Reply to The subtle micro aggressions of islamophobia

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "The subtle micro aggressions of islamophobia"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
I have said Muslims are fine with disagreement. The Quran states, "There is no compulsion in Islam." No one needs to like Islam, convert to Islam, agree with Islam.  This was never merely about disagreement. It was about an hate driven campaign. You can not even get yourself to speak with an imam or scholar because you said you mistrust them all.  How can they all be untrustworthy and liars, simply because they are Muslim?[/quote]
I don't have any questions for imams or scholars and that is why I have no intention of speaking with them.

[quote=Anonymous]
And when you say inheritance laws give less to women, its to show the disparity = inequity. Thats a bit misleading considering you failed to mention men have greater financial burdens and women do not need to support themselves. [/quote]
The value of privilege is in the eye of the beholder.  If I think that the freedom from the need to support yourself doesn't outweigh the limitations imposed on women, and the trade therefore is not fair, I feel perfectly at ease saying that.  No one has to agree with the value you place on specific rights and benefits.

[quote=Anonymous]
When you say Islam never established voting rights, you failed to discuss sura ash shurra which spoke to men as well as to women, and asked that all decisions requiring collective opinions be decided by consultation. You deny sura 60:12 which allowed women to take an oath to enter the tribe. You insisted its not a political oath, but instead a purity pledge simply because women were asked not to fornicate and commit adultery. I pointed out the last sentence of the oath, which asks the women to obey the Prophet in whatever he asks. This is not a purity pledge but a promise of political support to the prophet who was the new leader. Instead of admitting you may have misunderstood, you suddenly shifted and the complaint was no longer about voting rights but now about gender bias.[/quote]
There is nothing to admit. That verse is about a background check for new immigrants.

[quote=Anonymous]
On gender bias, you asked why only women were asked not to fornicate. Simple answer: if they came to the Prophet without a guardian and with children, some illegitimate, of course he was going to remind them that their past behavior may not continue. You asked why men were not asked the same. There was no way to ascertain paternity so why ask a man about illegitimate children if you have no evidence there are any? [/quote]
The oath was forward-looking. Women were not ask to swear that their children were legitimate, only that they won't have any more illegitimate children in the future.  You are the one who keeps insisting that fornication and adultery were commonplace in jahiliya - surely Muhammad would have been aware of that, if that was true? What other evidence is  needed to ask men that their past behavior may not continue?  Do you think women were fornicating with themselves? (not that that isn't fun). There wasn't any evidence that the women's children were illegitimate, either, you know. You just made that up - same as your story of caravans with women with an incredibly specific number of children in tow.

[quote=Anonymous]
From there were new complaints about Muslims not being able to read Quranic Arabic. [/quote]
I respond to your claims in the order in which you raise them.  If you upbraid posters for their lack of knowledge of Quranic Arabic as an insurmountable barrier to understanding Islam, it seems only fair to point out that of that sin, most Muslims are guilty.

[quote=Anonymous]
Then you jumped to yet another complaint about the Quran- abrogation. These are easy to address but I'm not sure you are seeking knowledge, particularly from a Muslim since you don't trust anything we say. [/quote]
I am not seeking any more knowledge, and certainly not from you.

[quote=Anonymous]
Every time I give you an answer, you request evidence from historical context or the Quran. But then when evidence is provided, you reject it if it has an Arab or Muslim author. Who else will provide testimony about arab history except Arabs? When I provide evidence from the Quran, you reject the Quran's authenticity because its not in chronological order or because of perceived abrogation.[/quote]
What evidence did you give besides the pictures you yourself imagined?

The Quranic abrogation is fact recorded in the book itself. The fact that it is not in chronological order is not questioned, either.
[quote=Anonymous]
So you see, you are not embarking on a truth seeking mission here. Its a campaign driven by another agenda. 
 [/quote]
I am not interested "seeking truth" - my education in all things Islam and my opinions on the subject have been fixed for years.  I'm certainly not seeking education from you.  When you post things that I consider inaccurate or false, I feel perfectly at ease pointing that out. That's all there's to it. No one is seeking truth from you.  The fact that not a single participant of the threads you generated found you remotely interesting, compelling or enlightening should have give you plenty of hints. [/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