Reply to What exactly is Chechyna'a beef with the USA?

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "What exactly is Chechyna'a beef with the USA? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]First, PP claims to be intimately aquainted with Saudi cultural norms:

[Post New]04/21/2013 13:03
 Anonymous wrote:
Only Shia allow temporary marriage and they are a minority among Muslims. 
And I'm married to a Saudi, so you don't need to explain the minutia of Muslim law and behavior to me.

Then writes:  
[Post New]04/22/2013 10:46 
you can certainly[b] rank followers [/b]of a religion on a scale of how closely they follow its teachings.

while simultaneously claiming: 
[Post New]04/22/2013 10:46

I have nothing but a shoulder shrug reaction to both Sunni and Shia creeds. I don't know how you take my statement that "Shias have temporary marriage and Sunnis don't" and make it into a manifesto of Sunni purity.

No, actually miss or Mr. " I'm married to a Saudi so I know",  religion is NOT ABOUT RANKING people according to who is more devout.

Some oragnized groups claiming to be motivated by faith, like southern baptists and Saudi wahabists claim that there is only "one way" and its theirs.

This type of rigidity is always found covering up deep hypocrisy in practice whether that be southern baptist preachers who turn out to be gay, or having affairs with women not their wife

Wahibist who beat, rape and even murder their more brown skinned , foreign but fellow muslim house servants, as Human Rifhts Watch report shows.

One could also point to Wahabits support of suicide bombers in Palestine, their financial support of the Mjuahaddein through their connects with Pakistani secret police and on and on... much of the political instability in the middle east is financed by Saudi Wahabists who fancy themselves " most devout of all" 
[/quote]
Sigh.  This is becoming tiresome.  On an off-chance that you're not willfully misunderstanding me, let me go over this again:

Organized religions have rules. (What religion, capital R, is about, is a completely different discussion, if you want to talk about that, open a different thread.)  I don't think you can argue that organized religion come without code of practice or standards about who is considered a follower of this religion, and who isn't.  If there are rules, then there is meaningful compliance or lack thereof, or this discussion becomes meaningless. Note that I didn't say goodness, purity, righteousness or any of that stuff. Rules. And if there are rules, then it is possible to make a judgment on who is following the rules of that particular set of rules, and who isn't.   It isn't a value judgment to say that Islam prohibits sex outside of marriage. It doesn't confer any judgment on Islam, marriage or sex.  It just states what the rules are.  If you disagree that these are rules, you are welcome to bring sources.  In the absence of that, we can all live with the statement - which was my original and only point - that Muslims aren't supposed to have sex outside of marriage, and if they do, they are breaking their rules. I don't see what's so controversial about that.   Wahhabis or southern preachers have nothing to do with this, I don't know why you bring them up.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics