Let's Stop Pretending That Islam is a Religion of Peace

[Desert Snake]

This thread has been about bashing Islam. That's why it's wrong.

Soooo.... what should I glean from this thread? Is this thread's intent to teach all of us naive westerners how Islam is a religion of hate, and that we have all been duped here in the naive West about its intent?

Is it wrong, or just accurate? You have to ask why the threads bashing the Bible don't get such a negative response.

 

[Rival]

This is exactly what surah 4:34 says:

(Several different translations)

4:34 Husbands should take full care of their wives, with [the bounties] God has given to some more than others and with what they spend out of their own money. Righteous wives are devout and guard what God would have them guard in the husbands’ absence. If you fear high-handedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great.

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 what 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.

Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and forsake them in beds apart, and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is high, supreme.

It isn't even if it's proven, but only if the husband fears rebellion!

I object to beating one's wife.

 

[raph]

"Bashing 1" is true. What is jizyah if not protection money?

"Bashing 2" is true. The Qur'an orders husbands to beat wives from whom they fear rebelliousness.

I know that you like to bash Islam and will keep bashing. Bashers gonna bash. Have fun.

1.
Protection money is the money, you pay the mafia so that said mafia wont hurt you.

Jizya is a tax in exchange for the privilige of non muslims for not being forced into military.

2. You leave out much information that every muslim knows and considers. This is not criticism but bashing. Criticism would require a fair judgement after you actually listen to the other side of the story.

Men have to be just (justice) leaders of the family. When a woman rebells against an unjust decision from her man, the law is not applicable. It is only applicable if she does something really bad.
And even then, there are two much more humane punishments in the same verse that you completely ignore. The light hitting is the last and most severe of punishements. In a society where being hit was a normal punishement, it is nothing strange.

This law is not about making women do everything you want. The law is about being the leader of a family and making sure that the family functions. Every leader has to punish bad behavior. Without punishement the world would not work.

 

[YmirGF]

what's the point of this thread then? who is the 'let's' in the title?

I chuckle when people back pedal and we are supposed to accept that as a suitable ''rebuttal.''

Who is back-peddling? How about Islam is a religion that fosters fanaticism? Would that be more palatable for you?

 

[raph]

I know that you like to bash Islam and will keep bashing. Bashers gonna bash. Have fun.

1.
Protection money is the money, you pay the mafia so that said mafia wont hurt you.

Jizya is a tax in exchange for the privilige of non muslims for not being forced into military.

2. You leave out much information that every muslim knows and considers. This is not criticism but bashing. Criticism would require a fair judgement after you actually listen to the other side of the story.

Men have to be just (justice) leaders of the family. When a woman rebells against an unjust decision from her man, the law is not applicable. It is only applicable if she does something really bad.
And even then, there are two much more humane punishments in the same verse that you completely ignore. The light hitting is the last and most severe of punishements. In a society where being hit was a normal punishement, it is nothing strange.

This law is not about making women do everything you want. The law is about being the leader of a family and making sure that the family functions. Every leader has to punish bad behavior. Without punishement the world would not work.

Also you leave out a very important aspect. Muslim men also get punished for bad behavior. The difference is that women dont have the duty to punish the man. A judge has the duty to punish a man for bad behavior. The same rebellion that women get punishment for, men also get punished for. The only difference is that another man will take care of rebellious men.

 

[Deidre]

Who is back-peddling? How about Islam is a religion that foster fanaticism? Would that be more palatable for you?

If people wish to critique Islam, there's nothing at all wrong with that. But, bashing is the issue. It's not right to bash any religion on here.

Regarding your comment, there are many religions that ''foster fanaticism.'' But, this thread isn't revolving around that idea, it's rather stating in a bold way that Islam is not a religion of peace, and if you think so, you're a liar. That's what it states. You can spin it any way you wish 23 pages in, but that's what it's about. That would have been a better thread title ''does Islam foster fanaticism?'' Because it asks a general question that is rather neutral, but can spark interesting and healthy debate. (IMHO)

 

[Rival]

I know that you like to bash Islam and will keep bashing. Bashers gonna bash. Have fun.

1.
Protection money is the money, you pay the mafia so that said mafia wont hurt you.

Jizya is a tax in exchange for the privilige of non muslims for not being forced into military.

2. You leave out much information that every muslim knows and considers. This is not criticism but bashing. Criticism would require a fair judgement after you actually listen to the other side of the story.

Men have to be just (justice) leaders of the family. When a woman rebells against an unjust decision from her man, the law is not applicable. It is only applicable if she does something really bad.
And even then, there are two much more humane punishments in the same verse that you completely ignore. The light hitting is the last and most severe of punishements. In a society where being hit was a normal punishement, it is nothing strange.

This law is not about making women do everything you want. The law is about being the leader of a family and making sure that the family functions. Every leader has to punish bad behavior. Without punishement the world would not work.

Even "light" hitting is unacceptable. Any wife-beating is unacceptable. In this country we call it domestic abuse and it is a crime punishable by a jail sentence. Also, that was then. The Qur'an is supposed to be for all times and places, so this argument doesn't work; the Qur'an shouldn't allow wife-beating if God knew that most folks in the future would abolish it and make it a crime, using more humane ways of punishment.

If the man was a true leader of the family, which I agree he should be, he would not have to resort to beating his wife if he even so much as fears rebellion. There are other methods.

 

[YmirGF]

If people wish to critique Islam, there's nothing at all wrong with that. But, bashing is the issue. It's not right to bash any religion on here.

Regarding your comment, there are many religions that ''foster fanaticism.'' But, this thread isn't revolving around that idea, it's rather stating in a bold way that Islam is not a religion of peace, and if you think so, you're a liar. That's what it states. You can spin it any way you wish 23 pages in, but that's what it's about. That would have been a better thread title ''does Islam foster fanaticism?'' Because it asks a general question that is rather neutral, but can spark interesting and healthy debate. (IMHO)

Thank you for a somewhat reasonable answer.

That said, can you honestly say that Islam is a peaceful religion, given its well known history? It is completely disingenuous to say it is a "religion of peace". I do agree however that if one says that "Islam is a religion of peace" they are either ignorant, disingenuous or outright lying. It would be quite truthful to say that "Islam is a religion of complete submission."

 

[YmirGF]

There are other methods.

Like talking things out like adults.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

what's the point of this thread then? who is the 'let's' in the title?

I chuckle when people back pedal and we are supposed to accept that as a suitable ''rebuttal.''

Okay, lets be clear. Islam was never a religion of peace, because it claims that pagans are, by the initial shahadah alone, wrong and badly mistaken in their outlook.

Even "light" hitting is unacceptable. Any wife-beating is unacceptable. In this country we call it domestic abuse and it is a crime punishable by a jail sentence. Also, that was then. The Qur'an is supposed to be for all times and places, so this argument doesn't work; the Qur'an shouldn't allow wife-beating if God knew that most folks in the future would abolish it and make it a crime, using more humane ways of punishment.

If the man was a true leader of the family, which I agree he should be, he would not have to resort to beating his wife if he even so much as fears rebellion. There are other methods.

I think that women seek out, by their own free will, the dramatical. so they will do their best to worsen the sitatuation for a dramatical position where they are in a position to have bad emotions. this would be never thought about by their husbands, so they will never have it occur and beat their wives as to never have happen a dramatical position. ( an example would be where women would allow their sons to drink and drive just so that they would have some sort of power in the sutation allowing them to have a dramatical outlook, i.e. allowing their son to drive drunk even though he would cause a accident. thats why they are allowed to be subjugated and "beaten".

 

[raph]

Even "light" hitting is unacceptable. Any wife-beating is unacceptable. In this country we call it domestic abuse and it is a crime punishable by a jail sentence. Also, that was then. The Qur'an is supposed to be for all times and places, so this argument doesn't work; the Qur'an shouldn't allow wife-beating if God knew that most folks in the future would abolish it and make it a crime, using more humane ways of punishment.

If the man was a true leader of the family, which I agree he should be, he would not have to resort to beating his wife if he even so much as fears rebellion. There are other methods.

There are other methods in the Quran. Pain punishement was normal at that time. Men also get punished with pain for bad behavior in Islam.

This was a society that didnt have high tech prisons like we do. Pain punishement did work best in such a society.

I think that Islam was a perfect religion for its time. I believe that God adjusted the religion to the needs of the modern age. So I agree, that Islam does not fit into our age.

How Islam fits into our age is something that I cant explain because I dont believe it. Maybe muslims can explain this to you.

 

[Rival]

Okay, lets be clear. Islam was never a religion of peace, because it claims that pagans are, by the initial shahadah alone, wrong and badly mistaken in their outlook.

I think that women seek out, by their own free will, the dramatical. so they will do their best to worsen the sitatuation for a dramatical position where they are in a position to have bad emotions. this would be never thought about by their husbands, so they will never have it occur and beat their wives as to never have happen a dramatical position. ( an example would be where women would allow their sons to drink and drive just so that they would have some sort of power in the sutation allowing them to have a dramatical outlook, i.e. allowing their son to drive drunk even though he would cause a accident. thats why they are allowed to be subjugated and "beaten".

Uh, are you saying wives want to be beaten?

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

Uh, are you saying wives want to be beaten?

I dont know. But i think if it a hingering punishment over their heads they will actually seek it out. Only to have their husbands not have them beaten, for doing wrong.

 

[Rival]

I dont know. But i think if it a hingering punishment over their heads they will actually seek it out. Only to have their husbands not have them beaten, for doing wrong.

????

 

[Deidre]

Thank you for a somewhat reasonable answer.

you're welcome

That said, can you honestly say that Islam is a peaceful religion, given its well known history? It is completely disingenuous to say it is a "religion of peace". I do agree however that if one says that "Islam is a religion of peace" they are either ignorant, disingenuous or outright lying. It would be quite truthful to say that "Islam if a religion of complete submission."

When religion falls into the wrong hands, it becomes a horrifyingly dangerous weapon. When religion falls into the right hands, it becomes a tool of peace and love. When people think of Christianity, (and I used to think this way after I left it for a time) ...they think of bigotry, hate, and sexism. Often times, that is a common thought of Christianity, among non Christians and/or non believers. And then, we can find passages in the Bible that sort of point to those three things. But, I don't carry around those things, and I now follow Christianity again. Same with Islam. I have good friends offline who are Muslim, they moved here from the middle east a while back, and Islam is a tool of peace and love, for them. For ISIS, it is not. And many say that ISIS is following Islam as 'it should be.' But, then I should shun homosexuals, and be quiet around men, as the Bible instructs, right? I don't believe that in order to be an adherent of a religion, you need to adhere to every single line out of its respective holy book. This is just my opinion.

Part of faith, is experiencing it. If you want to see Muslims who use Islam as a tool of peace and love, you needn't look much further than at Smart Guy, on this forum...or others who are kind, and care about others who are not Muslim. I don't think that violent psychopathy comes from religion, rather psychopaths use religion as a scapegoat for their depravity. That is why so many more Muslims are peaceful, than not.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

????

Lol (would be better so much to be talking in person)

 

[icehorse]

Any ancient scripture like the Bible or the Koran has things which taken in or out of context appear negative in the light of modern secular liberal thought, focusing just on one religions texts and not others, can in fact be a prejudice against that religion and its members, as has been demonstrated over and over in this thread, the OP has no interest in the Islamic interpretation of the text, but rather wants to make their own interpretation of Koranic verses taken out of context as representative of a religion of 1.5 billion people.

Many Muslims today practice or believe in Islam exactly as spelled out in the OP. Do you know Islam better than those folks?

 

[icehorse]

Sorry for the time lapse guys. My dad just had a major go at me for debating with Muslims online because he thinks they are going to come and kill me. I was actually standing up for FearGod and Servant. I'm actually almost in tears and not in the mood for this anymore. Sorry FearGod, might respond to you tomorrow. My dad has just slammed my door and called me braindead for even talking with Muslims. I tried to explain but he wouldn't have it.

This post came back to me a day later. Let's stop for a minute and consider this post...

Rival's Dad thinks Rival might be in danger... for criticizing ideas!!!!

Would Rival's Dad think this if Rival was criticizing any other religion? Of course not.

Well, the only conclusion must be? (Hint: Rival's Dad is NOT an islamophobe)

 

[icehorse]

you're welcome

When religion falls into the wrong hands, it becomes a horrifyingly dangerous weapon. When religion falls into the right hands, it becomes a tool of peace and love. When people think of Christianity, (and I used to think this way after I left it for a time) ...they think of bigotry, hate, and sexism. Often times, that is a common thought of Christianity, among non Christians and/or non believers. And then, we can find passages in the Bible that sort of point to those three things. But, I don't carry around those things, and I now follow Christianity again. Same with Islam. I have good friends offline who are Muslim, they moved here from the middle east a while back, and Islam is a tool of peace and love, for them. For ISIS, it is not. And many say that ISIS is following Islam as 'it should be.' But, then I should shun homosexuals, and be quiet around men, as the Bible instructs, right? I don't believe that in order to be an adherent of a religion, you need to adhere to every single line out of its respective holy book. This is just my opinion.

Part of faith, is experiencing it. If you want to see Muslims who use Islam as a tool of peace and love, you needn't look much further than at Smart Guy, on this forum...or others who are kind, and care about others who are not Muslim. I don't think that violent psychopathy comes from religion, rather psychopaths use religion as a scapegoat for their depravity. That is why so many more Muslims are peaceful, than not.

Islam contains a boatload of regressive ideas. Go read the UN Declaration on Human Rights. Then ask yourself why on earth Muslim leaders from around the world rejected this seemingly peaceful and benign document.

 

[Deidre]

Islam contains a boatload of regressive ideas. Go read the UN Declaration on Human Rights. Then ask yourself why on earth Muslim leaders from around the world rejected this seemingly peaceful and benign document.

Do you know any Muslims personally in your offline life?