• 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!

Why so many people revert to Islam ?!

Wombat

Wombat

Active Member
Riverwolf said:
Uh, no, there isn't. Over 30,000 deaths from firearms, added to the over 200,000 deaths from car accidents, with about 230,000 deaths from those two things alone, and according to the U.S. population clock (which is based on the Census), the total population of the U.S. is about 300,000,000.

Thus, the chances of you becoming a victim of one of those two things are QUITE small, depending on where you live. Where I live, for example, death by firearms is actually quite rare. But, nearby, there's a town that's famous for being very dangerous.

So, it's all about where you are. Many towns are perfectly safe, many towns are dangerous.
Click to expand...

So what you are telling me is that it's all ok, not at all barbaric, not an issue and not a problem because "the chances of you becoming a victim of one of those two things are QUITE small, depending on where you live"? If I live in a small rural enclave and I'm "perfectly safe" then the tens of thousands of people who do get shot, killed and maimed in dangerous cities don't reflect a 'barbarity' in the social order?

I wonder if the advocates of Shariah Law are familiar with this principle?- It's ok/not barbaric to cut five or six peoples hands off because "the chances of you becoming a victim of such a punishment are QUITE small, depending on wether or not you are a
recidivist thief"?;)
 
Riverwolf

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Wombat said:
So what you are telling me is that it's all ok, not at all barbaric, not an issue and not a problem because...
Click to expand...

Where did you get that I had implied such a thing?

I was simply correcting you. You said that there was a good chance you'd end up a victim in some sort of life-threatening crime; I'm simply saying that there, in fact, isn't. I didn't say there wasn't a problem.
 
KnightOwl

KnightOwl

Member
Bismillah said:
I could care less about with any other political system, but I do not see a problem with Shariah law.
Click to expand...

KnightOwl said:
"the Quran stipulated that female slaves might lawfully be enjoyed by their masters." Mohammad himself owned many slaves, some of whom he captured in wars of conquest and some he purchased. The names of forty slaves owned by Mohammad are recorded by Muslim chroniclers. Islamic law (Sharia) contains elaborate regulations for slavery.
Click to expand...

[youtube]EW636a489So[/youtube]

Jump to 3:31
 
Wombat

Wombat

Active Member
Riverwolf said:
Where did you get that I had implied such a thing?

I was simply correcting you. You said that there was a good chance you'd end up a victim in some sort of life-threatening crime; I'm simply saying that there, in fact, isn't. I didn't say there wasn't a problem.
Click to expand...

I got it from you telling me "Uh, no, there isn't" a "good chance you'd end up a victim in some sort of life-threatening crime".

As you point out "total population of the U.S. is about 300,000,000.
Deaths by firearms- Over 30,000
Non-fatal injuries is-over 200,000 per year.

Even the most cursory glace at global comparative statistics will show you that this is not a 'population' dependent phenomena-
Murders with firearms statistics - countries compared - NationMaster

Gun violence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Australia-Firearm homicide rate per 100,000 pop= 0.31

USA -Firearm homicide rate per 100,000 pop= 2.97

You have a much much higher chance of getting shot/killed by firearms in the US than any other "developed" nation...that, by the measure of anyone in a developed nation constitues a "good chance you'd end up a victim in some sort of life-threatening crime".

We could argue what constitutes "good chance"...but to my mind if the odds are twice, three times, four times higher than than my 'norm' that I might get shot...then that's a "good chance" I don't want to take.

Point being...You may find your gun culture acceptable while I find it 'barbaric' while you might find Sharia Law 'barbaric' while they may find it acceptable while both may look towards Australia and find our treatment of Indigenous population/refugees 'barbaric'........Bottom line- scratch the surface and it's easy to find the National/ ideological barbarism and finger pointing does not help.
 
Bismillah

Bismillah

Submit
"the Quran stipulated that female slaves might lawfully be enjoyed by their masters." Mohammad himself owned many slaves, some of whom he captured in wars of conquest and some he purchased. The names of forty slaves owned by Mohammad are recorded by Muslim chroniclers. Islamic law (Sharia) contains elaborate regulations for slavery.
Click to expand...

First of all here are my thoughts on the matter of slavery, http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/110146-quran-39.html. They begin with post 389 and end with 390.

Secondly now that I have established that the word slavery is quite obviously the wrong word to use and inappropriate save for those who have an agenda to slander Islam, it is not legal for a man to force himself upon the women if she does not desire it so.

Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah: "Musaykah, a slave-girl of some Ansari, came and said: My master forces me to commit fornication. Thereupon the following verse was revealed: "But force not your maids to prostitution (when they desire chastity). (24:33)"

Given that the status and origins of the "slave" in Islamic society was one borne of warfare and displacement, the only objective was to reintegrate these people into society. Anyone with an iota of understanding can see the underlying reasons, both worldly and spiritual, for this reintegration and expansion of the Muslim community.

These women were placed in families to have their needs sought after, including their sexual desires. Rather than seizing upon them as chattle and mere possessions as was done in pre-Islamic times each person was unanmiously bestowed upon the people as a duty and a obligation to feed and take care of that person.

There is also the fact that these women retain the right to marry anyone they please as well, which would invalidate their slavery.

As I have stated the primary concern with "slavery" was reintegration and the Prophet himself freed all his "slaves", his household freed thirty thousand "slaves", and it became part of the entrusted duty of the public to provide the financial and legal support to any in bondage who wanted to become independent members of society.
 
KnightOwl

KnightOwl

Member
Bismillah said:

First of all here are my thoughts on the matter of slavery, http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/110146-quran-39.html. They begin with post 389 and end with 390.

Secondly now that I have established that the word slavery is quite obviously the wrong word to use and inappropriate save for those who have an agenda to slander Islam, it is not legal for a man to force himself upon the women if she does not desire it so.

Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah: "Musaykah, a slave-girl of some Ansari, came and said: My master forces me to commit fornication. Thereupon the following verse was revealed: "But force not your maids to prostitution (when they desire chastity). (24:33)"

Given that the status and origins of the "slave" in Islamic society was one borne of warfare and displacement, the only objective was to reintegrate these people into society. Anyone with an iota of understanding can see the underlying reasons, both worldly and spiritual, for this reintegration and expansion of the Muslim community.

These women were placed in families to have their needs sought after, including their sexual desires. Rather than seizing upon them as chattle and mere possessions as was done in pre-Islamic times each person was unanmiously bestowed upon the people as a duty and a obligation to feed and take care of that person.

There is also the fact that these women retain the right to marry anyone they please as well, which would invalidate their slavery.

As I have stated the primary concern with "slavery" was reintegration and the Prophet himself freed all his "slaves", his household freed thirty thousand "slaves", and it became part of the entrusted duty of the public to provide the financial and legal support to any in bondage who wanted to become independent members of society.
Click to expand...

This is all well and good, but if they had not been displaced, by your account there would have been no reason for them to be slaves in the first place. Imagine on a smaller scale, I invade my neighbor's house because I don't like his religion and tell him his house is now mine, but he can be my slave until such time as he is able to better himself and or in her case, until she can re-marry, only widowed because I capped her husband before I took her as my slave. Then I told her, "If you don't want to have sex with me, that's fine." Would you consider me to be benevolent because I gave the man them the chance to become free again or because I didn't force myself on the woman?
 
Bismillah

Bismillah

Submit
by your account there would have been no reason for them to be slaves in the first place
Click to expand...
That is wrong and I clearly explain why a system of bondage existed in the first place.

I invade my neighbor's house because I don't like his religion
Click to expand...
Already your example is warped and inconsistent with the subject.

he can be my slave until such time as he is able to better himself and or in her case, until she can re-marry
Click to expand...
Wrong on both accoutns, a person can take it upon themselves to free themselves at anytime, regardless of sex.

Would you consider me to be benevolent because I gave the man them the chance to become free again or because I didn't force myself on the woman?
Click to expand...
Of course not, but your example is inconsistent of history and moreover ignorant of the evils perpetuated on the Muslims, of those the first among them the most heavily persecuted.
 
Riverwolf

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Wombat said:
I got it from you telling me "Uh, no, there isn't" a "good chance you'd end up a victim in some sort of life-threatening crime".

As you point out "total population of the U.S. is about 300,000,000.
Deaths by firearms- Over 30,000
Non-fatal injuries is-over 200,000 per year.

Even the most cursory glace at global comparative statistics will show you that this is not a 'population' dependent phenomena-
Murders with firearms statistics - countries compared - NationMaster

Gun violence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Australia-Firearm homicide rate per 100,000 pop= 0.31

USA -Firearm homicide rate per 100,000 pop= 2.97

You have a much much higher chance of getting shot/killed by firearms in the US than any other "developed" nation...that, by the measure of anyone in a developed nation constitues a "good chance you'd end up a victim in some sort of life-threatening crime".

We could argue what constitutes "good chance"...but to my mind if the odds are twice, three times, four times higher than than my 'norm' that I might get shot...then that's a "good chance" I don't want to take.

Point being...You may find your gun culture acceptable while I find it 'barbaric' while you might find Sharia Law 'barbaric' while they may find it acceptable while both may look towards Australia and find our treatment of Indigenous population/refugees 'barbaric'........Bottom line- scratch the surface and it's easy to find the National/ ideological barbarism and finger pointing does not help.
Click to expand...

Gun culture is just one subculture of Americans; it doesn't constitute all of American culture, which can't really be pinned down. I, personally, believe that aggressive use of firearms is cowardly, and many agree with me. But I imagine that, statistically, there are as many gun-enthusiasts in other countries as here.

I go by the actual statistical data in this situation. Yes, there is a better chance of getting shot here in America than many other "developed" nations, which is a shame, but that doesn't mean there's a good chance you'll end up a victim of such a crime, which is what you stated. It's sort of like saying "I don't want to live anywhere near the coast because there's a statistically bigger chance that I'll be a victim of a tsunami."

If you look at what's going on in America, you'd notice that the biggest problem here isn't gun control, or traffic accidents: everyone I've talked to, and everyone I've heard bring this up, agrees that the biggest problem here is education, which leads to the two aforementioned problems and many others. IOW, while I don't say stay out of this country, say, as a tourist on vacation, but whatever you do, DON'T send your kids to school here.

BTW, I do consider some American subcultures very barbaric, IMO possibly moreso than those of third world countries. ESPECIALLY when you look at public high school social hierarchies.
 
Wombat

Wombat

Active Member
Riverwolf said:
Gun culture is just one subculture of Americans; it doesn't constitute all of American culture, which can't really be pinned down..
Click to expand...

Gun culture is just one subculture of Americans; it doesn't constitute all of American culture, which can't really be pinned down.

Kind of like subcultures in Islam or any other religion or nationality? They don’t constitute all of a culture, which can't really be pinned down?


I go by the actual statistical data in this situation.

Thought that’s what I linked to and provided?


Yes, there is a better chance of getting shot here in America than many other "developed" nations, which is a shame, but that doesn't mean there's a good chance you'll end up a victim of such a crime, which is what you stated.

Yea...and as I qualified and explained...compared to here/my norm...there’s a “good chance” I’d end up a victim of such a crime there.


It's sort of like saying "I don't want to live anywhere near the coast because there's a statistically bigger chance that I'll be a victim of a tsunami."

Yea....and there are very large numbers of Japanese and Indonesians who are quite reasonably taking that approach...and sadly...thousands who won’t get the opportunity to make such a consideration.


If you look at what's going on in America, you'd notice that the biggest problem here isn't gun control, or traffic accidents: everyone I've talked to, and everyone I've heard bring this up, agrees that the biggest problem here is education, which leads to the two aforementioned problems and many others.

Funny you should mention that...here’s Australia’s idea of a ‘War on Terrorism’-

The Australian government has funded the construction and expansion of over 2.000 junior high schools (madrassas) in poor and remote areas in Indonesia. The Australian government has committed the equivalent of about 16-million US dollars towards education in Indonesia this financial year.
MGG Pillai : MGG in discussion on Madrassas and foreign aid on ABC Asia Pacific TV



IOW, while I don't say stay out of this country, say, as a tourist on vacation, but whatever you do, DON'T send your kids to school here.

Too late....My daughter has been over as an exchange student, had a great time, didn’t get shot.;)

I’m not taking a shot at America...
My whole point was that Islam cannot be judged by subculture or aspect and neither can America.


BTW, I do consider some American subcultures very barbaric,

Me too...the American subculture called ‘Hollywood- Media and Entertainment’ is a barbaric crime against humanity:D
 
gnostic

gnostic

The Lost One
72 virgins, at best. :dancer:

But with 72 mothers-in-law that's a huge drawback :eek: and possibly my worse nightmare...and possibly make me wish that I was in the other place - hell. :thud:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top