Reply to Science channel's "Biblical Mysteries Explained"

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "Science channel's "Biblical Mysteries Explained""

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
The fact that female infanticide was common then should have told you enough- that females were not valued. Thus, if one woman achieved success, it should be assumed to be an anomaly, not the norm.

You spent a great deal of pages in another thread arguing with Muslima about how Islam encouraged concubinage. If that was true, it would mean women were not respected or valued in Arab society. In societies where women are undervalued, they generally do not achieve success and status. Again, it shows Khadijas status was unusual, not the norm.
[/quote]
What evidence do we have that female infanticide was common, beyond Muhammad's say-so?

Pre-Islamic society - just like Islamic society - was flawed like all humans were.  Some women were valued. Some were not.  The fact that women in society are valued less than men does not preclude some women from rising to the top.  Certainly from Khadija's example we can infer that women COULD inherit property, and COULD run businesses independently.

Societies don't have to be monochrome in their treatment of women.  In pre-Islamic Arabia, women could be buried alive and still cherished as goddesses or respected as independent businesswomen.  In Islamic Arabia, women could be respected and still sold in the markets or distributed as booty.

Not sure why you bring up the bit about concubinage.  Women could be undervalued in societies and still achieve success and wealth according to individual circumstances. Are you using the existence as concubinage as proof why Khadija's status was unusual? Huh?[/quote]

First, or maybe I should say again, please distinguish between real Islam and the practice of it. This is a mistake you make repeatedly.

You repeatedly ask for evidence for various points, but disregard evidence of Muslim authorship or Muslim testimony or even Arab testimony. In your eyes, arabs and Muslims are inherently liars and their testimony is not to be trusted. But who do you expect will provide accounts of Arab history, if not the Arabs? Its like saying the Boston Tea Party never took place because you mistrust the Americans who were the only people who left accounts of it.

Societies do not have to be monochrome in their treatment of women? You spent hundreds of pages in various Islam threads fighting to prove Islam opresses and mistreats women. Yet now you hold khadija as representative of how great Arab women had it. Which is it then? Islam oppressed women or despite Islam, many women grew to the ranks of successful businesswomen? This shows that you keep moving the goal posts. This is an agenda driven campaign, not a truth seeking campaign. You are looking for any angle to vilify Islam or disprove Muslims, but some of your viewpoints are in direct contradiction to other, previously expressed viewpoints.

And this is why media outlets were called, you exemplify the type of person anti Islam organizations tend to use to spread hate for political gain. No one else will study Islam so extensively to spew hate 24/7 using blogs with large audiences. No one will move the goal posts so often that they sometimes unwittingly end up even contradicting themselves at times, like you just did here.

Even if the investigative journalist can not find out the organization you work for, at minimum articles will be written about islamophobia using your posts. But I am hopeful they will determine the name of the group you work for, since a couple leaders of the Muslim communities will be assisting the writer in her assignment and they seem to have knowledge about this.

[/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