or they mistake their maturing parsimony for ignorance...
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Should Feminists Criticize Abrahamic Religions (more than they do)?
- Thread starter icehorse
- Start date
or they mistake their maturing parsimony for ignorance...
Aren't you confusing religions with its followers again; i.e. Christianity and Islam vs Christians and Muslims (humans, and humans always make mistakes)? If Christianity and Islam are the ones to blame for real, you can always give scriptural proof so we can learn the right thing. I'd like to learn about those myself. It is believed that nothing can be taken by a religion unless there is a scriptural proof about it.
For now, most of (if not all?!?!), and as far as I know, the six examples have nothing to do with Christianity and Islam.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm basing my post on my knowledge. Please correct me if I'm wrong by providing scriptural proof.
Hey Smart_Guy,
Well we can debate word definitions to be sure. I will say though (an idea I learned here on RF), that if you take the stance that you cannot blame religion for anything, then you have to agree that you can't say religion is good for anything - correct?
So, if the word play is over, would you agree that if a group of people say that they're are basing their actions on what their religion tells them to do, we can - as a shorthand - say that the religion is to blame?
Well we can debate word definitions to be sure. I will say though (an idea I learned here on RF), that if you take the stance that you cannot blame religion for anything, then you have to agree that you can't say religion is good for anything - correct?
So, if the word play is over, would you agree that if a group of people say that they're are basing their actions on what their religion tells them to do, we can - as a shorthand - say that the religion is to blame?
Hello Icehorse.
But I'm not saying blaming "anything", we have specifics here. The thread is calling to criticize religions based on what people do. What you are saying would work on people, I agree, but not religion. Otherwise different followers wouldn't have different views and application of religion. Just as they justify what they do is right, critics do. No difference.
Blaming religion exclusively on what its followers do without as least giving an authentic related hint from the religion is something I don't see valid.
Having the thread about (most) Abrahamics instead of Ibrahamic religions would make sense and I could agree with you at some points. If you wan to criticize religion, trust me, giving scriptural proof is the only way to go.
I'm also willing to learn how at least the given examples are on religion to blame. At least in Islam, as far as I know, non of those are there. If there are proofs, please give them to me. Having most, if not all, the given examples being wrong give an impression of the validity of the thread. Just an impression, not that I'm labeling it not valid.
But I'm not saying blaming "anything", we have specifics here. The thread is calling to criticize religions based on what people do. What you are saying would work on people, I agree, but not religion. Otherwise different followers wouldn't have different views and application of religion. Just as they justify what they do is right, critics do. No difference.
Blaming religion exclusively on what its followers do without as least giving an authentic related hint from the religion is something I don't see valid.
Having the thread about (most) Abrahamics instead of Ibrahamic religions would make sense and I could agree with you at some points. If you wan to criticize religion, trust me, giving scriptural proof is the only way to go.
I'm also willing to learn how at least the given examples are on religion to blame. At least in Islam, as far as I know, non of those are there. If there are proofs, please give them to me. Having most, if not all, the given examples being wrong give an impression of the validity of the thread. Just an impression, not that I'm labeling it not valid.
Erebus
Well-Known Member
Yes. It's one of those situations where improving life for women also improves life for men.
Hey Smart_Guy,
(BTW, Happy New Year, good to be talking to you again.) First off, I never called to "blame religion exclusively" as you suggested. But I want to make sure that we don't end up playing a linguistic shell game here. When you say "calling to criticize religion based on what people do", it strikes me that this is a standard ploy that apologists use to deflect criticism from religion. Feel free to accuse me of being a little bit sloppy if I claim that when people cite their religion as a reason for their actions, we can say "religion is responsible". Are you okay with that? If not, what language would make you happy?
As far as citing scripture, again, I've seen this used as an apologist tactic. For my money, if the Pope or an Ayatollah makes a religious decree, we can "blame" religion. If you feel the need to play linguistic games with what I've said so far, then you must be willing to say that religion DOES NO GOOD in the world. If you aren't willing to say that, then you must accept what I've said so far, or you aren't being intellectually honest. Fair enough?
== Some specific examples
- The RC church has - for decades - acted strongly against the use of condoms.
- Republican leaders in the US consistently act against women's access to birth control and abortions - in the name of Christianity.
- Women throughout the Muslim world are killed for the sake of "religious honor", for example if they've been raped.
- Women is SA have very limited civil rights when compared to their male counterparts - in the name of Islam.
(BTW, Happy New Year, good to be talking to you again.) First off, I never called to "blame religion exclusively" as you suggested. But I want to make sure that we don't end up playing a linguistic shell game here. When you say "calling to criticize religion based on what people do", it strikes me that this is a standard ploy that apologists use to deflect criticism from religion. Feel free to accuse me of being a little bit sloppy if I claim that when people cite their religion as a reason for their actions, we can say "religion is responsible". Are you okay with that? If not, what language would make you happy?
As far as citing scripture, again, I've seen this used as an apologist tactic. For my money, if the Pope or an Ayatollah makes a religious decree, we can "blame" religion. If you feel the need to play linguistic games with what I've said so far, then you must be willing to say that religion DOES NO GOOD in the world. If you aren't willing to say that, then you must accept what I've said so far, or you aren't being intellectually honest. Fair enough?
== Some specific examples
- The RC church has - for decades - acted strongly against the use of condoms.
- Republican leaders in the US consistently act against women's access to birth control and abortions - in the name of Christianity.
- Women throughout the Muslim world are killed for the sake of "religious honor", for example if they've been raped.
- Women is SA have very limited civil rights when compared to their male counterparts - in the name of Islam.
amorphous_constellation
Well-Known Member
Heck, I believe I've known a woman who was quite feminist, but had a problem with abortion. That I don't get. However, maybe it was their religion which was influencing their position on that.
You know, I almost missed this post because I was not quoted. Sometimes I unsubscribe from threads, to avoid having notifications when I'm not interested in new posts, and depend on quoting or tagging me. Lucky me!
I wish you good health and welfare in this new year, Icehorse.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I should've said that it is about generally blaming religion, not that I'm demonizing you, God forbid, for blaming it specifically.
Yes, I see your point. I still see it is related to the people, not the religions. I don't agree with the way the mentioned country does it, but it's what and how the people want to do. Other Muslim countries don't have wearing hijab (head scarf) as a rule is one example that it is what people choose to do, an example that it is the people, not the religion.
The limitations women have in Islam are just counter limitations of those against men too, and other rules and teachings are similar in covering for each other. All part of an integrated system that has a role play, which is also what a successful company or business follow; a system to follow. Men also have their limitations that the rest of the world fail to see and decide to criticize Islam in what they want to see only. I can't get married because I have to pay what I can't of a dowry and all the needed expenses as a man, and these are just two examples and they are part of the Islamic teachings.
It makes sense to put it on the country (people) that does it, not the followed religion. Otherwise, you wouldn't have mentioned a specific country, if it is really Islam to look at, not the people following it. Also, the expression "in the name of Islam" does not justify that it is what Islam has. There are no origins/bases in Islam for the two more examples you gave about what some Muslims do. I do not know where did people get it from really. Any security guard, for example, could do unacceptable acts in the name of their employer while the act could be something the employer does not approve of, is an example the "in the name of" does not justify it.
Discrimination in punishing women for adultery is not in Islam (stories about it are propaganda to deceive the world). Forcing women to wear hijab is not in Islam. Preventing women from driving is not in Islam. As for the civil rights, again, they are the other side of the coin of role playing of men and women in Islam, like the example of myself above.
But you know, I understand why you see it that way. Religion is too complicated indeed to have people do such things. I hope one day people apply religion rationally and avoid extreme seriousness. I'll be honest with you. If I didn't see truth in Islam, I would have left so many parts of it so I can live my life the way I want. To me it is not just a system to follow, it is my truth.
Please note that I used Islam in my post because it happened to be the chosen religion in this context, but it is to deliver a point of religion in general.
Last edited:
Hey Smart_Guy,
I'm okay with most everything you just said, but there is a caveat: If this is your perspective - which is defensible - then it would be intellectually dishonest of you to give religion credit for anything. Does that make sense?
I'm okay with most everything you just said, but there is a caveat: If this is your perspective - which is defensible - then it would be intellectually dishonest of you to give religion credit for anything. Does that make sense?
I can't see how that is so. If I don't give religion credit, I wouldn't follow one in the first place. Besides, I didn't say that there is nothing I don't like in religion and I did say that I follow my religion mainly because I see truth in it, before I'd think of giving it credit.
Ah, this credit related thing is confusing me in this thread. Perhaps that's a good topic to start a new thread?
Ah, this credit related thing is confusing me in this thread. Perhaps that's a good topic to start a new thread?
Hey Smart_Guy,
If you want to start a new thread, I'll join you there. But this seems like a logical extension of the OP to me.
Here's my summary:
I say "religion is to blame for X" and you respond, "that's not the religion, it's the people".
Then it follows that if you say "religion is good for Y", that I can respond, "that's not the religion, it's the people".
thoughts?
If you want to start a new thread, I'll join you there. But this seems like a logical extension of the OP to me.
Here's my summary:
I say "religion is to blame for X" and you respond, "that's not the religion, it's the people".
Then it follows that if you say "religion is good for Y", that I can respond, "that's not the religion, it's the people".
thoughts?
It is not that I'm saying religion does not cause things to happen in general, in this context I'm talking about the approach the OP used to call for criticizing religion for the way it teaches about women. We have a specific subject here. For me as a Muslim, I looked at the examples given against Islam and had my posts and the "not to blame religion" based on it and about those specifics, not in general.
If it is the general notion that religion does indeed cause unwanted things to happen, then it is a different subject than what's at hand and it was not what I was aiming for.
I'm actually okay with criticism, but I noticed that it happens in an acceptable way like using what happened to be propaganda of the media as examples for it. It does not just show Islam as unwanted, but also imply wrong information about it.
I suggested starting a new thread if you want since it became completely out of topic, which is feminists criticism of religion.
If it is the general notion that religion does indeed cause unwanted things to happen, then it is a different subject than what's at hand and it was not what I was aiming for.
I'm actually okay with criticism, but I noticed that it happens in an acceptable way like using what happened to be propaganda of the media as examples for it. It does not just show Islam as unwanted, but also imply wrong information about it.
I suggested starting a new thread if you want since it became completely out of topic, which is feminists criticism of religion.
Thanda
Well-Known Member
That line isn't going to fool me.
Okay Smart_Guy,
So is it not the case that honor killings of women often occur when those women get raped?
Is it not the case that women in Muslim majority countries do not have equal rights to men?
Is it not the case that Muslim women often get punished for not "properly" covering themselves in public?
So is it not the case that honor killings of women often occur when those women get raped?
Is it not the case that women in Muslim majority countries do not have equal rights to men?
Is it not the case that Muslim women often get punished for not "properly" covering themselves in public?
Say more??
Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
But is it inherent in Islam or is it inherent in Middle Eastern culture?
Are women not stoned in the bible?
Do biblical women not have fewer rights than men?
Aren't women supposed to be covered in the bible?
Are women not stoned in the bible?
Do biblical women not have fewer rights than men?
Aren't women supposed to be covered in the bible?
Thanda
Well-Known Member
Feminism is not about equality. It is about women's rights.
Lighthouse
Well-Known Member
It's been so conditioned in people minds that females are lesser than males and males should have control over females it is sickening. Forms of these religions play a significant role in this inequality.
As for the religious inequality, I think many females are afraid to speak up and many are just so conditioned and so used to their "roles" and "submission" they just live with it and don't know better. The females who are becoming aware that it's messed up are speaking up and great for them!!
Useless2015
Active Member
Often? Please provide some evidence.
Not really. Compared to the West, women in muslim countries seem to have more rights. In an average European country roughly 15-20 percent of the government consists of women and in muslim countries the numbers are almost double.
Evidence?