Should we fear Islam?

[sonofskeptish]

There is so much wrong with that statement I don't even have time or the care to educate you on that subject.



If you had read all my posts you would know I have, now you just sound more like a fool. As for the Republican remark, your ideology is far more republican than mine. You know, your posts make it quite obvious of your hatred of muslims and your ignorance of their religion. You read 1 book about Islam extremism and now you're an expert. Why don't you actually pick up a quran sometime and you won't spew so much hatred. Seriously, such a large portion of your posts are dedicated to branding Islam evil. Your silly excuse of not knowing arabic doesn't cut it as it can be read in any language.

Your the one who implied the Quran must be read in ancient Arabic. Do you remember making this statement...

"That is why the Quran is supposed to be read in Arabic, otherwise you can end up with just that problem."

It's in the "Question for Christians" thread if you feel like looking yourself up. You'll find it there along with your usual anti-western retoric, and your claim that women have the "most" rights under Islam.

As for branding Islam evil, if someone doesn't notice that I seperate moderate muslims from puritan (extremist) muslims that's their problem, not mine.

Fact is, claiming all muslim believe Islam is peaceful is simply untrue. Some do, some don't. Frankly, I don't give a damn about the ones that think it's peaceful, but I do care about the ones that clearly demonstrate they are not peaceful.

Regarding the "1 book" I read, I've actually read many. Including the one you seem to discount which is by an Islamic scholar.

Get your head out of the sand.

 

[Sahar]

Whoever suggests that now Islam witnesses a conflict between the so called "moderates" and "extremists" is wrong. Simply, the extremists who are a very small minority always repel the majority away from them by their thinking and actions.
What we really witness, is another two opposing groups, I don't have names for them. The first group is a group who wants to take us to the past while neglecting the reality, and unable to understand important aspects of Islam like its universality and flexibility/dynamicity. The other group wants to understand the NOW reality and enable the Muslim to interact efficiently with this reality but while standing on a firm ground of the Islamic values. There is common ground between the two groups and it's the unchangeable basics of Islam anyway but they differ on their ability in interacting with the present reality.
I don't know if that makes any sense.

 

[Gabethewiking]

Whoever suggests that now Islam witnesses a conflict between the so called "moderates" and "extremists" is wrong. Simply, the extremists who are a very small minority always repel the majority away from them by their thinking and actions.
What we really witness, is another two opposing groups, I don't have names for them. The first group is a group who wants to take us to the past while neglecting the reality, and unable to understand important aspects of Islam like its universality and flexibility/dynamicity. The other group wants to understand the NOW reality and enable the Muslim to interact efficiently with this reality but while standing on a firm ground of the Islamic values. There is common ground between the two groups and it's the unchangeable basics of Islam anyway but they differ on their ability in interacting with the present reality.
I don't know if that makes any sense.

How do you, as a Muslim, relate to general policies towards, Woman, Homosexuals, Science (specially the fact of Evolution) and such?

We got countries like Saudia Arabia who have embrace modern living using BMW's and Vaccines whiles at the same time follow ancient and cruel laws by the Qu'ran and woman are seen as property not allowed to go out by themselves. Your view on contrast?

 

[Ba'al]

How do you, as a Muslim, relate to general policies towards, Woman, Homosexuals, Science (specially the fact of Evolution) and such?

I cannot answer that question as a muslim but I have read the quran along with other religious texts and I can tell you flat out that Islam gives more rights to women than the old or new testament. Women were allowed to vote centuries before western nations granted them the right. With their duties being looking after the home, their husbands are obliged to support and educate them as it is their rights. That is what's stated in the quran, but I don't know how or which nations actually enforce this. As for science and technology, it is encouraged in the quran along with religious debate.

 

[Fatihah]

So Fatihah, I ask again... are the Taliban muslims?

Response: And I answer again, I don't know the taliban.

 

[Fatihah]

your new, so ill fill you in on something in case you want to avoid wasting time & sanity.
fatihah dosent even attempt to answer questions, much less put any effort into them. and he certainly dosent consider any opposing point of view.
just thought you might want to know.

Response: If trolling was actually sound logic, you would be the smartest person on RF.

 

[Skeptisch]

1. Quran and women's rights:
   1. It's OK to have sex with your wives on the night of the fast. 2:187
   2. Menstruation is a sickness. Don't have sex with menstruating women. 2:222
   3. Have sex with your women whenever and as often as you like. 2:223
   4. Women have rights that are similar to men, but men are "a degree above them." 2:228
   5. A woman is worth one-half a man. 2:282

 

[Ba'al]

Skeptisch please quote context when you cherry pick.

 

[sonofskeptish]

Response: And I answer again, I don't know the taliban.

A muslim who does not know the Taliban. My, my, your head is buried deeper in the sand than I thought. I'll start with this link...

Taliban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[sonofskeptish]

Whoever suggests that now Islam witnesses a conflict between the so called "moderates" and "extremists" is wrong.

Your in disagreement with Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl... an Islamic scholar, as well as a professor of law at the UCLA School of Law where he teaches Islamic law, immigration, human rights, international and national security law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khaled_Abou_El_Fadl

His book "The Great Theft" is all about the current conflict between Islamic "moderates" and "puritans" (his label for extremists).

 

[Skeptisch]

Skeptisch please quote context when you cherry pick.

Context = Discourse that surrounds a language unit and helps to determine its interpretation. In this case the Quran.

"And He taught Adam all the names."
Allah taught Adam all the names of the plants and animals, which must have taken a while since there are 1.7 million species that are known today, with probably another 10 million or so that are yet to be discovered. And this only includes those that are alive today. If extinct species are included (~99%), then Allah must have taught Adam a billion or so names. 2:31
:islam:

 

[kai]

Your in disagreement with Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl... an Islamic scholar, as well as a professor of law at the UCLA School of Law where he teaches Islamic law, immigration, human rights, international and national security law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khaled_Abou_El_Fadl

His book "The Great Theft" is all about the current conflict between Islamic "moderates" and "puritans" (his label for extremists).

You may want to read her post again, you left out most of it from your quote.

 

[Ba'al]

Context = Discourse that surrounds a language unit and helps to determine its interpretation. In this case the Quran.

"And He taught Adam all the names."
Allah taught Adam all the names of the plants and animals, which must have taken a while since there are 1.7 million species that are known today, with probably another 10 million or so that are yet to be discovered. And this only includes those that are alive today. If extinct species are included (~99%), then Allah must have taught Adam a billion or so names. 2:31
:islam:

Context is the "text" before and after the text you quoted. Without the context statement can be misleading or misinterpreted.

 

[England my lionheart]

Whoever suggests that now Islam witnesses a conflict between the so called "moderates" and "extremists" is wrong. Simply, the extremists who are a very small minority always repel the majority away from them by their thinking and actions.
What we really witness, is another two opposing groups, I don't have names for them. The first group is a group who wants to take us to the past while neglecting the reality, and unable to understand important aspects of Islam like its universality and flexibility/dynamicity. The other group wants to understand the NOW reality and enable the Muslim to interact efficiently with this reality but while standing on a firm ground of the Islamic values. There is common ground between the two groups and it's the unchangeable basics of Islam anyway but they differ on their ability in interacting with the present reality.
I don't know if that makes any sense.

I agree with Not4me there are opposing groups and i have a name for one of them,revivalists want to turn the clock back 1400 years and take everything literally from the Ahadith which is a problem when it comes to Womens rights,Homosexuals,Apostates,Child Marriage and of course Hudood punishments such as Stoning and amputation.

The revivalist group do not want to ineract with the rest of the world or Muslims outside their revivalist thinking,indeed moderate Muslims have more to fear than we do as they are not seen as Muslims and are considered to be Apostates.

Revivalists such as Hasan Al Banna and Qutb have twisted the meaning of Jihad to such an extent that its real meaning has been overlooked and is simply taken to mean Terrorism which is far from the truth.

 

[Fatihah]

A muslim who does not know the Taliban. My, my, your head is buried deeper in the sand than I thought. I'll start with this link...

Taliban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Response: To the contrary, your mind is more confused than I thought. Apparently, you are a non-muslim who knows the taliban very well. So why are you not confonting your buddies about the issues you have with them?

 

[sonofskeptish]

Response: To the contrary, your mind is more confused than I thought. Apparently, you are a non-muslim who knows the taliban very well. So why are you not confonting your buddies about the issues you have with them?

Correct... I am not a muslim. What I know about the Taliban is they claim they are muslims. I assume you claim to be a muslim. You claim to know about Islam, yet you don't answer the simple yes or no question... do you think the Taliban are muslims too?

I'm not expecting an answer from you... just more word games. But if you had any sense about you, you'd realize how damaging your word games are to the perception of Islam by non-muslims.

Instead of acknowledging that the muslim faith has conflicts within it, and explaining the BIG difference between peaceful, moderates and violent, puritians, you prefer to play word games.

I'm assuming you think I'm trying to paint Islam with a negative brush. I'm not, but even if I was, your doing a much better job of that than I could even dream of.

 

[Sahar]

I agree with Not4me there are opposing groups and i have a name for one of them,revivalists want to turn the clock back 1400 years and take everything literally from the Ahadith which is a problem when it comes to Womens rights,Homosexuals,Apostates,Child Marriage and of course Hudood punishments such as Stoning and amputation.

The revivalist group do not want to ineract with the rest of the world or Muslims outside their revivalist thinking,indeed moderate Muslims have more to fear than we do as they are not seen as Muslims and are considered to be Apostates.

Revivalists such as Hasan Al Banna and Qutb have twisted the meaning of Jihad to such an extent that its real meaning has been overlooked and is simply taken to mean Terrorism which is far from the truth.

From what you said, it seems we don't agree much. This is not exactly what I meant. I am not talking about those who want to abandon basic aspects of Islam to fit the Western values and definitions. Of course some of the topics like apostasy, I don't know child marriage (?), stoning, Jihad could be topics of disagreement between the two groups which I described.

 

[Gabethewiking]

1. Quran and women's rights:
   1. It's OK to have sex with your wives on the night of the fast. 2:187
   2. Menstruation is a sickness. Don't have sex with menstruating women. 2:222
   3. Have sex with your women whenever and as often as you like. 2:223
   4. Women have rights that are similar to men, but men are "a degree above them." 2:228
   5. A woman is worth one-half a man. 2:282

"Have sex with your women whenever and as often as you like."... You lucky ********....

 

[Gabethewiking]

I cannot answer that question as a muslim but I have read the quran along with other religious texts and I can tell you flat out that Islam gives more rights to women than the old or new testament. Women were allowed to vote centuries before western nations granted them the right. With their duties being looking after the home, their husbands are obliged to support and educate them as it is their rights. That is what's stated in the quran, but I don't know how or which nations actually enforce this. As for science and technology, it is encouraged in the quran along with religious debate.

But this is the 21th Century, not 12th, we live in a new time and age and at this moment, woman in muslim nations have LESS rights then in Western Nations. Are they not following the Qu'ran correctly? False Muslims?
So as the Qu'ran encouraging science, you are for Evolution, History of the World and so on? You accept these facts and have the Qu'ran to show you you should?

 

[Skeptisch]

"Have sex with your women whenever and as often as you like."... You lucky ********....

Are the Quran and the Bible inspired by the same loving God?


The Bible says:

1. God fashions a woman out of one of Adam's ribs. This was necessary since Adam couldn't find a "help meet" in any of the animals that God made for him. 2:20-22
2. Adam blames Eve and Eve blames the serpent. 3:12-13
3. "In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children. ... Thy husband ... shall rule over thee."
   God punishes Eve, and all women after her, with the pains of childbirth and subjection to men. 3:16
4. Adam is also punished, although less severely. He now will have to work for a living because he "hearkened unto the voice" of his wife. 3:17
5. Lamech is the first of a long line of biblical men with more than one wife. It seems that God approves of such marriages. 4:19, 23
6. Finally, sometime in the next 800 years, Adam begat some daughters. These nameless ones are the first (and nearly the last) girls to be born in the Bible. 5:4
7. "The male and his female ..." Notice that in the Bible female animals are the property of male animals, as women are the property of men. 7:2