Reply to Be Wary of Racism and Islamophobes

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "Be Wary of Racism and Islamophobes"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
Here are the erroneous "facts" you mentioned:
- that Islam requires the oath ONLY for women. Patently false! Read the entire Quran and history. This would mean the rules that applied to women did not apply to men, and men could therefore commit infanticide, and freely fornicate to their hearts desire right in front of the Prophet himself if they pleased. Its ludicrous to think men did not have to abide by the oath but women did! [/quote]

Please provide a reference to a sura that says "and when believing men come to you, examine them, and then if they don't lie, don't steal, don't worship others besides you and don't have illegitimate children, you can accept their pledge of allegiance."

[quote=Anonymous]
- that women with illegitimate children were somehow screened and possibly prevented from taking the oath. No. As nonmuslims, women were engaging in all kinds of unislamic behavior like adultery and infanticide, and it would not have been a shock if they had illegitimate children. Actually, when a person converts the sins they committed unknowingly are washed away and their soul begins anew. Converts are deemed to be of a higher status in God's eyes than born Muslims because of the hardship they often suffer. So to imply that women with illegitimate children were screened or prevented from joining the tribe just goes completely against my understanding of Islam.[/quote]

This is not personal, and your understanding of Islam is not a golden standard of anything.  I have provided a verse that asks "believing women" who wanted to join Muslims in Medina to pledge that they don't have children they falsely attributed to their husbands (i.e. illegitimate). I point out, again, that these women were not converting on the gates of Medina; they were already Muslims. And converts may suffer great suffering, but certainly the ladies who got to collect their dowries TWICE didn't do exactly poorly.

[quote=Anonymous]
- that the oath has no connection to voting whatsoever. Wrong. It was the precusor to womens voting rights because it allows women to give the oath regardless of the presence of a guardian. As far as evidentiary hadith, the well known rule is that hadith does not carry more weight than the Quran and if the hadith can not be supported or substantiated by the Quran, you should be careful about relying on it. If you need to pull out a hadith when you can't find a Quranic verse to support your statement, its a red flag that maybe your statement is not authoritative. 
- that Islam never gave women voting rights. Wrong again. Sura Ash Shurra did, by using plural language while God/Allah asked everyone to decide on relevant matters collectively. ALL relevant matters. This flies in the face of the hadith you offered and if there is any conflict between hadith and Quran, the Quran trumps hadith.
[/quote]

That's your theory.  You haven't provided convincing evidence that it is so.[/quote]

Fine, PP, here is a verse that shows men ALSO took the oath of allegiance to the Prophet. I hope it will put this issue to rest and you will stop publishing false and / or misleading information about Islam. If your questions are sincere, you would ask a scholar.

Sura 48 Al Fath, verse 18:

"Allah's Good Pleasure was on the believers
When they swore Fealty
To thee under the Tree:
He knew what was in their hearts,
And He sent down Tranquility
To them; and He rewarded them
With a speedy Victory;"

This was a group of men taking an oath![/quote]
Were they asked to swear they didn't lie, steal or have illegitimate children? Where?[/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