Ask About Islam

[Sheldon]

People can be wrong, is the point. Subjective no one is wrong or right.

I know, almost as if wrong and right are subjective as well, scary stuff uh? Not to worry you can cling to a religious belief that pretends that there are moral absolutes, lots of people find that more comforting than reality.

 

[KWED]

..and this proves what exactly?

That you don't think a husband needs a wife's consent for sex? I was merely trying to establish your position on this issue. Now we know.
Presumably you also consider a slave or captives consent unnecessary.

..that Muslims are barbarians who have no respect for women?

That depends if they have the same position as you on with issue. If they do, then yes, basically. I think most people would agree that a person who does not think consent is required for sex has no respect for women.
You do know what sex without consent is called under the law?

That's right .. you reject the Bible and Qur'an and think that you know it all.

So your claim that I am "morally bankrupt" is based solely on me being an atheist and nothing to do with my actual morals.
That's kinda ironic, given that you are claiming the moral high ground but have just admitted that you condone spousal rape.

It's not really about what I find moral. It is about what Allah SWT has taught us in the Qur'an.

Ah, the Nuremberg Defence. Remind me how that worked out?
And it is perfectly clear that you have no actual morality of your own, established through reason, empathy, etc or you wouldn't have just publicly admitted that you consider rape to be acceptable.

It is very likely that a man will be tempted to have illicit relations with his "secretary" if he spends time alone with them.

I find it very sad that you have reduced women to mere sexual vessels whose evil temptations cannot be resisted by men. You really seem to have no idea how the real world works.

 

[KWED]

I took a philosophy of human rights course. It was taught by an Atheist professor. He believe morality was not subjective,

I suspect you may have misunderstood what he was saying.
Morality is clearly and demonstrably subjective - which is why different times, places, cultures, individuals have different moralities, and why those moralities can and do change with changing circumstances.

 

[KWED]

You don't understand this issue properly.

 

[Link]

I suspect you may have misunderstood what he was saying.
Morality is clearly and demonstrably subjective - which is why different times, places, cultures, individuals have different moralities, and why those moralities can and do change with changing circumstances.

No, he went on to explain why there is diversity in morals yet that morality is objective. I didn't misunderstand.

 

[KWED]

it's spitfire fallacy to try to overwhelm with many claims instead of dealing with one or two.

Never heard of that one before. Probably because there is no such fallacy.

 

[Link]

There are two ways to deal with cultural pluralism with respect to human rights:

(1) See what every culture has to offer through reasoning, accept what is proven in terms of human rights and rights in general.
(2) No right or wrong answers, right or wrong is cultural.

He argued for 1, and stated reasons why 2 is wrong.

 

[Link]

Never heard of that one before. Probably because there is no such fallacy.

Because you're the encyclopedia of all facts.

 

[KWED]

The six Days, each is a thousand years in the Quran.

So the universe and the earth, and all the species on it, was formed in 6000 years?
So the Quran is still completely wrong.

How long is (the total duration of) this world? He replied: Six thousand years."

So definitely confirmed as wrong.

 

[KWED]

His posts have been so unreasoning and over the top that I have wondered if he is simply posing as a Muslim to make them look bad

I occasionally come across apologists who give this impression. It is bewildering that they have so little self-awareness. As you say, it's like they are deliberately projecting a parody of an extremist. Poe's Law in action.

 

[Sheldon]

You're foolish to do so.

I disagree with that subjective claim as well. if you're hoping for something beyond bare disagreement here, then maybe you can actually offer something beyond your bare assertions, that you are right, and anyone who doesn't share your beliefs is wrong.

 

[Link]

I disagree with that subjective claim as well. if you're hoping for something beyond bare disagreement here, then maybe you can actually offer something beyond your bare assertions, that you are right, and anyone who doesn't share your beliefs is wrong.

There are a lot of works on this. I suggest reading some.

 

[KWED]

I think perhaps that contraception has caused people to think that marital relations is just "a bit of fun".
It's not. It has profound emotional consequences.
Perhaps ask the police what harm can be caused.

Did a rape apologist just tell us to ask the police about the harm consensual sex causes?

 

[KWED]

No, he went on to explain why there is diversity in morals yet that morality is objective. I didn't misunderstand.

If morality is diverse, variable and dependent on circumstances, it cannot be objective.
Either you misunderstood him, or he was an idiot.

 

[Link]

If morality is diverse, variable and dependent on circumstances, it cannot be objective.
Either you misunderstood him, or he was an idiot.

No, you're the fool here. But it's okay, perhaps in time you will understand.

 

[KWED]

Because you're the encyclopedia of all facts.

I have my moments.
But please, post a link to a reference for the "spitfire fallacy".

 

[KWED]

No, you're the fool here. But it's okay, perhaps in time you will understand.

OK. Explain how diverse and variable morality that is dependent on circumstances can be objective.
No bare assertion. A reasoned argument.
Thanks.

 

[Link]

OK. Explain how diverse and variable morality that is dependent on circumstances can be objective.
No bare assertion. A reasoned argument.
Thanks.

You should read up on it. Plenty of books. Internet is not everything.

 

[Sheldon]

I suspect you may have misunderstood what he was saying.
Morality is clearly and demonstrably subjective - which is why different times, places, cultures, individuals have different moralities, and why those moralities can and do change with changing circumstances.

I'm inclined to believe this is not an entirely accurate claim, leaving aside his baffling motivation for taking secular philosophy course. What kind of professor of philosophy let alone an atheist one, thinks morals are absolute?

Perhaps Link could list a few moral absolutes for us? Obviously he would need to support these with something approaching objective evidence, not just assert they are absolutes with an argument from authority fallacy, but he'll have learned that from his philosophy course obviously.

 

[Sheldon]

No, he went on to explain why there is diversity in morals yet that morality is objective. I didn't misunderstand.

Could you list a few morals this atheist professor claimed are moral absolutes? Only this story is sounding more and more dubious to me.