Here you go, clearly anti-Islam and anti-Arab. Although, as a woman, I might sit with the Arabs in this place.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't know if she wants this but doubt it.

No men or children were affected. Seem to be only women. I doubt it is a disease. Seems like it only affects older women. I just don't understand why someone would do this voluntarily. There has to be extreme pressure to make someone want to dress all in black, from head to toe, covering the eyes except for slits, unable to see well, unable to move well. Isolated and segregated.

I just don't understand.

But why is it important that you understand it? It's not affecting you in any way. To you, it feels isolated and segregated. To her, it may feel protected and embraced. You are imposing your ideas of what is right on someone else's body. I see people to whose choice of clothing I object on a daily basis, but my ability to understand these choices is not a part of the picture.

Some Muslim women who wear the face covering wear it because they attract a lot of attention. I was at a mosque and a woman walked in and sat near us in the prayer area. She was covered from head to toe. She was the only woman who covered her face in a group of about 100. Since we were amongst women she too off her face veil. I couldn't believe my eyes. She was absolutely gorgeous with big, green eyes and long, brown hair. She was the type of woman that was so beautiful that even women would turn their heads to look at, sort of like a Paulina Porizkova except with green eyes. So -- I guess I don't blame her for wanting to avoid all that staring and attention. In Islam, we are supposed to dress modestyly to avoid attention.

or maybe it was like Elizabeth Smart, hidden under a veil because the males in the group made her do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The peaceful minority is irrelevant."

It's a peaceful majority, but yes they have made themselves irrelevant by not denouncing the fundamentalists who have hijacked their religion and their culture.

To the PP who responded to this. I actually was not thinking of the peaceful majority launching protests.

Rather, they have to put their best minds at work to debunk all of the rubbish thinking about Islam espoused by these groups in a concerted and public campaign. This is very difficult because they are busy living their lives as doctors or scientists or businessmen or whatever and Islam for them is kind of in the distant background.

They are not very religious and have rejected most of what they were taught by poorly educated religion teachers in school. And yet, public debunking of so and so mentally deficient Islamic scholar is culturally considered very impolite and disrespectful.

They'd rather not think of religion at all, but if they don't do this they risk waking up under the rule of ISIS or similar.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The peaceful minority is irrelevant."

It's a peaceful majority, but yes they have made themselves irrelevant by not denouncing the fundamentalists who have hijacked their religion and their culture.

Sigh. The moderator is going to come on and tell you it's pointless to expect peaceful Muslims to demonstrate or otherwise protest IS because (a) IS doesn't care what other Muslims, or you, think, and (b) IS isn't under any central Islamic authority.

I actually posted in Feedback (after the moderator locked a thread about this) that IS does have to worry about public opinion, because it does need at least the tacit support of non-Wahhabi Sunnis in the area--IS only represented 10% of Mosul when it captured that city. He deleted my thread. Other points are that Saudi opinion matters because they are also Wahhabis and there are some questions about financial links. So I don't agree with the moderator that Muslims or anybody else should just sit on their hands.

If you bothered to read and pay attention to my post, you would have seen that I wrote this:

"IS may be susceptible to pressures from communities within the land it governs, but not from those well outside those lands."

I don't think anyone should sit on their hands. I just don't think it is correct to expect American Muslims to have a special responsibility in this regard. The American Muslims' ability to influence IS is no different that that of American Jews or American Christians.

Also, I think these discussions would be much more helpful if you actually showed some indication that you were interested in learning or gaining understanding rather than simply debating. As long as your goal is to simply develop a counter-argument, very little that is beneficial will come out of these threads.

Wait, what? Disagreeing with your position, especially by providing substantive "counter-arguments" to your arguments (in my thread you deleted, I linked to a Post article) amounts to frivolously "simply debating"?

I spent hours yesterday figuring out the Ebionites. Thanks for noticing.

What was different in that article that what I had already written? More importantly, what made you think that such a post was relevant to the "Website Feedback" forum?

The entire point of the original poster's argument was that he didn't want to talk about politics, but only the religious aspects. Then, you posted an article that was all about politics and nothing about religion. If you were actually trying to understand, you would not have missed either what I had written or what the OP had said was the purpose of his post.

That OP didn't want to talk about religious aspects (e.g., are beheadings OK in Islam?) but about spiritual/community aspects -- s/he asked, what are Muslim communities doing about the perception of their faith, here's what my (his/her) Catholic community did about the pedophelia.

We agree that IS cares about non-members in areas it controls and in areas might want to expand to.

I'm arguing that American Muslims may be able to influence Sunnies in the region who are deciding between IS and the Shiite government. American Muslim opinion may influence Saudi Wahhabis and might even give the Administration more leverage in negotiations with other Muslim countries. I disagree, therefore, with your contention that American Muslims can't use their voices.

(Why was I posting in Feedback? Because you locked the thread on this forum, then you locked the thread that OP started in the Feedback forum, obviously.)

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The peaceful minority is irrelevant."

It's a peaceful majority, but yes they have made themselves irrelevant by not denouncing the fundamentalists who have hijacked their religion and their culture.

Sigh. The moderator is going to come on and tell you it's pointless to expect peaceful Muslims to demonstrate or otherwise protest IS because (a) IS doesn't care what other Muslims, or you, think, and (b) IS isn't under any central Islamic authority.

I actually posted in Feedback (after the moderator locked a thread about this) that IS does have to worry about public opinion, because it does need at least the tacit support of non-Wahhabi Sunnis in the area--IS only represented 10% of Mosul when it captured that city. He deleted my thread. Other points are that Saudi opinion matters because they are also Wahhabis and there are some questions about financial links. So I don't agree with the moderator that Muslims or anybody else should just sit on their hands.

If you bothered to read and pay attention to my post, you would have seen that I wrote this:

"IS may be susceptible to pressures from communities within the land it governs, but not from those well outside those lands."

I don't think anyone should sit on their hands. I just don't think it is correct to expect American Muslims to have a special responsibility in this regard. The American Muslims' ability to influence IS is no different that that of American Jews or American Christians.

Also, I think these discussions would be much more helpful if you actually showed some indication that you were interested in learning or gaining understanding rather than simply debating. As long as your goal is to simply develop a counter-argument, very little that is beneficial will come out of these threads.

Wait, what? Disagreeing with your position, especially by providing substantive "counter-arguments" to your arguments (in my thread you deleted, I linked to a Post article) amounts to frivolously "simply debating"?

I spent hours yesterday figuring out the Ebionites. Thanks for noticing.

What was different in that article that what I had already written? More importantly, what made you think that such a post was relevant to the "Website Feedback" forum?

The entire point of the original poster's argument was that he didn't want to talk about politics, but only the religious aspects. Then, you posted an article that was all about politics and nothing about religion. If you were actually trying to understand, you would not have missed either what I had written or what the OP had said was the purpose of his post.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The peaceful minority is irrelevant."

It's a peaceful majority, but yes they have made themselves irrelevant by not denouncing the fundamentalists who have hijacked their religion and their culture.

Sigh. The moderator is going to come on and tell you it's pointless to expect peaceful Muslims to demonstrate or otherwise protest IS because (a) IS doesn't care what other Muslims, or you, think, and (b) IS isn't under any central Islamic authority.

I actually posted in Feedback (after the moderator locked a thread about this) that IS does have to worry about public opinion, because it does need at least the tacit support of non-Wahhabi Sunnis in the area--IS only represented 10% of Mosul when it captured that city. He deleted my thread. Other points are that Saudi opinion matters because they are also Wahhabis and there are some questions about financial links. So I don't agree with the moderator that Muslims or anybody else should just sit on their hands.

If you bothered to read and pay attention to my post, you would have seen that I wrote this:

"IS may be susceptible to pressures from communities within the land it governs, but not from those well outside those lands."

I don't think anyone should sit on their hands. I just don't think it is correct to expect American Muslims to have a special responsibility in this regard. The American Muslims' ability to influence IS is no different that that of American Jews or American Christians.

Also, I think these discussions would be much more helpful if you actually showed some indication that you were interested in learning or gaining understanding rather than simply debating. As long as your goal is to simply develop a counter-argument, very little that is beneficial will come out of these threads.

Wait, what? Disagreeing with your position, especially by providing substantive "counter-arguments" to your arguments (in my thread you deleted, I linked to a Post article) amounts to frivolously "simply debating"?

I spent hours yesterday figuring out the Ebionites. Thanks for noticing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The peaceful minority is irrelevant."

It's a peaceful majority, but yes they have made themselves irrelevant by not denouncing the fundamentalists who have hijacked their religion and their culture.

Sigh. The moderator is going to come on and tell you it's pointless to expect peaceful Muslims to demonstrate or otherwise protest IS because (a) IS doesn't care what other Muslims, or you, think, and (b) IS isn't under any central Islamic authority.

I actually posted in Feedback (after the moderator locked a thread about this) that IS does have to worry about public opinion, because it does need at least the tacit support of non-Wahhabi Sunnis in the area--IS only represented 10% of Mosul when it captured that city. He deleted my thread. Other points are that Saudi opinion matters because they are also Wahhabis and there are some questions about financial links. So I don't agree with the moderator that Muslims or anybody else should just sit on their hands.

If you bothered to read and pay attention to my post, you would have seen that I wrote this:

"IS may be susceptible to pressures from communities within the land it governs, but not from those well outside those lands."

I don't think anyone should sit on their hands. I just don't think it is correct to expect American Muslims to have a special responsibility in this regard. The American Muslims' ability to influence IS is no different that that of American Jews or American Christians.

Also, I think these discussions would be much more helpful if you actually showed some indication that you were interested in learning or gaining understanding rather than simply debating. As long as your goal is to simply develop a counter-argument, very little that is beneficial will come out of these threads.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The peaceful minority is irrelevant."

It's a peaceful majority, but yes they have made themselves irrelevant by not denouncing the fundamentalists who have hijacked their religion and their culture.

Sigh. The moderator is going to come on and tell you it's pointless to expect peaceful Muslims to demonstrate or otherwise protest IS because (a) IS doesn't care what other Muslims, or you, think, and (b) IS isn't under any central Islamic authority.

I actually posted in Feedback (after the moderator locked a thread about this) that IS does have to worry about public opinion, because it does need at least the tacit support of non-Wahhabi Sunnis in the area--IS only represented 10% of Mosul when it captured that city. He deleted my thread. Other points are that Saudi opinion matters because they are also Wahhabis and there are some questions about financial links. So I don't agree with the moderator that Muslims or anybody else should just sit on their hands.

Anonymous wrote:"The peaceful minority is irrelevant."

It's a peaceful majority, but yes they have made themselves irrelevant by not denouncing the fundamentalists who have hijacked their religion and their culture.

"The peaceful minority is irrelevant."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't know if she wants this but doubt it.

No men or children were affected. Seem to be only women. I doubt it is a disease. Seems like it only affects older women. I just don't understand why someone would do this voluntarily. There has to be extreme pressure to make someone want to dress all in black, from head to toe, covering the eyes except for slits, unable to see well, unable to move well. Isolated and segregated.

I just don't understand.

But why is it important that you understand it? It's not affecting you in any way. To you, it feels isolated and segregated. To her, it may feel protected and embraced. You are imposing your ideas of what is right on someone else's body. I see people to whose choice of clothing I object on a daily basis, but my ability to understand these choices is not a part of the picture.

Some Muslim women who wear the face covering wear it because they attract a lot of attention. I was at a mosque and a woman walked in and sat near us in the prayer area. She was covered from head to toe. She was the only woman who covered her face in a group of about 100. Since we were amongst women she too off her face veil. I couldn't believe my eyes. She was absolutely gorgeous with big, green eyes and long, brown hair. She was the type of woman that was so beautiful that even women would turn their heads to look at, sort of like a Paulina Porizkova except with green eyes. So -- I guess I don't blame her for wanting to avoid all that staring and attention. In Islam, we are supposed to dress modestyly to avoid attention.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like here - http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/255/403172.page

You were arguing that ahadith shouldn't bee seen as reliable. I reminded you of the meaning of the word "Sahih". You responded by "Islamophobe Christian Evangelical Crusader" in four separate subsequent posts. I remember laughing at the time because it is so typical for Muslims to see Christians everywhere.

But never mind. That conversation was not for nothing. You delivered the best bit about the only authentic collection of hadith that's still 1) untranslated from Arabic, and 2) not distributed to the world, even the Arabic-speaking one, 3) under lock and key in Saudi Arabia.

I shared this with my Saudi husband and when he was done laughing, he said, "this woman must be like the ones who call into the religious TV shows and ask, "Sheikh, i believe there is a male jinn in my house, should I cover in front of him or not?"

Yes, well of course I should have known your Saudi husband was the real authority whose opinion I should have sought before publishing this ridiculous statement. Let me guess, he's on the World Fiqh Council? Or the World Muslim Council? No? Oh thats right, he's a direct descendent of Prophet Muhammad and a member of the royal Saudi family? And he's a devout Muslim too? A learned man who graduated from Al Azhar University? Which one?

All I can tell you is if you refuse to investigate to confirm the truth of what I said, then shut up. Get off your ass, pick up the phone, make the phone calls, speak to the scholars who know. Otherwise you just look stupid for criticizing from a place of no knowledge.

I think it's cute that you think members of the Saudi royal family have outstanding religious knowledge. It's understandable, though. Sunnis have always worshipped rulers.

I don't believe in oral evidence. Post a link to a written opinion proving the existence of unpublished authentic ahadith, or it's just a one dude in a turban said so.

No, never said that. They have an enormous ego though and think their opinion valuable to the world. I know a member of the family. They number in many.

Anonymous wrote:
I don't know if she wants this but doubt it.

No men or children were affected. Seem to be only women. I doubt it is a disease. Seems like it only affects older women. I just don't understand why someone would do this voluntarily. There has to be extreme pressure to make someone want to dress all in black, from head to toe, covering the eyes except for slits, unable to see well, unable to move well. Isolated and segregated.

I just don't understand.

But why is it important that you understand it? It's not affecting you in any way. To you, it feels isolated and segregated. To her, it may feel protected and embraced. You are imposing your ideas of what is right on someone else's body. I see people to whose choice of clothing I object on a daily basis, but my ability to understand these choices is not a part of the picture.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why ???

The sun was out and in the 70's. It had rained most of the day. It was the weekend and I didn't have to work. I don't have cleavage.

Why would you cover your face? I don't understand a god that would create a sun, that is good for the earth and body and soul and then dictate that 50% of the human race cannot experience it.

Keep your face to the sun and you will never see the shadows!

You don't need to know why she covers her face. Her body, her business. Don't presume to know what she wants. For all you know, she would be intensely uncomfortable with her face open. Should she suffer discomfort to make you happy? God never dictated face-covering for Muslim women. She's covering because she wants to.

I don't know if she wants this but doubt it.

No men or children were affected. Seem to be only women. I doubt it is a disease. Seems like it only affects older women. I just don't understand why someone would do this voluntarily. There has to be extreme pressure to make someone want to dress all in black, from head to toe, covering the eyes except for slits, unable to see well, unable to move well. Isolated and segregated.

I just don't understand.

Anonymous wrote:
Why ???

The sun was out and in the 70's. It had rained most of the day. It was the weekend and I didn't have to work. I don't have cleavage.

Why would you cover your face? I don't understand a god that would create a sun, that is good for the earth and body and soul and then dictate that 50% of the human race cannot experience it.

Keep your face to the sun and you will never see the shadows!

You don't need to know why she covers her face. Her body, her business. Don't presume to know what she wants. For all you know, she would be intensely uncomfortable with her face open. Should she suffer discomfort to make you happy? God never dictated face-covering for Muslim women. She's covering because she wants to.