Why I Can't Be Muslim

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]jawara wrote:
But I will say this Islam is way more oppressive to women than Christianity. AND thats the DAMN truth!!![/quote]

Just because it’s your point of view doesn’t make it “the DAMN truth”. Here are some points you may wanna consider:

Women were oppressed under the Talibans regime.

Women are oppressed under Al-Saud’s Wahabism.

The status of women in the West has little to do with Christianity.

Nothing in the teachings of Islam oppresses women.

Islam is 15 centuries old. Women were extremely oppressed in the 15th century by Christians.

You’re only reinforcing the image of the poorly informed Islam-bashing American.

I’m sure you can find more reasonable reasons not to be a Muslim besides customized swimsuits. How about Ramadan coinciding with your bulk phase?

42

When a woman goes into a job interview dressed modestly and wearing a hijab, she can be assured she is not being hired for her sex appeal but for her talents. That is extremely opressive.

43

[quote]etaco wrote:
brucevangeorge wrote:

Damn straight. While we’re at it… let’s liberate us men too. I’d like to walk down the street with no pants on.

Then I’d have to deal with jealous insecure guys trying to pick fights to make themselves feel better. I think there may be more historic/pre-historic support ofr the commonality of the loin cloth or…

But nudity works for me. When it’s warm.[/quote]

All right. Just as long as there is no double standard.

44

[quote]lixy wrote:
Nothing in the teachings of Islam oppresses women.[/quote]

No?

Men are “in charge” of women because they spend money to support them:

4:34 Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

And 2:282, 4:176 and 4:11 also indicate that a man is worth twice a woman. Not exactly a good basis for equality of the sexes.

45

[quote]btm62 wrote:
pookie wrote:
I thought the answer would be “Because I was born to Christian parents who have already supplied me with a set of semi-coherent delusions from which I can pick and choose to justify all my prejudices.”

My bad.

From whence do your delusions come then Pookie? Perhaps you are naturally semi-coherent?[/quote]

LOL! This should get interesting…Pookie loves a good flame war.

46

[quote]pookie wrote:
Men are “in charge” of women because they spend money to support them:

4:34 Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.[/quote]

In its original form. that is a though verse; Your translation however is far from accurate.

Here’s an attempt at interpreting it.
http://www.flwi.ugent.be/cie/bogaert/bogaert4.htm

Sexes are not equal.

Men are stronger than women. Women are more caring and have better developed senses. I’m quite as feminist as a bloke can be, but you have to account for physiological differences. To the best of my knowledge, that is what’s meant by those verses. Of course, many “Muslims” have interpreted them to mean something else to serve their phallo-selfish needs.

47

[quote]lixy wrote:
Men are stronger than women. Women are more caring and have better developed senses. I’m quite as feminist as a bloke can be, but you have to account for physiological differences. To the best of my knowledge, that is what’s meant by those verses. Of course, many “Muslims” have interpreted them to mean something else to serve their phallo-selfish needs.[/quote]

Yes, there are physiological differences. But the Koran does not make any distinction. It simply says that men are worth more than women (usually by a factor of two) and that they are in charge of women.

Now, whether each muslim man chooses to oppress his women is up to him, but the theological basis for it is there. Meeting any resistance from the woman with force is quite justifiable using the Koran.

What do you think the basis for this was: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article1414137.ece

48

[quote]pookie wrote:
What do you think the basis for this was: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article1414137.ece
[/quote]

Ignorance.

Blaming the Quran for it is outrageous. I will never concede that an interpretation of it which advocates such actions is anywhere near what was intended.

49

[quote]lixy wrote:
pookie wrote:
What do you think the basis for this was: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article1414137.ece

Ignorance.

Blaming the Quran for it is outrageous. I will never concede that an interpretation of it which advocates such actions is anywhere near what was intended.[/quote]

Your opinion does not matter. What matters is that there are many Muslims that do justify evil with the Koran.

50

[quote]lixy wrote:
Ignorance.

Blaming the Quran for it is outrageous. I will never concede that an interpretation of it which advocates such actions is anywhere near what was intended.[/quote]

Isn’t it odd though, that god is unable to spell out clearly what he wants? He must have known that men would misinterpret his words; why then not make the meaning and intent clear? He repeats about 400 times that infidel will burn in hell (theirs is a painful doom - or some such). Why not repeat the important moral points to make sure people understand what he meant?

Why repeat many times that men are worth twice a woman if that’s not the case? Modern societies all recognize men and women as equals under the law and as having equal rights as persons. How can modern society achieve better justice and social equality than the all-good creator of the universe? Unless, of course, none of the holy books are divinely inspired, but simply written by men and reflect the culture of the times when they were written.

Which view fits the facts best?

51

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Your opinion does not matter. What matters is that there are many[/quote] Christians [quote] that do justify evil with the [/quote]Bible.

And you can fill in the blanks with others too!

Other popular choices include: Catholics, Bible, Jews, Tanakh… and etc. And of course Muslim, Quaran.

52

[quote]brucevangeorge wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Your opinion does not matter. What matters is that there are many Christians that do justify evil with the Bible.

And you can fill in the blanks with others too!

Other popular choices include: Catholics, Bible, Jews, Tanakh… and etc. And of course Muslim, Quaran.
[/quote]

At this point in time very few Christians use the Bible as an excuse for evil.

We seem to be in Islams dark ages right now.

53

[quote]pookie wrote:
Why repeat many times that men are worth twice a woman if that’s not the case?[/quote]

It actually doesn’t. However, it says that a daughters inherits half of what her brother gets. Here’s a discussion as to why that is the case.
http://www.victoryscent.co.uk/womens_inheritance.htm

It also states that a woman’s testimony in some cases is worth a fraction of that of the males. I’m a bit ambivalent about that myself, but my experience have shown that women are much less emotionally stable than man (sometimes borderline irrational). But that’s just me…

Can’t answer that. It’s probably one of those things the human mind is unable to perceive.

Quantum mechanics is the perfect example of that. No matter how hard you try, the human mind simply does not accept its precepts. And I happen to have an exam in it next week. Better get back to the books…

54

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
brucevangeorge wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Your opinion does not matter. What matters is that there are many Christians that do justify evil with the Bible.

And you can fill in the blanks with others too!

Other popular choices include: Catholics, Bible, Jews, Tanakh… and etc. And of course Muslim, Quaran.

At this point in time very few Christians use the Bible as an excuse for evil.

We seem to be in Islams dark ages right now.[/quote]

No, we Christians use it as an excuse to do “good”. However that may be construed.

55

Let’s take this argument from another perspective. I believe the calculation for wrongful death or disabilities in civil suits in the US is based primarily on lost earning potential.

If one takes into account that the average woman earns less than the average man --just based on more women staying at home, not even counting the same-job pay gap women whine about-- then one should expect the US courts to, on average, find the life of a woman to be less valuable than that of a man.

If the same standard were used for calculating value in a society in which all the women are kept pregnant, barefoot, and illiterate, then half-value is being generous.

56

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:

Women can go topless in NY.[/quote]

Seriously? I need to start a campaign to free all those women-- or at least the hot ones-- from the oppressive social mores which deprive me, er, them of their freedom and liberty.

Then I shall move to New York. Unless too many of the wrong women through off their chains/shirts. Some people really do belong in a burka.

57

[quote]pookie wrote:

Why repeat many times that men are worth twice a woman if that’s not the case? Modern societies all recognize men and women as equals under the law and as having equal rights as persons. How can modern society achieve better justice and social equality than the all-good creator of the universe? Unless, of course, none of the holy books are divinely inspired, but simply written by men and reflect the culture of the times when they were written.[/quote]

As a corollary to this point, the Qu’ran is accepted among Muslims to be the fixed, static, unerring word of Allah, without the flexibility of saying the text is allegorical, etc. (a la the Bible for many Christians).

That said, there is an inherent incompatibility between modern recognition of gender equality and the Qu’ran - after all, the Qu’ran cannot ‘develop’ or ‘evolve’ with the times because of the static, flawless dictates of Allah’s word cannot be improved upon.

Gender apartheid is the law in Islam, and Muslims are simply not permitted to reconsider that times have changed - this according to their own tenets, not mine or anyone else’s.

58

[quote]lixy wrote:
It actually doesn’t. However, it says that a daughters inherits half of what her brother gets. Here’s a discussion as to why that is the case.
http://www.victoryscent.co.uk/womens_inheritance.htm

It also states that a woman’s testimony in some cases is worth a fraction of that of the males.[/quote]

You say it doesn’t, then go on to give example of places where it does.

And spare me the various interpretations, justifications, explanations; I’m quite familiar with all the dodges and excuses… the Bible thumpers use the same ones.

You’ve learn your Koran well I see. Instead of asking why a divinely inspired book should be unjust and unfair; you try to justify its position from your own prejudices.

How does your emotionally unstable and borderline irrational mom like your views on women?

Don’t give me that crap. The human mind is well able to think about that and reach a conclusion based on reason and logic.

You don’t want to, but it’s not because you’re unable. You’re unwilling because of the comfort and security you derive from your belief. You don’t really care how valid they are, as long as they make you feel good.

QM is not intuitive and does not conform to everyday experience, but the human mind can well accept its precepts. Do you think all the technological advances made possible by QM where done by people who could not accept its precepts?

And QM is a nice example, because even if it is entirely counter-intuitive and hard to grasp, we have to recognize its validity. Why? Because when we test it, it works. It’s unfortunate that you can’t evaluate your beliefs based on the same rigorous mental process.

Instead of picking up on the absurdities, the contradictions, the intolerance and realizing that there’s no way such a work can be divinely inspired, you bend over backwards to make excuses and allowances to justify it. And then complain when other people interpret it differently to justify their actions based on it. You’re both engaging in the same process; they just happened to do something violent enough to make the news.

59

[quote]etaco wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:

Women can go topless in NY.

Seriously? I need to start a campaign to free all those women-- or at least the hot ones-- from the oppressive social mores which deprive me, er, them of their freedom and liberty.

Then I shall move to New York. Unless too many of the wrong women through off their chains/shirts. Some people really do belong in a burka.[/quote]

In a landmark case in New York, seven women were arrested in 1986 for going topless in a park. The women, dubbed Rochester’s Topfree Seven, challenged the law that stated women could bare their breasts for “entertainment” purposes only.

Six years later, the New York Court of Appeals ruled that women could be topless in public in that state.

60

From Reuters: Muslim “Tribal Customs”

Girl lost in poker game
Email Print Normal font Large font February 27, 2007

Rasheeda … tribal elders ruled that she should be handed over to clear debt.

A teenage girl in southern Pakistan, whose late father lost her in a poker game when she was two years old, has asked authorities to save her from being handed over to a middle-aged relative.

Rasheeda, 17, said she has filed applications with the police and a local councillor asking them to prevent Lal Haider, 45, from taking her to his home.

Her mother, Nooran said her husband racked up a debt of 10,000 rupees ($190) to Haider playing cards.

“My husband didn’t have money to pay, and instead he told Lal Haider that he could take Rasheeda when she grows up,” she said.

Despite being paid his money last year, she said Haider still insisted the girl should be given to him because of tribal customs.

While both families live in Hyderabad, a city 160 kilometres north of the southern city of Karachi, they belong to the same tribe in Baluchistan province.

The girl’s uncle, Dur Mohammad said Haider apparently wanted to marry the girl to his son.

Khalid Rajput, a local councillor dealing with the case, said the decision that Rasheeda should be handed over to Haider was taken late last week at a tribal council meeting.

“We know some tribal elders from Baluchistan came for the meeting in which the girl’s family was told to give her as per their customs,” he said.

Irfan Bhutto, a police officer in Hyderabad, said Haider had been summoned. “We will ensure the girl does not have to do anything against her will.”