during the marriage. This is in stark contrast to divorce laws in the US, where spouses often fight for who gets what, and women are in financial hardship after divorce.

Overall, it looks to me that Islam does a fine job of providing true "equality" because it is a more just system.

You follow me??


That sound you hear is everybody reading this smacking their heads against their screens. We don't follow you, Muslima (yes, it's clear from your rhetorical style that you're Muslima, just not logged in at the moment), because the errors in logic are overwhelming.
1. You said Jesus was born "out of wedlock," so it was explained that Joseph married Mary so there was no "out of wedlock birth" as you had claimed several times. So now you're on a different tangent about immaculate conception and how you don't believe the gospels - yet you call us Islamophobes for not taking the word of your holy book. Whatever....
2. You, Muslima, have been told multiple times that your descriptions are half-truths and therefore misleading. To the extent you got all flowery, it was for the purpose of throwing up a smoke screen and avoiding clarity and truth. THAT is the problem with your language and rhetorical style.
3. You haven't mentioned how divorced women lose custody of their children at a young age.

I'm satisfied if the facts get out there. Then DCUM readers can make up their own minds. The problem is, you're exhausting, and a person could spend an entire day tracking down your every logical fallacy and flowery smokescreen that's meant to camouflage the hard facts.


Stop attributing messages to me. Clearly, you see that whatever you are responding to was written by "Anonymous" not "Muslima" I do not have the time nor the desire to sock poppet.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:PS: If you think women in Muslim countries are never in financial hardship after the divorce, you're blind.


Stay focused, this discussion is not about rotten people who use religion for their own ill purposes, its about what life is like for people in a TRUE islamic state. In true Islam, women do not suffer great hardship after divorce. They are cared for by male relatives or the State.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:And Joseph married her, yes, but AFTER Mary got pregnant.


Wow, Muslima! I thought you told us that Muslims revere Mary. Yet here you are, trashing Mary's reputation in order to score points on DCUM.


Again, I'm not Muslima. But whatever…

Yes, Muslims do have tremendous respect for Mary. I personally believe in the immaculate conception. Muslims are required to believe in it. But I'm using this as a point to show the lunacy of calling Muhammad a pedophile. Muhammad is no more a pedophile for marrying Aisha than Mary was a disgraced woman for having an immaculate conception. Get it?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:And Joseph married her, yes, but AFTER Mary got pregnant.


Wow, Muslima! I thought you told us that Muslims revere Mary. Yet here you are, trashing Mary's reputation in order to score points on DCUM.


Again, I'm not Muslima. But whatever…

Yes, Muslims do have tremendous respect for Mary. I personally believe in the immaculate conception. Muslims are required to believe in it. But I'm using this as a point to show the lunacy of calling Muhammad a pedophile. Muhammad is no more a pedophile for marrying Aisha than Mary was a disgraced woman for having an immaculate conception. Get it?


sorry, completely different situations.

Jesus did not have a choice over how he was born. It was a choice made by his mother.

Mohammed had a complete choice over whether he had sex with a little girl. It was his personal choice.

But keep trying to apologize for Mohammed. I would have thought his actions and thoughts would speak for themselves.


Oh, and in the US, we usually don't criticize someone that was born out of wedlock, but if we know a pedophile, they are going to jail where they belong.
Muslima
Member

Offline
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
If a Muslim woman wants to divorce, she may, but has the addl hurdle of seeking a divorce through the court. A man needs two witnesses. The addl requirement acts as a safeguard for women in a system entrenched with institutional discrimination toward women, as it is in place to ensure a woman is not making a decision that will be more harmful to her in the long run. Moreover, men are not permitted to take back anything they bestowed to the wife during the marriage. This is in stark contrast to divorce laws in the US, where spouses often fight for who gets what, and women are in financial hardship after divorce.

Overall, it looks to me that Islam does a fine job of providing true "equality" because it is a more just system.

You follow me??

You're doing the typical Muslim thing where they say the arrangements of their religion is perfect and whatever seems imperfect is really for your own good. Unequal rights to divorce for women? That's for your own good! Cannot travel without male companion? That's for your own good! Have to cede custody of children if you remarry? That's for your own good! Cannot marry without permission of legal guardian? It's for your own good!

So to address, just to humor you, the weak argument you make about divorce:

The system that is entrenched with institutional discrimination toward women did not fall from the sky. It was created and enshrined by that very same religion. The religion that does not see women as capable makers of their own decision and therefore wants to "protect them" from themselves.

Men are not permitted to take back anything they bestowed on the wife during marriage? That's only if divorce is initiated by men. If initiated by a woman, it is very common for women to buy out their way out of the marriage by returning their wedding gift, for which ample scriptural proof is in fact available in the ahadith.

Furthermore, you know what else men are not required to do upon divorce? Share with the wife anything the couple accumulated during marriage. Theoretically, a scenario where a rich husband divorces his homemaker wife of 30 years and sends her off with three months' of maintenance, is perfectly legal Islamically. Doesn't seen fair? It didn't seem fair to the Indian courts either, which ushered in a famous case of Shah Bano, an elderly woman tossed out by her rich husband with nothing. When the court attempted to seek redress via alimony and property division similar to what is available to Hindu women, Muslims went out to demonstrate. India had to weasel out of this predicament by creating a special fund dedicated to maintenance of women who were cruelly - and yet irreproachably, as far as Islam is concerned - tossed out by their husbands.


Ugh okay next...> Poor me, Muslim Woman I will just go hide and cry tonight. I had no idea I was living under these dire conditions, thank you so much for enlightening me, who knew??

Are you too scared to admit s that there is a good possibility that Islam is not a bunch of fairy tales and might be a divinely inspired religion? It would certainly explain a lot of the internet troll’s behaviour who vociferously criticise Islam as if their life depended on it. Indeed, the Quranic idea is that when people are confronted with the truth, they often cover it up with disbelief. Some, for example, will spend all their energy ridiculing Islam maybe because they don’t want to concede that Islam is what it says it is: a divinely inspired religion. But hey for us the believers, no amount of ridicule, fallacies, lies will move our faith to even an inch. Our Trust is in Allah!
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:PS: If you think women in Muslim countries are never in financial hardship after the divorce, you're blind.


Stay focused, this discussion is not about rotten people who use religion for their own ill purposes, its about what life is like for people in a TRUE islamic state. In true Islam, women do not suffer great hardship after divorce. They are cared for by male relatives or the State.

And I understand some women find that sort of thing attractive. I personally would find it utterly demoralizing to be treated like a child. Furthermore the comment about financial hardship post divorce in the west refers to practice, not religion, so if seems perfectly fair to compare western reality with Muslim reality, not Muslim ideal.
Anonymous
Muslima wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

You want people to assume the out of wedlock birth was an immaculate conception based on gospel? But who other than Christians believe in the word of the gospel? Your "proof" is your OWN book though. And it requires me to assume the premise is true. The gospel is true perhaps to you but not to me or everyone else. So your reasoning is ill conceived. Try again.

I think the word " pedophile " was used in this thread, if not by you, then clearly by others.

There has been ample information provided by Muslima to explain Islamic inheritance, testimony, and divorce. I do not rely on Sharia though as Sharia is man made law. I rely on the Quran. Muslima might not have explained everything but she did a fairly decent job. Her "flowery" descriptions rubbed you the wrong way, huh? It sounds like you simply hated that she spoke devoutly about her faith.

Everything was explained to you. So in essence a Muslim woman under a true Islamic State is not required to support herself. She may but isn't required. Her brothers, uncles, father, are required to support her unless she is married. This is why inheritance laws gives men more money, so they can support women.

If a Muslim woman wants to divorce, she may, but has the addl hurdle of seeking a divorce through the court. A man needs two witnesses. The addl requirement acts as a safeguard for women in a system entrenched with institutional discrimination toward women, as it is in place to ensure a woman is not making a decision that will be more harmful to her in the long run. Moreover, men are not permitted to take back anything they bestowed to the wife during the marriage. This is in stark contrast to divorce laws in the US, where spouses often fight for who gets what, and women are in financial hardship after divorce.

Overall, it looks to me that Islam does a fine job of providing true "equality" because it is a more just system.

You follow me??


That sound you hear is everybody reading this smacking their heads against their screens. We don't follow you, Muslima (yes, it's clear from your rhetorical style that you're Muslima, just not logged in at the moment), because the errors in logic are overwhelming.
1. You said Jesus was born "out of wedlock," so it was explained that Joseph married Mary so there was no "out of wedlock birth" as you had claimed several times. So now you're on a different tangent about immaculate conception and how you don't believe the gospels - yet you call us Islamophobes for not taking the word of your holy book. Whatever....
2. You, Muslima, have been told multiple times that your descriptions are half-truths and therefore misleading. To the extent you got all flowery, it was for the purpose of throwing up a smoke screen and avoiding clarity and truth. THAT is the problem with your language and rhetorical style.
3. You haven't mentioned how divorced women lose custody of their children at a young age.

I'm satisfied if the facts get out there. Then DCUM readers can make up their own minds. The problem is, you're exhausting, and a person could spend an entire day tracking down your every logical fallacy and flowery smokescreen that's meant to camouflage the hard facts.


Stop attributing messages to me. Clearly, you see that whatever you are responding to was written by "Anonymous" not "Muslima" I do not have the time nor the desire to sock poppet.


Ignore them. It's a deflection because they're running out of more accusations about Islam.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:PS: If you think women in Muslim countries are never in financial hardship after the divorce, you're blind.


Stay focused, this discussion is not about rotten people who use religion for their own ill purposes, its about what life is like for people in a TRUE islamic state. In true Islam, women do not suffer great hardship after divorce. They are cared for by male relatives or the State.

So there is no such thing as poor male relatives?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:And Joseph married her, yes, but AFTER Mary got pregnant.


Wow, Muslima! I thought you told us that Muslims revere Mary. Yet here you are, trashing Mary's reputation in order to score points on DCUM.


Again, I'm not Muslima. But whatever…

Yes, Muslims do have tremendous respect for Mary. I personally believe in the immaculate conception. Muslims are required to believe in it. But I'm using this as a point to show the lunacy of calling Muhammad a pedophile. Muhammad is no more a pedophile for marrying Aisha than Mary was a disgraced woman for having an immaculate conception. Get it?


sorry, completely different situations.

Jesus did not have a choice over how he was born. It was a choice made by his mother.

Mohammed had a complete choice over whether he had sex with a little girl. It was his personal choice.

But keep trying to apologize for Mohammed. I would have thought his actions and thoughts would speak for themselves.


Oh, and in the US, we usually don't criticize someone that was born out of wedlock, but if we know a pedophile, they are going to jail where they belong.



This is an easy one, lol. I was waiting for this argument…Jesus might not have had a choice over how he was born but today's equivalent of his status would be making a porn star's son a prophet. Would anyone do that? Not likely.

Check out http://womenofhistory.blogspot.com/2007/08/medieval-marriage-childbirth.html

I suppose all the men who married the women of royalty in medieval times were pedophiles too, huh?
post reply Forum Index » Religion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: