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][quote=Anonymous] Oh, yes, I forgot. The linear thinking of yours. If a man has a right, the woman must have the identical right in identical circumstances for it to be considered "equality" in your mind. If an oath is primarily for conversion and allegiance, it may not incidentally serve to grant any other rights. Fine. Lets try to put it in linear, more concrete terms to help you digest this then. Allegiance is a vote for the person seeking rulership or a vote to maintain the person's rulership. It is a promise of loyalty to that person. This is similar to our modern day voting. What is impressive is that Islam permitted women to take this oath of allegiance at a time when women were disregarded and treated as if they were chattel. Deny it as much as you want and continue to publish misleading facts about Islam but I'm quoting the foremost scholars in religion who contradict your assertions completely. [/quote]
No one argued this is about equality. You argued it's voting and I don't happen to agree.

It's a very particular sort of chatteldom in jahiliya that lets women own and manage property, run their own business and marry men of their choosing (see Khadija).  Poor, poor women of jahiliya. I'd weep for them if I could.

[quote=Anonymous]Let me make sure I understand you. According to you, the following may not be trusted sources of information:
 1) No Muslim's word may be trusted 
2) No Arab's word may be trusted 
3) No religious scholar, no matter his education or how renowned he or she may be, may be trusted if they are even remotely associated with a Muslim or an Arab.

Is this accurate?

Esposito's assertions are validated by OTHER non-Miuslim and non Arab scholars I have already quoted. The other scholars have absolutely nothing to do with Muslims (however, I can call each one of them to interrogate them to make sure they do not have any Muslim acquaintances at all if it would calm your fears). These scholars have published works via Oxford University Press. Their published works are used as textbooks in the world's best universities, such as Oxford. [/quote]

Here's what's accurate: whatever Al-Saud bought and paid for, I distrust.

[quote=Anonymous]You are, once again, confusing the practice of Islam, which is a far digression from true Islam and which more similar to the pre-islamic jahiliya period. Islam does not reflect a western perspective and it doesn't need to to be an equitable system. 
[/quote]

Not at all, I am referring strictly to Islam's letter, not practice. You are entitled to view Islamic rules as an equitable system. I am entitled to disagree with that viewpoint.

[quote=Anonymous]
The whole discussion was about about the extent of that improvement (was it really as good as people say?) and the starting point pre-Islam (was it really as bad as people say?). So, let's set Mr. Esposito straight:

- women owned property and engaged in commercial transaction before Islam
 - the contractual nature of marriage in Islam privileges the husband with regard to terminating the contract
 - re: Aisha.  I don't know if her authority extended to medicine. I should also point that no other wife of Muhammad became as famous or as heavily quoted as she did, and I suspect the fact that her daddy - Mr. Abu Bakr - became President #1 upon Muhammad's passage, had a little something to do with it.  Daughters of Middle Eastern rulers generally do well in life. Unless they are Al-Saud.

I have no hatred of Islam.  I'm Islam-neutral.  But to you, any criticism or disagreement must be hatred-driven. That's your thing.

[b]When rebuttals are rejected simply because the speaker is Muslim, or scholarly works are rejected simply because the author is Arab or Muslim, or opinions are rejected simply because the speaker is acquainted with a Muslim, one has to wonder about your "neutrality."….[/b][/quote]

I don't consider Esposito a scholar. When a speaker brings evidence, Muslim or not, I will listen.  I have brought forth perfectly valid arguments - that women had rights before Islam, that Islamic contractual marriage denies women certain rights extended to men, and that Aisha's rise to power may have had something to do with her father since no other wife achieved anything like her prominence - and you did nothing to comment on them. That's OK.  Whoever disagrees with you is Islamophobic. We know. [/quote]

Please provide the scholarly proof of the many vast rights women enjoyed before islam.[/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