It's again that time of the year ... or Muslim bashing!

valcik said:
I'm with Vergil on this, women treated as a mere property in moslem world is nothing new. Many clerics are actively supporting the doctrine that woman has no right to refuse sex in mariage, for instance. Not even while riding on back of a camel:
http://www.christianaction.org/news/2015/4/28/cleric-wives-must-give-sex-even-on-a-camel
Click to expand...
I don't know if you actually trust that site, but according to Dr. Zakir Naik interpretation of some of the Hadith and verses in the Alquran in this article here, and I quote:
From all the above mentioned Ahadith, it is Wajib upon the wife to fulfill the desire of her husband whenever he wishes. If the relationship between the husband and the wife is truly based on Islamic principles, in which both of them treat each other with love, affection, kindness, fulfilling all Islamic desires and settling all matters with mutual agreement and understanding, the question of the wife refusing the sexual desire of the husband does not arise. Nor does the question arise of the husband being insistent or getting perturbed at her not wanting to have sex.
Click to expand...
And it's not like it's impossible for a man to understand his wife's refusal for sex and relent himself for her. Surely a husband and wife wouldn't truly unite under a marriage, unless they 100% love and trust one another? On top of that, a man and a woman who were meant for each other, did so because they love and trust one another because of their Creator, and because the Creator chose them for one another according to Islam. You might not know nor understand that, but that's how it is in Islam.

Islam and woman had a good history. It was Islam that freed woman from a shackle that binds them in the time before Islam. Back at the time of Pagan Arabs, men were ashamed to have a daughter, that they would kill and/or bury one when a baby girl was born. If they were ashamed but couldn't muster a courage to kill/bury her, they would raise her as a slave, worse yet sex slave. The only ones who could grew up as a women AND treated properly like human beings were those lucky enough to be born to a man not ashamed to raise a daughter, and mostly because the man was honorable, as evidenced by Siti Khadijah. It was changed by the arrival of Islam, as men were imposed heavy burden when they happen to have a daughter, the responsibility becomes heavier than that of raising a boy.

I can't speak for women in the other countries other than mine, but in my country women were treated fairly well, even outnumbering men in Chemistry Department here in my Uni, and my country is well known as the country populated by the biggest percentage of Muslim.
 
Black Angel said:
Surely a husband and wife wouldn't truly unite under a marriage, unless they 100% love and trust one another?
Click to expand...
I don't know, man:
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Contemporary_Pedophilic_Islamic_Marriages
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...to-have-sex-with-isis-militants-a7066956.html
There's too many reports of forced mariages from various sources, including radical fundamentalists marrying kidnapped women (such as hundreds of Yazidis girls recently) in order to rape them legally.
 
Black Angel said:
Islam and woman had a good history. It was Islam that freed woman from a shackle that binds them in the time before Islam. Back at the time of Pagan Arabs, men were ashamed to have a daughter, that they would kill and/or bury one when a baby girl was born. If they were ashamed but couldn't muster a courage to kill/bury her, they would raise her as a slave, worse yet sex slave. The only ones who could grew up as a women AND treated properly like human beings were those lucky enough to be born to a man not ashamed to raise a daughter, and mostly because the man was honorable, as evidenced by Siti Khadijah.
Click to expand...

Please source that.
Black Angel said:
I can't speak for women in the other countries other than mine, but in my country women were treated fairly well, even outnumbering men in Chemistry Department here in my Uni, and my country is well known as the country populated by the biggest percentage of Muslim
Click to expand...

What country are you in?
 
valcik said:
I don't know, man:
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Contemporary_Pedophilic_Islamic_Marriages
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...to-have-sex-with-isis-militants-a7066956.html
There's too many reports of forced mariages from various sources, including radical fundamentalists marrying kidnapped women (such as hundreds of Yazidis girls recently) in order to rape them legally.
Click to expand...
I read the wiki, and the only Alquran's verse quoted there were kind of out of context. That verse only spoke of prescribed period for women before they could marry again, nowhere stating that it's allowed for a girl-not-yet-turned-women to marry. Besides, marriage is about trust, can a woman below.... I don't know, 17? 18? 19? 20? have a fully developed mental and emotional capacity to decide if she's ready for commitment and trust to be a wife and mother? And if Islam truly condone pedophilia, why didn't I heard more from the well known Islamic scholars, whether international and in my country, that they married underage girls?

The world is fucked up, there are Muslims just as fucked up as the worst scum of the Earth yet, but Islam is fine as it is. Blame Muslims all you want, blame me, but don't fault Islam especially when you don't quite understand it as I do.

Crossfire said:
Please source that.
Click to expand...
http://www.alahazrat.net/islam/women-before-islam.php

On top of that, I've attended 2 Islamic middle and high schools, so I was quite educated on the history of Islam, and the daily lives of Muhammad (pbuh).

Crossfire said:
What country are you in?
Click to expand...
Indonesia.
 
Black Angel said:
On top of that, I've attended 2 Islamic middle and high schools, so I was quite educated on the history of Islam, and the daily lives of Muhammad (pbuh).
Click to expand...
If you are referring to other religions like Christianity, to you still say pbuh? Like, Jesus (pbuh)? Or Peter (pbuh)? Or is it just for Muslim's like Mohammed.
Also, do you say Allah (pbuh) or just Allah.
 
Doomsdayprepper said:
If you are referring to other religions like Christianity, to you still say pbuh? Like, Jesus (pbuh)? Or Peter (pbuh)? Or is it just for Muslim's like Mohammed.
Also, do you say Allah (pbuh) or just Allah.
Click to expand...
Yeah, basically. Though, now that I'm looking into what it is in English, it's actually Muhammad (may Allah send prayers and peace upon him), and Jesus (peace be upon him), David (peace be upon him), etc etc and finally, Allah (Glory to Him, the Exalted). It's weird to say it in English, though, so I prefer to omit it sometimes (I shouldn't, though).
 
A god or prophet that cares about stupid words said or written after its name is not a god I'd worship.
 
Black Angel said:
Blame Muslims all you want, blame me, but don't fault Islam especially when you don't quite understand it as I do.
Click to expand...
Nah, I'm not into this collective guilt thing at all, certainly not blaming you personally for anything. Just for the record, one of my neighbors is a Balkanian immigrant, moslem, physician, living in a marital monogamy with his beloved wife, so I'm well aware that not all moslems are depraved rapists.
 
As for underaged girls forced to marry a moslem man in Indonesia, it certainly doesn't look that good:
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issu...GO/IndonesianLegalAidAssociationForWomen.docx

In certain areas in which Islamic culture and religion are very strong, like in Nusa Tenggara Barat and West Java (especially in Indramayu and Karawang where most people live in poverty), the average age of marriage for girls is 12 years old. One of the causes is the interpretation of certain Hadith (based on the practices of Prophet Muhammad). Muslim people/men have their own interpretation of the age of marriage, which they practice. Usually they rely on the tradition, which mentions that prophet Muhammad married Aisha when she was only 7 years old. In 2008 Syekh Puji (born in 1965), a cleric and head of an Islamic boarding school from Central Java and a business man) married one of his pupils who was 12 years at the time and he planned to marry 2 more pupils who were only 7 and 9 years old. The reason why he married this young girl and planned to marry 2 more (so he could have 4 wives as allowed by the 1974 Marriage Act) was to prepare them to become managers of his business. The parents said that they allowed their daughter to marry this old man because they thought that they don’t need to pay school fees any more and would be freed from their obligations to take care of their daughters and their other children. 27 NGOs including LBH APIK Semarang reported this case to the police and luckily he was sentenced by the court to 4 years in jail and he had to pay a fine of 60 million. The Court declared that he had violated 2002 Child Protection Act. Both the prosecutor and the accused appealed this verdict at the High Court.
Click to expand...
 
valcik said:
As for underaged girls forced to marry a moslem man in Indonesia, it certainly doesn't look that good:
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issu...GO/IndonesianLegalAidAssociationForWomen.docx
Click to expand...
I knew that guy. He appeared on many news here years ago. Thing is, he's not a well known scholar, at all, I even doubt he's a legit scholar. He's not known for giving any kind of sermon, nor people came to him to consult about religion and spirituality. Instead, he's known for THAT. I'm also currently living in West Java, didn't heard anymore child marriage other than him.
 
If the majority of them come by sea. Why not use satelites to monitor the sea? So when they see a boat with refugees they can send other ships to intercept it before they arrive to the shore.

Also sending them to prison for the crimes they commit is a bad idea. They should be instantly deported back where they came from and put on trial in their own country. Keeping someone in prison costs money. Food, heat, water etc. and thats money that tax payers give.

And people who arrive with no documents or means of identification should also be sent right back where they came from. This probably how terrorists manage to get into EU in the first place.
 
the EU decided that it is to expensive to monitor the whole sea. For example Mare Nostrum was scraped completely in favour of simple border controll.

And sending criminals to prison has the advantage, that they serve well, a punishment. No one knows if the criminals would actually face a trailer back in their homeland. If the place has a working jurisdiction at all.

Do you really think serious terrorists would loose their papers? Look at the ones from 9/11. They all had legal papers, working visa and attented schools. There is no fail proof way to detect terrorists, unless you can read minds. And increased surveilance, has proven to be very ineffective in preventing terrorist attacks.

Doomsdayprepper said:
YOU.
Click to expand...
Dude. Maybe this is a language thing. I don't know! What I am saying, is that we SUPPORT the PROPAGANDA of radical and extremist groups if we LUMP TOGETHER ALL MUSLIMS. A ban on muslims, if even only temporarily, is what the extremist groups even want. Why do you think they attack most of the time soft targets? Why don't those idiots try to attack military targets? Parliaments? Our economoic centres? Why do they often chose means that cause as many civilian targets as possible? Because they know very well how we, our politics and the media work. Up to the point where it becomes almost a tradition ...

We should't forget about who we're talking about:

Not all Muslims are the same. But if we think and act like they would be, then we will lose even the moderate ones.



Doomsdayprepper said:
And when they get that time in the spotlight we destroy them. Simples.
Click to expand...
And ineffective. I mean hey, it takes a lot of bombing, killing of civilians and people in the western world die to terrorism. But it works ... I guess ...
 
Last edited:
Crni Vuk said:
Dude. Maybe this is a language thing. I don't know! What I am saying, is that we SUPPORT the PROPAGANDA of radical and extremist groups if we LUMP TOGETHER ALL MUSLIMS.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it is a language thing, because I have never lumped together all Muslims or made any statements that lump together all Muslims. I have never claimed all Muslims are the same.
Perhaps you are confusing me with @The Lonesome Drifter, or this is just another strawman.

And ineffective. I mean hey, it takes a lot of bombing
Click to expand...
On the contrary, its very effective.
Military action has transformed ISIS in Iraq from a powerful and dangerous group to an almost non entity that has lost 40% of its territory in Iraq, is not gaining an inch of ground, and people are defecting. We have killed hundreds and hundreds of their fighters since the bombing began. This video, which I have used before, shows 250 ISIS soldiers being killed:


We have also killed their leaders:


As you might have noticed, after the military action, there have been no terrorist actions that were undeniably planned and executed by ISIS.

Before you say, ISIS only claimed responsibility for the Nice attack, its unlikely they actually did it. He was a lone crazy and reports that he was Muslim are conflicting.
 
Last edited:
Crni Vuk said:
I am talking about all strikes since 2001 that have been made with the war-on-terror doctrine. And there is no way that we never hit civilians with our strikes.

Hundreds of civilians killed in US-led air strikes on Isis targets

Airwars project details ‘credible reports’ of at least 459 non-combatant deaths, including 100 children, in 52 air strikes

As France Bombs ISIS, Civilians Are Caught in the Middle
Click to expand...
That is certainly tragic, however, we are actually helping them. We are destroying the terrorist group that has murdered hundreds of Syrians before and even worse.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Speicher_massacre
https://www.rt.com/news/168916-isis-iraq-war-crimes/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top