Islamic laws. Clear explainations are needed.

I must be clear as I do not follow the tenets of any religions. I also, must point out the women in the West have only started enjoying a sense of economic and social equality. Our Western religious laws have evolved into secularism which protects all faiths, genders and ethnic groups. That is that Biblical injunctions are no longer used in a secular society. My concern is that many Islamic laws are still observed and acted on in much of the Muslim world, and this includes many Muslim communities living in the secular West.

Western law is negotiated and concessions are made; the Qur’ran is the absolute word of God and cannot be changed.

I have contact at least three Islamic sites and all have confirmed that the Qur’an’s laws supercede secular laws. They were layman, and never had a scholar respond, which leads me to conclude that there is no refute to the following laws. Also, please note, I have only delved into the first two or three sections of the hadiths and Surah’s, I am sure there is much more.

The following hadiths, Qur’anic verses and Sharia laws are here for an Islamic scholar and/or academic to explain.

Abstract of Robert Scuton’s “Islam Is Not Compatible with Western Values”

Scruton, a conservative English writer and philosopher claims that Islam conflicts with the laws of the secular West. Islam places all political authority in the writing of the Qur’an and that all individuals should submit to Islam.

I tend to agree with him. There are a few texts that call for religion is not a compulsion, and calls for tolerance, and God is compassionate and merciful, but it appears to be very violent and still enforced.

From The World of Islam
Surah laws:

“Men are in charge of women, because God has given some bounty over others, and because men shall expend of their wealth on them. So righteous women obey God, guarding unseen what God has guarded. As for women whose rebellion you fear, admonish them or banish them to their own beds or beat them. If they then obey, then seek not a way against them; God is sublime, [simultaneously terrifying and beautiful], Great” (Sura 4:15-16) (pp. 27).

Hum, I am a feminist, and if my husband lightly taps me as chastisement, I’ll divorce his ass and leave.

Surah 2:177 discusses charity. Hum, funny how many Islamic charities have been busted for terrorist ties. How much charity does the Islamic world provide to its very many living in poverty, or refugee camps? Hypocrites. Tiny Israel took in thousands of her brethren, provided citizenship, aid and a new lease on life. Now, let us take a look at a map of the Middle-East?? Think about it.

Now we have the rules for Ramadan and fasting.

Ah, here is a nice kicker “Fighting is prescribed for you, although you hate it. Yet it may be that you hate a thing that is better for you, or you may love a thing that is worse for you: God knows, and you do not know. They will ask you about the holy mother, and fighting in it. Say, ‘Fighting in it is a great fault, but to bar from God’s way, and reject Him and the Holy Mosque, and expel its people from it is a greater fault in God’s sight; that discord is worse than slaying.’ They will not cease to fight with you until they turn you from your faith, if they are able; whoever of you turns from the faith and dies rejection—such may hope for God’s mercy, and God is Forging, compassionate” (Surah 216-217) (Williams p. 28)

Sounds to me like this claims killing is better than discord.

In Surah 219 wine and gambling are forbidden. It does not mention drugs?

Surah 221, ah, you cannot marry an idolatrous unless they convert. Hum, how many members of humanity does this eliminate?

Surah 222 is another kicker “They will question you about menstruation. Say, “It is a hurt; so keep away from menstruating women and do not be intimate with them until they are purified. [. . .] “

Hey ladies you are impure every menses.

Surah 2:223 "You wives are tillage [to till is to prepare for raising of crops by plowing, harrowing and fertilizing.] for you, so come unto your tillage as you wish, but look forward for yourselves [. . .]” In other words, women are dirt to be formed by men. At least this is what I am see this as. If you disagree, feel free to correct.

Another kicker which justifies murdering women. Probably used for honor killing.
Surah 4:15 “If any of your women commit indecency, then call four of you to witness against the, and if they testify, then detain the women in their houses until death visits them, or God appoints for them a way” (Williams 29).

The hadiths:

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
Allah’s Apostle said: “I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah.”

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Apostle was asked, “What is the best deed?” He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, "What is the next (in goodness)? He replied, “To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah’s Cause.” The questioner again asked, “What is the next (in goodness)?” He replied, “To perform Hajj (Pilgrim age to Mecca) 'Mubrur, (which is accepted by Allah and is performed with the intention of seeking Allah’s pleasure only and not to show off and without committing a sin and in accordance with the traditions of the Prophet).”

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 28:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
The Prophet said: “I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers were women who were ungrateful.” It was asked, “Do they disbelieve in Allah?” (or are they ungrateful to Allah?) He replied, “They are ungrateful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors and the good (charitable deeds) done to them. If you have always been good (benevolent) to one of them and then she sees something in you (not of her liking), she will say, 'I have never received any good from you.”

This was explained as Mohammed was only reporting what he saw.

Volume 1, Book 3, Number 111:
Narrated Ash-Sha’bi:
Abu Juhaifa said, "I asked Ali, ‘Have you got any book (which has been revealed to the Prophet apart from the Qur’an)?’ 'Ali replied, ‘No, except Allah’s Book or the power of understanding which has been bestowed (by Allah) upon a Muslim or what is (written) in this sheet of paper (with me).’ Abu Juhaifa said, "I asked, ‘What is (written) in this sheet of paper?’ Ali replied, it deals with The Diyya (compensation (blood money) paid by the killer to the relatives of the victim), the ransom for the releasing of the captives from the hands of the enemies, and the law that no Muslim should be killed in Qisas (equality in punishment) for the killing of (a disbeliever).

A tolerant religion???

Volume 1, Book 3, Number 125:
Narrated Abu Musa:
A man came to the Prophet and asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What kind of fighting is in Allah’s cause? (I ask this), for some of us fight because of being enraged and angry and some for the sake of his pride and haughtiness.” The Prophet raised his head (as the questioner was standing) and said, “He who fights so that Allah’s Word (Islam) should be superior, then he fights in Allah’s cause.”

Sounds like Mohammed conducted a religious crusade similar to the Christian crusades.

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 794:
Narrated Anas:
Some people from the tribe of 'Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islam. The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the (herd of milch) camels of charity and to drink, their milk and urine (as a medicine). They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment (became healthy) they turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away. The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were (caught and) brought, and the Prophets ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die.

These types of punishments are still used in many Islamic countries. Ouch.

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 821:
Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid:
A bedouin came to the Prophet while he (the Prophet) was sitting, and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Give your verdict according to Allah’s Laws (in our case).” Then his opponent got up and said, “He has told the truth, O Allah’s Apostle! Decide his case according to Allah’s Laws. My son was a laborer working for this person, and he committed illegal sexual intercourse with his wife, and the people told me that my son should be stoned to death, but I offered one-hundred sheep and a slave girl as a ransom for him. Then I asked the religious learned people, and they told me that my son should be flogged with one-hundred stripes and be exiled for one year.” The Prophet said, “By Him in Whose Hand my soul is, I will judge you according to Allah’s Laws. The sheep and the slave girl will be returned to you and your son will be flogged one-hundred stripes and be exiled for one year. And you, O Unais! Go to the wife of this man (and if she confesses), stone her to death.” So Unais went in the morning and stoned her to death (after she had confessed).

The boy was flogged, the girl stoned to death. Equality??? Women are routinely more severly punished than men in many Islamic countries and communities.

Volume 1, Book 5, Number 268:
Narrated Qatada:
Anas bin Malik said, “The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number.” I asked Anas, “Had the Prophet the strength for it?” Anas replied, “We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men).” And Sa’id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven).

Quite the libido.

Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
Once Allah’s Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle ?” He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” They replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” The women replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.”

It takes two women to equal one man

Volume 1, Book 7, Number 331:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
The Prophet said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me.

1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month’s journey.
2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers)
   [what about the rest of humanity dude?]
   a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due.
3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me.

[Hum, not a pirate?]
4. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection).
5. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind.

Volume 1, Book 8, Number 345: [so god is not omniscient why the reduction in prayers??? Sorry for the long verse, but I do not want to be accused of taking it out of context. Go to the bold section for my point]
Narrated Abu Dhar:
Allah’s Apostle said, "While I was at Mecca the roof of my house was opened and Gabriel descended, opened my chest, and washed it with Zam-zam water. Then he brought a golden tray full of wisdom and faith and having poured its contents into my chest, he closed it. Then he took my hand and ascended with me to the nearest heaven, when I reached the nearest heaven, Gabriel said to the gatekeeper of the heaven, ‘Open (the gate).’ The gatekeeper asked, ‘Who is it?’ Gabriel answered: ‘Gabriel.’ He asked, ‘Is there anyone with you?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Yes, Muhammad I is with me.’ He asked, ‘Has he been called?’ Gabriel said, ‘Yes.’ So the gate was opened and we went over the nearest heaven and there we saw a man sitting with some people on his right and some on his left. When he looked towards his right, he laughed and when he looked toward his left he wept. Then he said, ‘Welcome! O pious Prophet and pious son.’ I asked Gabriel, ‘Who is he?’ He replied, ‘He is Adam and the people on his right and left are the souls of his offspring. Those on his right are the people of Paradise and those on his left are the people of Hell and when he looks towards his right he laughs and when he looks towards his left he weeps.’
Then he ascended with me till he reached the second heaven and he (Gabriel) said to its gatekeeper, ‘Open (the gate).’ The gatekeeper said to him the same as the gatekeeper of the first heaven had said and he opened the gate. Anas said: "Abu Dhar added that the Prophet met Adam, Idris, Moses, Jesus and Abraham, he (Abu Dhar) did not mention on which heaven they were but he mentioned that he (the Prophet ) met Adarn on the nearest heaven and Abraham on the sixth heaven. Anas said, “When Gabriel along with the Prophet passed by Idris, the latter said, ‘Welcome! O pious Prophet and pious brother.’ The Prophet asked, ‘Who is he?’ Gabriel replied, 'He is Idris.” The Prophet added, “I passed by Moses and he said, ‘Welcome! O pious Prophet and pious brother.’ I asked Gabriel, ‘Who is he?’ Gabriel replied, ‘He is Moses.’ Then I passed by Jesus and he said, ‘Welcome! O pious brother and pious Prophet.’ I asked, ‘Who is he?’ Gabriel replied, 'He is Jesus.
Then I passed by Abraham and he said, ‘Welcome! O pious Prophet and pious son.’ I asked Gabriel, ‘Who is he?’ Gabriel replied, 'He is Abraham. The Prophet added, 'Then Gabriel ascended with me to a place where I heard the creaking of the pens.” Ibn Hazm and Anas bin Malik said: The Prophet said, “Then Allah enjoined fifty prayers on my followers when I returned with this order of Allah, I passed by Moses who asked me, ‘What has Allah enjoined on your followers?’ I replied, ‘He has enjoined fifty prayers on them.’ Moses said, ‘Go back to your Lord (and appeal for reduction) for your followers will not be able to bear it.’ (So I went back to Allah and requested for reduction) and He reduced it to half. When I passed by Moses again and informed him about it, he said, ‘Go back to your Lord as your followers will not be able to bear it.’ So I returned to Allah and requested for further reduction and half of it was reduced. I again passed by Moses and he said to me: 'Return to your Lord, for your followers will not be able to bear it. So I returned to Allah and He said, ‘These are five prayers and they are all (equal to) fifty (in reward) for My Word does not change.’ I returned to Moses and he told me to go back once again. I replied, ‘Now I feel shy of asking my Lord again.’ Then Gabriel took me till we ‘’ reached Sidrat-il-Muntaha (Lote tree of; the utmost boundry) which was shrouded in colors, indescribable. Then I was admitted into Paradise where I found small (tents or) walls (made) of pearls and its earth was of musk.”

Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.” Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, “O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?” He replied, “Whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have.”

Watch out Pagans:Volume 1, Book 8, Number 420:
Narrated Anas:
When the Prophet arrived Medina he dismounted at 'Awali-i-Medina amongst a tribe called Banu 'Amr bin 'Auf. He stayed there For fourteen nights. Then he sent for Bani An-Najjar and they came armed with their swords. As if I am looking (just now) as the Prophet was sitting over his Rahila (Mount) with Abu Bakr riding behind him and all Banu An-Najjar around him till he dismounted at the courtyard of Abu Aiyub’s house. The Prophet loved to pray wherever the time for the prayer was due even at sheep-folds. Later on he ordered that a mosque should be built and sent for some people of Banu-An-Najjar and said, “O Banu An-Najjar! Suggest to me the price of this (walled) piece of land of yours.” They replied, “No! By Allah! We do not demand its price except from Allah.” Anas added: There were graves of pagans in it and some of it was unleveled and there were some date-palm trees in it. The Prophet ordered that the graves of the pagans be dug out and the unleveled land be level led and the date-palm trees be cut down . (So all that was done). They aligned these cut date-palm trees towards the Qibla of the mosque (as a wall) and they also built two stone side-walls (of the mosque). His companions brought the stones while reciting some poetic verses. The Prophet was with them and he kept on saying, "There is no goodness except that of the Hereafter, O Allah! So please forgive the Ansars and the emigrants. "

Volume 1, Book 8, Number 425:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:
Allah’s Apostle said, “Do not enter (the places) of these people where Allah’s punishment had fallen unless you do so weeping. If you do not weep, do not enter (the places of these people) because Allah’s curse and punishment which fell upon them may fall upon you.” [the pagans]

Volume 1, Book 8, Number 427:
Narrated 'Aisha and 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas:
When the last moment of the life of Allah’s Apostle came he started putting his ‘Khamisa’ on his face and when he felt hot and short of breath he took it off his face and said, “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of their Prophets.” The Prophet was warning (Muslims) of what those had done.

Do not convert to another faith if Muslim.
Volume 9, Book 84, Number 58:
Narrated Abu Burda:
Abu Musa said, “I came to the Prophet along with two men (from the tribe) of Ash’ariyin, one on my right and the other on my left, while Allah’s Apostle was brushing his teeth (with a Siwak), and both men asked him for some employment. The Prophet said, 'O Abu Musa (O ‘Abdullah bin Qais!).’ I said, ‘By Him Who sent you with the Truth, these two men did not tell me what was in their hearts and I did not feel (realize) that they were seeking employment.’ As if I were looking now at his Siwak being drawn to a corner under his lips, and he said, 'We never (or, we do not) appoint for our affairs anyone who seeks to be employed. But O Abu Musa! (or ‘Abdullah bin Qais!) Go to Yemen.’” The Prophet then sent Mu’adh bin Jabal after him and when Mu’adh reached him, he spread out a cushion for him and requested him to get down (and sit on the cushion). Behold: There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu’adh asked, “Who is this (man)?” Abu Muisa said, “He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism.” Then Abu Muisa requested Mu’adh to sit down but Mu’adh said, "I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice. Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, “Then we discussed the night prayers and one of us said, ‘I pray and sleep, and I hope that Allah will reward me for my sleep as well as for my prayers.’”

Volume 1, Book 9, Number 490:
Narrated 'Aisha:
The things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me. They said, "Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people)." I said, “You have made us (i.e. women) dogs. I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie --in my bed between him and the Qibla. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away. for I disliked to face him.”

Heck, can’t have a similar holy day as the Christains and Jews
Volume 2, Book 13, Number 1:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
I heard Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) saying, “We (Muslims) are the last (to come) but (will be) the foremost on the Day of Resurrection though the former nations were given the Holy Scriptures before us. And this was their day (Friday) the celebration of which was made compulsory for them but they differed about it. So Allah gave us the guidance for it (Friday) and all the other people are behind us in this respect: the Jews’ (holy day is) tomorrow (i.e. Saturday) and the Christians’ (is) the day after tomorrow (i.e. Sunday).”

Volume 2, Book 13, Number 37:
Narrated Abu Umama bin Sahl bin Hunaif:
I heard Muawiya bin Abi Sufyan (repeating the statements of the Adhan) while he was sitting on the pulpit. When the Muadh-dhin pronounced the Adhan saying, “Allahu-Akbar, Allahu Akbar”, Muawiya said: “Allah Akbar, Allahu Akbar.” And when the Muadh-dhin said, "Ash-hadu an la ilaha illal-lah (I testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah)", Muawiya said, “And (so do) I”. When he said, “Ash-hadu anna Muhammadan Rasulullah” (I testify that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle), Muawiya said, “And (so do) I”. When the Adhan was finished, Muawiya said, “O people, when the Muadh-dhin pronounced the Adhan I heard Allah’s Apostle on this very pulpit saying what you have just heard me saying”.

[/b]

Because you have not corresponded with a scholar (the appropriate authority on these matters), you conclude that there is no refute? Therein lies a most basic illogical conclusion.

You observe Muslim countries, and then conclude on Islam. Muslim countries do not necessarily represent what Islam purports to advocate. And in history, law varied throughout various Muslim lands. Law also varied throughout time. You take the present to be the absolute sample. Arbitrary and mistaken. You look at what state of evolution the politics of the Islamic Arab countries have reached today, and you conclude on Islam. Therein lies your most basic illogical conclusion.

Your concerns are best addressed by Muslim scholars. You have been instructed how to get your questions answered by them. You know that none here possess the scholarship to answer these interpretational issues, and to clarify which of the Hadiths are recognized (All should be aware: Hadiths undergo a test of reliability. The process has various verification methods. Each hadith is ranked in its reliabilty and lack thereof. You may be listing hadiths that are largely unrecognized and unreliable, in the view of Muslims themselves), and to give a proper interpretation. Nonetheless, you attack Islam with these hadiths that I as one who have studied Islam do not recognize. I have not even heard of some of the narrators. There were numerous people, some wackos who wrote down that they heard Prophet Mohammad say so and so, or saw him do so and so. You prop up some of these hadiths that not even Muslims give credence to so as to define Islam in the scope of just what you’ve pasted. All in this forum have sense. They know that you have the means to get your questions answered by a scholar, but yet you continue your artificial state of confusion about Islam, posting things not even I’ve heard of, and attempt to validate them by saying that they are from a “valid site.”

You promote Osama bin-Laden by advocating the Islam he designed to trick people into warfare and murder. Consider yourself his ally for driving wedges between people, particularly, exactly who he wants to alienate and inflame. If you notice, no one but I have responded to your thread. I am here to let you know why. You have little credibility among the members after so many of your illogical, emotionally driven, and personally assaulting posts. They know that you can have your questions answered by the appropriate authority, but you do not. You simply say the same things over and over about Islam, claim intellectual superiority, display your prejudice against Muslims, and act confused as to why you have not received a refute on this site where there are no Muslim scholars, or no religious scholars for that matter. You have exposed your hate. Take your propaganda elsewhere.

If he did take his propaganda with him, you’d likely chase him down the street beating on him with yours.

That if I advised consultation with an authority, one who possesses the appropriate knowledge on an issue, of which none here possess, on an issue whereby ones objective is to attack a view, with demonstrably and admittedly no training in hand to do so effectively, would you Phaedrus, deem this, as you allude, propaganda? Your haste has distracted you from what I suggest. That if one seeks to refute, attack, unground a view, one should know what that view is before doing so. To not is to take the role of Parmenides vs. Socrates with his Third Man Argument as an example, whereby he argues against a position Socrates does not hold. This does not meet the objective of the objector, and further, the objector must accept the moral responsibility for misleading an audience who does not know Socrates’ real views on universals, thereby more apt to accept Parmenides’ objection and deem Socrates’ notion (which he holds not) defeated. Moreover, I would make the charge that Parmenides, in this case Aspacia, is (as opposed to Parmenides) aware of the fact that she does not have the training to undergo such a challenge. Worse, she declines to pursue answers that eagerly await her inquiry, within the minds of Islamic scholars who answer such questions for such people, as the purpose of their life. Do you discourage such appropriate method Phaedrus?

Haste? You’ve hung around ILP jumping anyone’s shit who won’t roll over and accept your view of Islam. Do yourself a favor- search for “all posts by (yourself)” and see how many are attacking someone over your preceptions of their “ignorance” of Islam. Interesting, huh?

Yes, the Koran (free free to jump my shit, too, if that’s not the preferred spelling) is widely misunderstood in the West, but that can’t be too much of a shocker since it seems just as widely misunderstood in the Middle East. Tell me, how can you view a religion as set down in a book as completely separate from its actual practice? The errs you lambaste other for here seem to be widely embraced my many practicing Muslims as well. You not only frequently criticize these supposed “misunderstandings” by claiming a “bad translation,” you usually go on to cast aspersions on the poster, all but flat stating they did so on purpose.

Calling someone a ‘retard’ isn’t likely to change their view, nor does it enhance your credibility. Normally I don’t really give a fuck, as I think Muslims are deluded, although to be fair they’re no more so than Christians. But you seem to be piling on the ad hominium attacks pretty high lately, enough so that it’s caught my attention.

Not that anyone gives a shit, but what the fuck does it matter what the actual texts say? Plenty of radicals have twisted Islam and Christianity to suit their purposes. If the Qu’ran espouses peace, yet the followers of Islam interpret it differently to justify Jihad (not that all do) then is Islam really peaceful? A religion isn’t a book, it’s the actions of its followers.

You seem to be pretty knowledgeable about Islam, and I don’t doubt your sincerity, but you have to understand that if I was sitting down with Bin Laden he’d probably sound pretty knowledgeable, too.

Do you see my difficulties?

I actually expressed my personal feelings to thirst4metal in confidence recently, but I will share them now with you. I am really not in the position to defend Islam. I hope this conveys my standard for which we must investigate and consider the religion. I admit that I’ve had Islamic training since childhood and taken advance courses, etc. but these issues are really best answered by scholars.

My view…hmm. I see what you’re saying, but isn’t it true that in religion, no matter what your opinion, all agree that there is only one real view. In other words, religions like Islam are absolute in nature. It would be natural to then defend the view you feel is authentic. I’ve simply contended that Islam espouses peace, tolerance, etc. This is true, that ayah’s are there. Opponents, instead of saying that it espouses only intolerance, are better off arguing that it does both (not that I agree). But I see what you’re saying. At this point, I just ask people to treat investigation of Islam like any other philosophy, with patience, and an approach that actually involves learning, not concluding outright at prima facie quotes.

Yes, I have a point of view. So, yes, I express it against contrary views. That’s what we do here. What I’d like to get across here is that there are answers to these questions if one wishes to find them. But pasting some quotes free from context, guidance, not ascertaining translation source, hadith reliability rank, and so on and saying “see! see! Islam is so crazy!” is not what I deem scholarly research. I could do that with the Bible and Torah all day, (Jesus saying that he would destroy the temple in Jerusalem, or in the old testament Moses ordering a massacre upon finding his people worshipping the golden calf, etc.)… but I don’t, because I am aware enough to know I will need to take some real courses on the scriptures before jumping to conclusions. As for “attacking,” yes, I talk shit when I lose patience with charges that are a clear demonstration for a preceding will to bash Islam by cluttering up a thread with a huge paste from a website, rather than based on a will to learn, and then developing an opinion.

Truth spoken.

Theoretically, you have a point. Applied to Islam, I see the will to war, will to power, etc. preceding the manipulation of people by religion of any origin. As for how a people can commit the opposite of what a religion commands, consider the following phenomena as possibilities: human nature (the bad parts), pre cultures to introduction to the religion, socio-economic states and fluctuations, politicization, inflammation, war, poverty, illiteracy, manipulation, despair, hate, …the fact about our stage of infancy in our evolution process. We’re still animals (in the brut sense) for crying out loud.

Let’s be precise. I did so with one person, the author here. And I gave a detailed account as to why I think so in the Islamic Doctrine thread. If you wish to take this up, tell me where I charged unjustly. I was “mean” to one other: Alderian. I did NOT accuse him of any puposeful distortions, rather, after the first couple posts, we had a very pleasant and fruitful conversation.

Where did I call someone “retard?” Again, in the Rant House, I released some testosterone in post, talking shit to Alderian. But where did I call someone a retard? (I probably said something worse at some point) But I specifically went to the Rant House to do that, I felt the urge to let loose on someone while giving my thoughts. I found the Rant House appropriate to do so. It was nothing personal. I think guys in particular handle insults quite well, I’m used to basketball courts where we abuse eachother in words on the court and shake hands after. If I came off as personal, I apologize, and will point out that there was nothing personal. But will you omit Aspacia’s ugly words? I talk shit, but I don’t cross a certain line that Aspacia does and feels totally justified to. Cursing my mother, calling me filth and my religion filth, calling me a fanatic, equating me with terrorists who kill innocent children, etc. I think you better direct your discontent for word choice in another direction.

I direct you to my statements above. But again will say, nothing personal to anyone I might have offended (Alderian and Aspacia) I’m afraid I am accustomed to sincere efforts to learn, temperance, and respect, lack of simple mindedness, resistance to hasty conclusions, will to learn prior to will to slander. I am in the halls of philosophers 5 days per week and came to this site assuming (unconsciously) the same from those in the Department. I soon realized that many of the members here are not necessarily familiar with philosophy, have not studied it, and therefore lack to certain traits that come with the training. I regret losing my composure, but what’s with the chastisement? Was I that offensive and obscene? (Not a rhetorical question, I’d really like to know)

That is, if their actions truly correspond to the religion. If not, I strongly disagree. Example: if you take a look at pre Islamic Arabia, you will find that what you see today is similar in nature. The Mulsim world seems to have devolved into their old ways. Their culture never vanished we must understand, and that is what we see in Arab countries today, but now it’s via Islam. Over simplistic I’m sure, however, a point to consider in its scope of importance.

Indeed, I do. I will keep this thought in mind for the future, thanks for the sincere insights. Your post seems to be the first constructive one I’ve had in a long time.

Withdrawn. I see most of your most inflammatory posts were made in the context of heated exchanges with the more obnoxious and inflexible ILP members. To be honest, my eyes started to glaze over after a couple pages, anyway. I don’t want to take a quote out of context as that’s not fair to you at all. BTW, I wish everyone would use a friggin’ avatar- it’s hard to follow such verbose, long winded posts with nothing to break them up. It’s late and I simply cannot scroll thru any more endless arguements…

You bring up an interesting point: any religious text presumably means one thing and one thing only. Yet everyone is utterly convinced that their interpretation is the correct one. A good example can be found in Christianity. Catholics believe in purgatory (among other things) that other denominations reject. And all claim a scriptural basis for their view. Using the same logic you have used elsewhere, are 1 billion Catholics wrong?

I certainly realize the bulk of Muslims aren’t warmongers, but what of those sects who are? They seem equally convinced that their faith has called them to do the things the rest of the world considers barbaric. At the core of it, their Islam is violent, and the violence is couched in religious rhetoric. Are they wrong? Does it matter if they are? Ultimately the Koran will be debated from here til Doomsday, just as the KJV Bible has been.

Religion fascinates me, but more for its ability to serve as a window into the human mind than out of any transcendental truth in them. I consider them all fictions, only the ceremonies differ. All religious followers claim theirs is not only The True Faith, but one devoted to peace. But in practice, how often is this true? That’s no indictment of one vs another, just an observation of how theory seems to fail when the rubber meets the road.

most of what you decry of islam can also be found in the bible.

most of the reasons why you feel that islam is incompatible with Western secular society are also relevant to Christianity, and indeed to any religion which holds its teachings as the ultimate truth when these teachings do not correspond precisely with the legal spectrum of the society in which it exists.

The fact is that widespread Islam is a relative newcomer to the west. England (for example) has a long history of Christianity of first the state religion and then the main religion in a ‘secular’ society. Even now, although society is generally regarded as secular, its form has been shaped strongly by Christian values and outlook.

Therefore of course Islamic ideals do not ‘fit in’ as well as they do in Islamic societies which they themselves shaped. the other possibility is that the nature of culture in any society is what shapes the identity and bekiefs of any religion evolving therein… but that’s a matter for another thread.

You could just as well complain of Christianity being incompatible with a TRULY secular society.

but our society is only secular in name. because it has been formed by centuries of predominantly christian dogma.

If you want examples from the bible of similar quotes to the ones you find so unacceptable from Islamic texts, there are many. for example off the top of my head i know that the bible teaches that menstruating women are impure, and that if a daughter of a priest were to have sex with a man, she should be burned alive…

read Leviticus, it’s nasty stuff.

i’m not saying that islam is compatible with secularism… just that if it is, it’s not alone.

[size=200] Funny, how you never respond or explain the quotes. You dance, and dance, resort to ad hominem attacks.

This leads me to conclude, that Islam is indeed violent and misgynistic.

Hey, have one of your good buddy theologians at the mosque respond. I would like to see how they explain these few quotes away. Oh, there is so much more.[/size]

Hum, I am using direct quotes from an edu site that provides three translations for every verse. How is posting direct quotes from Islamic religious texts posting propaganda.

BTW: He never explains any of the quotes. He instead resorts to the Straw Man/ Red Herring and ad hominem fallacies.

the trouble is most christians, and jews don’t use these verses to justify violence any longer… the majority of islam (asia, africa) does.

unfortunately this isn’t true to the same degree, there are far more liberal and moderate christians than there are muslims.

and I think we have good reason to fear widespread Islam looking at the
widespread islam of the “east.”

that I can agree with, and thus agree with Sam Harris STRONGLY, on the issue on challenging faith.

our country was founded by deists, and in the 80’s and 2000’s due to fundamental neo-con-fundamentalist christian leadership the social experiment that is the US is changing for the worse.

you should do that, for the sake of equality, again though christians no longer practice such madness.

you can find nastiness in any part of the bible. How about god flooding the earth, becuase he’s unhappy with it? How about god killing sodom and gohmorra?

How about Paul okaying slavery?

you can okay anything you want to from our holy books.

again the majority of Islam is still doing so.

I agree… the devil is in the details of what type of reasoning they abject to.

If bob is right then bush is an apocolyptic christian that believes he is quickening the second coming, frankly I believe that and think he is carrying on reagans and his fathers work.

read my post in the other islam thread that has statistics and maps of where the majority of islam is.

I’m certainly not supporting the war between aspacia and avicenna, I’m just saying we need to confront all sides of this issue and not just let it slide to “it’s in the bible too”.

Yes, this is why I became so very belligerent with him.

Yes, many Muslims are literate, but often not beyond the elementary level. The Islamic leaders lead them around by the nose.

The religious texts support the violence.

Yes, to you, me, the many atheists agnostics, etc., but to the religious the texts are the world of God. The texts often cannot be explained in a rational manner.

Read my thread on a few Sharia laws and hadiths. Do not misunderstand, the Bible is very violent too. Remember the Jew whose guest a mob wanted to kill? Rather than submit the guest to the mob, he gave them his daughter and they raped her unto death. Nice huh.

I hope that secularism will spread. I do not care if a person is relgious, I only that that they follow our secular laws. I am ticked that many Islamic groups are trying to legalize Sharia law in their communities, in the secular West. They are not special and this sort of special consideration, along with prayer breaks during work and school hours I find offensive and insulting.

Have a great day

Yes.

And the West learned from its intolerance and became secular. We learned from the Inquisition, the Protestant Reformation, the Witch hunts, the Crusades.

Yes, like the Branch Davidian’s, Jim Jones and the Koolaid drinkers, Tim McVery, Rudolph, etc.

The head of the Anglican Church is the queen. Our US dollar has In God We Trust, our Pledge of Allegiance says “Under God.” Our laws are based on the Ten Commandments.

It is, but secular society outlaws certain faith based practices. For example, the polygamous Mormons had to leave. That is, secular laws superced God’s laws in the secular society.

Hum, I read the bit regarding mensus, but not the daughter of a priest. Do you have the verse?
[/quote]
read Leviticus, it’s nasty stuff.
[/quote]
Sure is, is the verse in Leviticus?

Again, Muslims groups living in the West are trying to legalize Sharia law in their communities. This is a problem to me, how about you?

I’d like to comment on this… yes we do have terrorists in our country… they are a small minority of the EXTREME fundamentalists.

The problem is the Islam terrorists, are not that extreme and not that much of a minority.

remember the video they showed shortly after 9-11 that showed people cheering in pakistan? Those people just happen to be Islam.

How many christians of any kind do you think support Tim McViegh, Jim Jones, the branch davidians, etc? Certainly I don’t think you’d find any cheering for them.

another thing I should’ve made clear, yes both books have violent text (to name some of the problems for a great look at all the books: ww.skepticsannotatedbible.com) but don’t you think actions speak louder than words? The actions of the majority of Islam like Aspacia has correctly shown (the sharia laws should send shivers down everyone’s spines.) is not something ANYONE should be turning a blind eye too.

Certainly I think we should challenge the logic behind all religion. if you believe a book is divine in origin that pretty much means you can justify anything heinous within it because it is the word of god.

I back this up… we had a lengthy conversation which I think we both benefitted from.
As a result, I reversed my position on the Qur’an desecration.

As for the interactions between Phaedrus and Avicenna: they could have spun out of control, but in the spirit of philosophy both provided reasonable responses. Bravo to them both!

Very true! I think we can all agree to this observation. The Christian bible is just as, if not more, misunderstood. Are the 500+ denominations enough proof of that?

This is where I would appeal to Aspacia and Avicenna and ask all parties to forget the past and concentrate on philisophical arguments. We are not in the Rant House… We can vehemently disagree but we should hold ourselves up to high standards. If we don’t, well, no physical harm done, no one can stop you, but it is a barrier to learning: that is what we are all here for… who among us can claim they have learned everything there is to know about something… ANYTHING?

Avicenna, you were not that offensive (IMO) but you must admit that you lost your cool at some points. Aspacia, you were very offensive (IMO) but let us forget the past and focus on respect–I’m not suggesting you love one another as that would be too Christian of me…

Aspacia, I appeal to your reason to the philosopher within you to stop your campaign. It often appears as if you have been consumed with hate and are compelled to ‘expose’ the evil of Avicenna–worse yet, you conclude that this perceived evil is an indication that all of Islam is evil too. I plead with you to return to your senses.

No Shit, could not agree more.

I meant the Moral Majority are NOT very moral. Sorry all.

Why did your reverse your position? Just curious.

Yes, and I am still looking for explanations regarding the Qur’an. Only one person has explained one quote that makes sense. And no, everyone cannot know everything. Hell, my B.A. is in history, and my other half knows more regarding the Civil War, military history and armaments than I do.

That is, most of Qur’anic texts cannot be rationally explained. The one regarding widows came from a Muslim, the one regarding alcohol came from a sociology class. I am for explanations and received insults.

Yes, aspacia meant to be offensive as she was being compared to bin Laden. She was not asked to “come to her senses” or that she was being irrational. She was being compared to a mortal enemy. I admit it. Think for a minute thirst, did I react the same way to your posts. It is okay to disagree, I really do not mind. I dislike it when insecure individuals who disagree with my claims resort to personal attacks and dance around the issues. This is what Avicenna did. Yes, I became belligerent, and admit it. I did not say I talked shit, I was belligerent and hostile so he would understand that he was using personal insults rather than addressing the issues.

Okay, but I will still ask questions. Remember, twenty years ago I conducted the same campaign against Judaism and Christianity after reading a few feminist critiques regarding faith. I started to dig then, and only recently really started to dig into Islam. Remember, I have not used any feminist critiques yet, as sensitive indivuals would go ballestic.

Avicenna, if you cannot answer, do not respond with BS and a defensive attitute. I can spot BS from a long way off. Often I bring tapes and political speeches to class and ask “Okay which fallacy is being committed?” Did you know that you dance resembles the political bs we hear from our “leaders.” Hell, all political leaders do the Straw Man routine.

Hey thirst , you really do misunderstand. I do not hate, but like everyone else become incensed when insulted. I do have some obsessive compulsive traits, you know like a dog that will not let go of that damn bone. When I go looking for answers and come up against a wall, chuckle, then I dig even more, mistrust and believe that I am being lied to by those who will not answer my questions. Like I said, it has been a brick wall for an entire year.

No, I slammed him for insulting me, I did not claim he was evil, just a piece of filth as he compared me to a piece of filth.

Yes, to me most, if not all religions and religous leaders use faith to gain wealth, prestige, and power. Most Muslims, similar to most Christians and Jews are nonviolent.

But that is not the point. The point is, why the hell won’t any scholar explain these quotes?

Why on earth do you believe I have lost my senses. I am curious and want answers to my questions. Instead of answers, I receive Straw Man/Red Herring and ad homenem attacks. Not to mention having a person attempt to patronize me by insults to my intellect.

I have asked these questions of many Islamic sites. No response. I have asked similar questions regarding the Bible and Judaism and they have answered me. For example, yes the Torah does allow slavery, hum, but take a look at Talmud law regarding slavery. Shit, there are so many rules that Jews started the saying “To buy a slave, is to buy a master.” Hence, the practice became extinct.

HELL(O) F(R)IEND(S)

I think it is sad that religions are dragged through the mud by the very men that profess to adhere to these religions. If we look throughout history we find all kinds of atrocities being done in the name of religion or in the name of god when behind these actions are the real incentives: money, power, fear, & LAND.

I remember reading about a time when Christianity was not as divided as it is today. There was one major branch of Christianity (Catholics) and a couple of other note worthy sects, but they were all Christians nonetheless, and typically united in their goals. I remember reading about the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, Papal rule, forced conversions, executions, witch hunts, a deliberate attempt to force god unto the world’s population and their version of understanding and knowledge. The killed anyone who denounced their faith and no one could stop them from doing this in the section of the world that they controlled (a very large section indeed). They did this all in the name of their god, in the name of their leader Jesus Christ, in the name of the lord. I wonder if things would have changed had this power that the Church wielded had not been replaced by other more moderate governing methods.

Although this may be unpopular among some Arab Muslims, I would venture to say that many of the above circumstances are still affecting many in the Arab world (and the world influenced by Arabic disciplines) today. So far, it has been a near unanimous agreement that Christianity and Judaism has had its share of problems in the past. Who among us would argue that all or most Christians were bad during the Papacy’s reign? Was it the people that acted with such cruelty or was it the leaders? Were the people really even aware that their beliefs and actions were disruptive? We shouldn’t underestimate the power of propaganda. Some would argue that this can apply to American politics. This may apply today to the Arab countries… Is that a reasonable position?

Moreover, I think it can be argued that many Arabs are using Quranic texts today much the same way that Christians used Biblical texts before. The problem with all these religious texts are that so many of the ideas that were applicable hundreds or thousands of years ago are not applicable today. Seriously, Kosher laws are a scam… I could see Pig meat could kill you in those days but realistically, a small percentage of people would die from it today. Also, Muslim right to marry multiple women may have been applicable during times of war when so many males had died (the choice was to have multiple wives for each man, or a large population of prostitutes) but this law is not practical today. Racial or religious laws also made it clear that the true believers should not mix with unbelievers (which is very impractical to co-existence of religions). These laws continue to be a stumbling block to everyone because of some interpretation.

Finally, since I can’t allow myself to be fully reasonable without introducing something that makes me a jerk to many: the problem all falls on god’s head because he is the one whose holy word is being disputed over. Give us clear direction!

One word.

AWESOME.

BTW love your sig, I had that quote in my sig for a little while.

Thank you for at least that much. I think it can also be argued regardless of how “peaceful” a muslim sect acts they still are at their core ‘angry’ and ‘vehement’.

proof?

look at the nation of Islam in america, where the leaders all change their name to mohamed. Their goal is to get the US to give the black people their own land (they’ve nearly threatened violence to get it.) and pay them money to live there.

they believe that they are god’s choice people. (of course they are, my god is better than your god.)

The thing is I don’t know that there is even a peaceful message in the Qu’ran… I’d love to see one quoted.