ISLAM Q&A

NewSoul wrote:

you know I don't like pagans. Go burn your Gods that you made from stones and if they get angry at you tell them it was my idea so you are set.

you know i dont like barbarians.

go flush your korans that you copied from the torah and if some demented lunatic gets angry at you, tell him/her/it, the world needed toilet paper real bad and so you arnt the one to blame.

0 Replies

Brahmin,

Surely, you will know your destination but when it is too late.

No matter how much Quran books you flash Quran will always stay because it is in the mind and heart of billions of people.

Peace,

Michael

0 Replies

article taken from a site on the net. About JWL, the AT.

PS : - if posting copyrighted articles is forbidden in this boad, then mods pls let me know - ill delete it.

Quote:

John Walker Lindh

"Dumb-ass" may be a subjective term, but it's difficult to think of any better way to describe John Walker Lindh, the American Taliban.

Lindh grew up affluent, in the rolling, mellow hills of Marin County, in Northern California. It's peaceful and temperate up there in wine country, where the sun always shines and even the ugly people are beautiful.

It's kind of hard to understand how one goes from spoiled wine country glitterati-spawn to filthy Kalashnikov-wielding mujahideen. No, scratch that. It's completely impossible to understand how one goes from spoiled wine country glitterati-spawn to filthy Kalashnikov-wielding mujahideen. One can only stare in befuddled amazement and contemplate the depths of stupidity of which humans are capable.

In November 2001, U.S. forces in Afghanistan were sorting through the aftermath of an al Qaeda prison riot when they stumbled across a scrawny, mud-caked American college boy. John Walker Lindh spilled his guts to a rolling CNN camera before the CIA got its hands on him, which is the only reason you've even heard of him.

It's All Denzel's Fault

Lindh was an overly bright teen, in that home-schooled, unable-to-cope-with-reality kind of way. Lindh told investigators he first became interested in Islam at the age of 12, when he watched the movie "Malcolm X." At age 16, the son of a Catholic father and a Buddhist mother converted to Islam and began regularly attending a local mosque. One can only speculate as to what the family dinner menus must have been like. Especially on Fridays during Lent...

In 1998, Lindh traveled to Yemen and studied Arabic and Islam for about two years before making his way to Pakistan, one of the world's leading centers for ultraviolent lunatics (and a nuclear power to boot!).

It was the classic old story: Boy meets sadistic militarized theocracy, boy falls in love with sadistic militarized theocracy, boy loses sadistic militarized theocracy. Lindh told CNN that while he was studying in Pakistan, he read some sales brochures and "my heart became attached to [the Taliban]." Ah, young love!

From thence, according to Lindh himself, "I went to Afghanistan because I believed it was my religious duty to assist my fellow Muslims militarily in their jihad against the Northern Alliance." In his sentencing statement before the court, Lindh went on to explain the exact nature of his historic dumbassitude. Despite the fact that he spent three weeks in an al Qaeda terrorist camp being trained in the use of Kalashnikov machine guns, explosives and heavy arms, Lindh assumed that the "jihad" to which he had been invited was the technical jihad of moderate Islam: "In the Arabic language, jihad literally means 'struggle.' In Islamic terminology, jihad refers to the spending of one's utmost exertion in the service of God. I have never understood jihad to mean anti-Americanism or terrorism." Well, there, see? It could happen to anyone!

"I believe that jihad ranges from striving to overcome own personal faults, to speaking out for the truth in adverse circumstances, to military action in the defense of justice. The type of jihad one practices depends upon one's circumstances, but the essence of any form of jihad lies in the intent." Unfortunately for Lindh, he didn't go the "speaking out for truth" route.

American Psycho

"I went to Afghanistan with the intention of fighting against terrorism and oppression, not to support it," Lindh told the court. Alas! His "good intentions" paved the way to... well, you know.

According to the federal government, Lindh fought terrorism by signing up with the Taliban, attending al Qaeda seminars on how to kill Americans, staying in guesthouses funded by Osama bin Laden, sharing campfire tales about suicide terrorists being dispatched against the United States (just before 9/11 and practicing his anti-terrorism skills with rocket-launchers, pistols and Molotov cocktails (a favorite tool of anti-terrorism forces everywhere).

During the summer of 2001, Osama bin Laden personally thanked Lindh for everything he had done to "fight terrorism and oppression." However, when Lindh was invited to take the fight against terrorism to U.S. soil, he declined in favor of a Rambo-style battlefield experience.

When he heard about the September 11 attacks, Lindh's commitment to "fight terrorism and oppression" didn't waver, and he continued to fight alongside Taliban forces, even when the U.S. invasion force came crashing down on his head. In November 2001, his cadre surrendered to the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan and was subsequently imprisoned. While in an Afghan jail, Lindh and his fellow mujahideen staged a riot, killing a CIA agent who was there seeking information on al Qaeda members.

When the U.S. military moved into the area, they found Lindh in a disheveled state, with various wounds suffered during the prison fighting. CNN cameras on the scene captured Lindh raving about his love for the Taliban. He was airlifted out to a Navy warship for interrogation, following which he was returned to the U.S. to face trial.

Lindh was unlike the other U.S. citizens accused of assisting al Qaeda, such as Latino Jose Padilla and Arab-American Yasser Hamdi, in that Lindh was a white boy with affluent parents. Naturally, the government gave him access to a lawyer and the privilege of facing criminal charges in open court (unlike Padilla and Hamdi who are being held indefinitely without charge and without access to counsel).

Lindh entered a guilty plea and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. In exchange for his plea, the more serious charges (such as conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals) were dropped, which means that with time off for good behavior, he'll be out in about 17 years.

http://images.google.com/images?q=John%20Walker%20Lindh&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=wi

0 Replies

http://voi.org/books/negaind/index.htm

that link should go a long way to explain why i share and corroborate the jewish people's lack of patience with the murderers.

0 Replies

Salaamz

Can we please--for sanity's dear sake--return to some more intelligent, informative question/answering PLEASE?

--Ibn (deeply concerned human)

0 Replies

Ibn_kumuna wrote:

Salaamz

Can we please--for sanity's dear sake--return to some more intelligent, informative question/answering PLEASE?

--Ibn (deeply concerned human)

Sure, I have a question:
What are the sociological; anthropological; and ethnological problems that are at play in the current state of affairs in the Islamic world that appear to make the majority of Muslims acquiesce to the pronouncements of Islamic leaders; imans; mullahs; journalists; royals; and others that approve of the murder of innocents performed in the name of Islam?
Question

0 Replies

ok ibn... sorry.

i have a question too. Smile

What are the sociological; anthropological; and ethnological problems that WERE at play in the PREVALENT state of affairs in the Islamic world (er.. make that "islam in the hindu world") that appear to make the majority of Muslims -
- mercilessly carry out what is described in the link i provided 2 posts up north (which can quite accurately be described as "the MASS murder of innocents performed in the name of Islam") ???????????

Smile

0 Replies

brahmin wrote:

ok ibn... sorry.

i have a question too.

What are the sociological; anthropological; and ethnological problems that WERE at play in the PREVALENT state of affairs in the Islamic world (er.. make that "islam in the hindu world") that appear to make the majority of Muslims -
- mercilessly carry out what is described in the link i provided 2 posts up north (which can quite accurately be described as "the MASS murder of innocents performed in the name of Islam") ???????????

Seriously, ibn_kumuna, I apologize for the pendantic and sarcastic nature of our questions, because I do believe that you are a deeply concerned human being and I presume that you are a religious Muslim who finds this usurpation of your religion abhorrent.
Nonetheless, this is an Islamic problem that will not be solved until religious Muslims take back the religion that has been hijacked by the Death Cultists.
So, I merely picked up where you had left off on this same question a year ago.

0 Replies

What do you call a religion that inspires people to commit murder?

This question could be directed at any belief system, but as this is and Islam thread, I ask the question of Islam.

It was Islam that inspired 911, Madrid and todays outrage in London was it not?

These people do it because they think they are doing Gods will.

They are jihadists, destined for paradise.

Most muslims condemn what they do. But very few ever say what they do is un-Islamic.

Why is that? Is it because the fanatical islamists regard themselves as true followers of the prophet, and therefore so called muslims who condemn what they do as un islamic are apostates, the penalty for which is of course, like a lot of other things in islam, death?

concise answers please

0 Replies

I would like to give my best wishes and regards to the families of the trajic event in London. The people who did this are stupid, barbaric, gutless, and have no sympathy for human life. How can you just kill innocent people??? It makes me enraged to see these horrible acts against humanity occur.

0 Replies

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

Most muslims condemn what they do. But very few ever say what they do is un-Islamic.

Why is that? Is it because the fanatical islamists regard themselves as true followers of the prophet, and therefore so called muslims who condemn what they do as un islamic are apostates, the penalty for which is of course, like a lot of other things in islam, death?

As I see it, there are two major kinds of false religions abroad in the world at present, i.e. I-slam, and secular-humanism/evolutionism.

Secular humanist and slammite societies still function after a fashion, simply because the basic tenets of real/normal religion are pretty much imprinted upon most people biologically. It's only in the case of psychopaths and what not that you really need to have things like "Thou shalt not go out and murder people for no rational reason" written down anywhere.

In other words, slammite societies work more or less because the average slammite does not take I-slam but so seriously. The problems arise when people DO start taking I-slam seriously, as it is written in the Koran and elsewhere. Somebody who does take I-slam seriously and practices it is pretty much a criminal by definition since the Koran itself is basically a sort of a manual for criminal activities.

There is no law of physics to prevent a Jew or Christian from being an a$$hole. Nonethless a Jew or Christian has to be in substantial violation of the basic tenets of his religion in order to be an a$$hole. A slammite has to be in substantial violation of the basic tenets of HIS religion in order to be a decent person. That is the difference.

0 Replies

gungasnake wrote:

There is no law of physics to prevent a Jew or Christian from being an a$$hole. Nonethless a Jew or Christian has to be in substantial violation of the basic tenets of his religion in order to be an a$$hole. A slammite has to be in substantial violation of the basic tenets of HIS religion in order to be a decent person. That is the difference.

this piece of enlightment should have been posted in the "3 religions" thread.
Wink

0 Replies

an article - even if you read nothing (it is tough/confussing reading for a non indian), please read the parts in bold.

from http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/jul/01varsha.htm

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Varsha Bhosle

Paedophilia and the Muslim Board

That was a week of virii-laden mail. I'm guessing that they constitute the Islamist/"secularist" argument against my point of view...

Well, today, there's more yet to bring on the worms: On June 24, The Hindu (newspaper) published a report on the recently concluded meeting of The All India Muslim Personal Law Board held in Hyderabad; I'm reproducing the entire item here since it wasn't carried by other publications, and, strangely, "AIMPLB (my edit - All India Muslim Personal Law Board....in india muslims are judged by the "shariat" for domestic issues, as per their own demands. for criminal cases involving muslims, its central law that applies. like in thr latest headline making Imrana case, the rapist will be punished by Govt's penal code, but whether Imrana should marry her rapist or marry the nearest jehadi, or some one else, will be the AIMPLB's call) wants exemption from Child Marriage Act" isn't to be found in the online edition of The Hindu anymore:

"The All India Muslim Personal Law Board(AIMPLB) has decided to intervene before the Supreme Court on extension of the Child Marriage Restraint Act to Muslims. The Board felt Muslims should be exempted from the purview of the Act. Briefing newsmen about the final day's deliberations of the 16th session of the Board, Secretary Muhammad Rahim Quraishi said that as per the Shariat, a girl could marry after reaching puberty.

"He said the Board President would constitute a committee comprising ulemas and legal experts to analyse the recent judgement of the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court regarding a divorce case and examine whether it had infringed on the Muslim Personal Law. The Board urged the Andhra Pradesh Government to exempt Muslims from compulsorily registering their marriages. The State Assembly has recently passed a legislation in this regard."

The Hyderabad edition of The Times of India of June 24 included a bit on the subject -- buried under copious weeping over madarsas unjustly accused of being jihad factories, Muslim genocide in Gujarat, the VHP and Babri Masjid: "The board has also asked the state government to amend the Compulsory Registration of Marriages Act to exempt the Muslim community. Qureshi said Muslims already have a systematic and fool-proof method of registration of marriages through the Wakf Board, and they need not be forced to adopt an alternative method... Similarly, the MPLB will also study a case booked under the Child Marriage (Restraint) Act, 1937, [sic] in Hyderabad."

The AIMPLB has been astute in rejecting, both, the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929, and the AP Compulsory Registration of Marriage Act, 2002. For, the latter makes it possible to monitor infringements of the former. A brief background:

§ The Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929, prescribes the minimum age of 18 years for girls and 21 years for boys for contracting marriage, and "extends to the whole of India except the State of J&K and it applies also to all citizens of India without and beyond India."

§ Registration of marriage is compulsory under the Christian Marriages Act, 1872.

§ Under the Hindu Marriages Act, there exists a provision for registration of marriages. However, it's left to the contracting parties to either solemnise the marriage before the sub-registrar or register it after performing the ceremony in conformity with Hindu beliefs.

§ Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat have already amended the Hindu Marriages Act, making registration of Hindu marriages compulsory in these states.

§ Rajasthan, MP, UP, Haryana, Orissa and Bihar, where child marriages are rampant, haven't moved towards compulsory registration. (A 1993 UNICEF survey of 5,000 women in Rajasthan found that 56% had married before the age of 15 and, of these, 17% before they were 10 years old.)

§ Andhra Pradesh passed the Compulsory Registration of Marriage Act, 2002, also to give legal status to wedlock. The Andhra Pradesh Women's Commission recommended the new law since "in number of bigamy cases the wives are losing their cases by reason of their failure to prove the first or second marriage of their husbands."

§ In September 2000, the Union government rejected the National Human Rights Commission's proposal for compulsory registration of Hindu marriages -- as had the Narasimha Rao government in 1994 and the Deve Gowda government in 1996. The "Hindu nationalist party" that upheld the Uniform Civil Code in its election manifesto, was not in favour of interfering with the personal law of Hindu individuals...

Beginning with Raja Ram Mohan Roy and I C Vidyasagar in the early 19th century, a host of Hindu social reformers, including M G Ranade, Jyotirba Phule, Swami Dayanand Saraswati, Mahatma Gandhi, Veer Savarkar, B R Ambedkar, etc, began an onslaught on the dehumanising aspects of Hindu society such as Sati, child marriage, injunctions against widow remarriage and untouchability. Eventually, the Constitution rendered illegal those aspects of Hindu Personal Law that went against the concepts of equity and equality. Legislative measures like the Bombay Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriages Act, 1946, and a series of laws enacted in the 1950s, including the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; the Hindu Succession Act, 1956; and the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, continued the process of reforms.

Unfortunately, human nature is such that, despite the Constitution, untouchability, gender discrimination and even slavery are still in practice. Just as murder exists despite punitive criminal codes, the Constitution is no guarantor of an equitable human mind. Nevertheless, what's significant is that over a period of 150 years, social reformers succeeded in getting vile practices branded as such, and legally prohibiting those religious traditions which went against a democratic order. Today, no Hindu can dare to propagate caste discrimination even from religious platforms. And this reality was made possible not only by the emergence of Hindu reformers, but also by the average Hindu's recognising the pitfalls of religion.

Then, where does the Muslim Board leave the Indian Muslim, today? Just as the central government did not ask Hindu citizens before it turned down the NHRC's proposal of compulsory registration of marriages, the Muslim Board has assumed that Indian Muslims are solidly behind its latest scheme of further denying the Indian Constitution and further widening the communal rift. I don't think they are.

I say this with some confidence because it was a Muslim who first sent me the link to The Hindu and wrote, "If the Pinkos support the AIMPLB paedophilia variation request, I am THROUGH! And I mean I will get SERIOUSLY SHITTY. Yet again the AIMPLB does not miss an opportunity to exhibit their utter lack of any broad sense of morality or duty to the Indian Muslim community, in fact they throw themselves with customary vigour into ensuring that Indian Muslims continue to live under medieval laws while the rest of the country progresses. Mashallah AIMPLB! Well done! As usual it is women and children (combined this time), who suffer the most from this attitude. If the AIMPLB were trying to make itself irrelevant to Indian Muslim society, they are going the right way about it. As for the VHP/RSS toads who see this as yet another golden opportunity to rubbish Islam in an effort to feel more advanced and 'modern' -- I spit on them. Their communal attitudes are as medieval as the AIMPLB."

In May, the National Commission for Women launched a campaign to create awareness against child marriages; the Bal Vivah Virodh Abhyan is focused in Rajasthan, UP, MP, AP and Orissa. Shantha Reddy, speaking in Hyderabad, said, "the problem had assumed serious dimensions considering that a meagre 17% deliveries in India were done institutionally. Thirty per cent of the mothers were underaged and nearly 42% underweight." On the opposition of Muslims clerics to compulsory registration of marriages, she said that a large number of women -- including Muslims -- had demanded the UCC during the NCW's public hearings in various states...

So, how does the AIMPLB feel about paedophilia? Well, as per the Shariat, "a girl could marry after reaching puberty." Problem is, girls are technically reaching puberty faster than before; as one medic on parentsoup.com writes, "It is true that girls are developing earlier in this modern world. Some believe this may be due to a variety of stimulants as diverse as artificial light to our high fat diets." She -- like every doctor counseling on female puberty -- says that in Stage Four, ie, between the ages of 10 and 16 years, "Underarm hair is likely to appear in this stage, as is menarche. A girl's first period (menarche) usually occurs, but may occur late in Stage Three [9 to 15 years], typically, about a year after breast buds form. Ovulation may occur, but not on a regular basis."

So, when a 12-year-old Muslim girl menstruates, should she be married off to the old Arab who pays a fat mehr...? If this not a demand to legalize paedophilia, what else is it??

In 1996, the case of Massarrath had seized the nation's conscience as a victim of "Arab marriages." In a space of two months, she was married to (and divorced from) three Arabs, all her grandfather's age. Each time, Massarrath was married by the same Qazi, who knew that she couldn't be married during the iddat period. When arrangements were being made by her father and stepmother to marry her off the fourth time, Massarrath rebelled: "It is not marriage, it's forced prostitution," she told the police. Massarrath was just 14 years old at the time of her three "marriages."

In August 2000, The Asian Age ran a story on Hyderabad's Arab marriages: "The Wakf Board has no records regarding the number of marriages. But brokers in the Old City areas here say that on an average, 20 such marriages are performed in the Old City every month... Police officials say that matters come to light only when the girl-victim comes forward to lodge a complaint. The Arabs arrive at Hyderabad on a short trip, drive straight to the homes of the brides pre-fixed by brokers, and are married soon after. The parents are paid amounts ranging between Rs 10,000 to 50,000. They take their brides to their hotel rooms and dump these hapless girls after a week or so, and then catch flight home." Which is one reason why Andhra Pradesh made the registration of marriages mandatory.

This, then, is what the Muslim Board seeks to legalize under the cover of the "immutable and unalterable" Shariat, which "contains guidelines which a Muslim must follow," as per Rafiq Zakaria...

Indeed, when the AP assembly passed the Bill in March, "noted religious scholar and president, Millat-e-Islamia, Maulana Hameeduddin Aqil Husami, took strong objection... 'This is nothing but a step towards the implementation of the Common Civil Code'." And, ulemas attending a meeting of the Tamir-e-Millat decided to educate the community about the "nefarious designs" of the AP government...

Sure, take it as god's truth that I am of and for the VHP/RSS toads who see this as yet another opportunity to rubbish Islam. Take it for granted that I'm an Islamophobe with nothing but the destruction of Muslims on her evil mind. I'm telling you, I am all of that! Even so, what have I stated that isn't a fact...? What have I said that negates the despicable intentions of the Muslim Board...? The VHP recently declared that the courts cannot intervene in matters of faith. But that is exactly what the ulema have been saying for a century -- and are saying today, too! Shall we then accept the Muslim Board's tenet as a principle that governs our existence while rejecting the VHP's...? Why...?

Exactly. Which is why Islamists and "secularists" mail me virii each time I hold a mirror up to their ugly countenance...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

so now tell me your honest opinions, are indians wrong in demanding an uniform civil code (we have an uniform criminal code), or not ??

0 Replies

Hello All,

I have a question concerning Islam that I would like Ibn to answer if he/she wouldn't mind: I recently finished Reading Lolita in Tehran. What are your feelings about the theocracy of Iran? On a different note, why do you believe Islam has such a poor reputation regarding its treatment of women? I realize that most religions tend to vilify women to some extent; it seems as though Islam has a particularly bad reputation at present. Do you feel it is deserved? Any thoughts?

Thanks.

0 Replies

Shazzer wrote:

On a different note, why do you believe Islam has such a poor reputation regarding its treatment of women?

This reputation is due to 2 main factors:
1) A part of the media, which show women as if they were "imprisoned" in Islam.
2) Regrettable practices in some Islamic societies where anti-Islamic culture traditions have won over Islamic teachings and where women are subdued.

Shazzer wrote:

it seems as though Islam has a particularly bad reputation at present. Do you feel it is deserved? Any thoughts?

Of course it's not deserved. In fact, each and every one of the following points is a real and true teaching of Islam, based on the Holy Qur'an and on the tradition of the prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him):

- Islam declared women and men equal in rights and duties.

- Islam condemned pre-Islamic practices degrading and oppressing women.

- The same injunctions and prohibitions of Islam equally apply to both sexes.

- Islam gave woman the right of inheritance and the right of individual independent ownership unhampered by father, husband, brother, son or anyone else.

- Islam gave women the right to accept or reject a marriage proposal free from pressure, and by mutual agreement to specify in the marriage contract that she has the right to divorce (if she misses that option she has the right to seek court divorce if she deems the marriage to have failed beyond repair).

- Islam does not require woman to change her name at marriage.

- Islam protects the family and condemns the betrayal of marital fidelity. It recognizes only one type of family: husband and wife united by authentic marriage contract.

- "Heaven is at the feet of mothers", is a basic Islamic teaching (which means: if you're kind to your mother, if you obey her, if you don't 'forget' her when she's old... then God (Allah in Arabic) will grant you Heaven (Paradise)).

- "The best of you are the kindest to their wives and I am your best to mine", is a teaching by prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him).

- Islam enjoins sounds morality in thinking, behavior and appearance. Dress fashions and social patterns that reduce woman to a sex object and exploit her as such are not acceptable to Islam.

- The observance of chastity and moral standards is equally demanded by Islam from both men and women. "Women are the siblings of men", is a saying of prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him).

taken from an article published by the Islamic Center of Southern California

0 Replies

Shazzer,

Here is a link to many of the problems relating to women in Islam. Each one has a hyperlink to the Quran reference.

Quran - Women

0 Replies

Muslim1,

Please read mesquite's link and tell me what you think. I am curious about your thoughts.

Quote:

A part of the media, which show women as if they were "imprisoned" in Islam.

What about the women who are speaking out against their oppression? Not every story out there is fabricated. Some are written by women of faith who have been persecuted due to their gender.

Quote:

Regrettable practices in some Islamic societies where anti-Islamic culture traditions have won over Islamic teachings and where women are subdued.

As a follower of Islam, how do you propose to solve this perversion of your religion?

0 Replies

It really is time these muslims left their superstitious medieval beliefs behind and joined the rest of the world.

Although I dont believe all muslims are potential terrorists, it is a fact that all terrorists are muslims. And just because most muslims condemn terrorism, it does not mean that islam has any merit. It is backward looking, oppressive, discriminatory intolerant and cruel to animals.

Moreover it as no historic authenticity, there are no non muslim accounts of the life of Mohammed, it is a hotch potch of beliefs loosly modelled on Judaism and was cobblled together over several hundred years to provide a distinct polity for the the nomadic tribes of Arabia.

0 Replies

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

Quote:

Although I dont believe all muslims are potential terrorists, it is a fact that all terrorists are muslims.

You have every right to question formal religion; I do as well. But this statement is not historically or presently accurate. All terrorists are not muslims.

And while you have every right to express your views openly (and I welcome them, truly), I would appreciate it if you would provide susbstantial evidence when making a statement like that. This is not the time to be throwing around the word 'terrorist' lightly, you know?

Just my two cents.

Edited cause I messed up the quote thingy.

0 Replies

Shazzer wrote:

Please read mesquite's link and tell me what you think. I am curious about your thoughts.

Gladly. The statements mentioned in mesquite's link generally fall into two categories:
1) True statements, of which we are proud as Muslims (even if the whole world does not agree)
2) Inaccurate phrases, based on a misinterpretation of the given references from the Holy Qur'an

Let's examine some of them:

Quote:

It's OK to have sex with your wives on the night of the fast.

What's the problem here? the fast covers the period between sunrise and sunset, so in the night people return to their normal life.

Quote:

Women have rights that are similar to men, but men are "a degree above them"

and

Quote:

Men are in charge of women, because Allah made men to be better than women. Refuse to have sex with women from whom you fear rebellion, and scourge them.

Quote:

A woman is worth one-half a man.

Completely false claim and does nothing to have with the reference given.

Quote:

Marry of the women two, or three, or four.

A nice answer can be found here:
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/mcqnm1.htm

Quote:

Males are to inherit twice that of females.

In Islam a woman has no financial obligation and the economical responsibility lies on the shoulders of the man. Before a woman is married it is the duty of the father or brother to look after the lodging, boarding, clothing and other financial requirements of the woman. After she is married it is the duty of the husband or the son. Islam holds the man financially responsible for fulfilling the needs of his family. In order to do be able to fulfill the responsibility the men get double the share of the inheritance.
For example, a man has a boy and a girl, if he dies leaving about 15000$, the son inherits 10000$ and the daughter only 5000$. Out of the 10000$ which the son inherits, as his duty towards his family, he may have to spend on them almost the entire amount or say about 8000$ and thus he has a small percentage of inheritance, say about 2000$, left for himself. On the other hand, the daughter, who inherits 5000$ is not bound to spend a single cent on anybody. She can keep the entire amount for herself. Would you prefer inheriting 10000$ and spending 8000 from it, or inheriting 5000$ and having the entire amount to yourself?

Quote:

Instructions for exchanging wives

Exchanging wives??? No my friend, the correspondent verse gives a rule on the divorce and how it completely preserves the financial rights of the woman.

Quote:

They invoke in his (Allah's) stead only females.

The Arabic word "Inathane" used here means the angels. In fact, some of the unbelievers worship the angels besides God (Allah in Arabic). May Allah protect us from such deviation.

Quote:

A man cannot treat his wives fairly.

Complete nonsense.
The reference given means that it's difficult to have an equal love for the wives (if a man has more than a wife). So he has to try his best to treat them equally.

Quote:

If you can't find any water, just rub some dirt on yourself.

The one who writes such claims really does not know anything about Islam.
If we want to make Ablution and we don't find water, we are allowed (Praise be to Allah) to do "Tayammum" (Dry ablution).

Quote:

Lot offers his daughters to a mob of angel rapers.

First, the person who wrote this has to learn how to be polite with the angels.
Second, prophet Lot (peace be upon him) who was sent to homosexual people, suggested that his people naturally marry the females (the arabic word "banaty" in the verse means females or women ) and leave their very bad behavior.

Quote:

When the doom of Allah comes, pregnant women will suffer miscarriages, nursing mothers with forget their babies.

The Day of Judgement will be so great and important that the mothers will not even think about their kids.
Here I have a message to the members of this forum: The Great Day of Judgement will come, no doubt about that, so try your best to search for the truth, fear your Creator and follow his Guidance.

Quote:

If you accuse an honorable women of adultery, be sure to bring four witness. Otherwise you will receive 80 lashes.

How great is Islam! A married women is so protected and honored that no one can accuse her of bad behavior unless he has substantial proof.

Quote:

A husband can accuse his wife of adultery with only one witness. 24:6

Why do you stop here? why don't you read verses 7,8 and 9 of the same chapter? The woman can defend herself with only her witness.

Quote:

Believing women must lower their gaze and be modest, cover themselves with veils, and not reveal themselves except to their husbands, relatives, children, and slaves.

Quote:

Women must cover themselves when in public.

We are so proud of how women in Islam are dressed.
Suppose two sisters who are twins, and who are equally beautiful, walk down the street. One of them is attired in the Islamic hijaab i.e. the complete body is covered. The other sister is wearing western clothes, a mini skirt or shorts. Just around the corner there is a hooligan or ruffian who is waiting for a catch, to tease a girl. Whom will he tease? The girl wearing the Islamic Hijaab or the girl wearing the skirt or the mini? Naturally he will tease the girl wearing the skirt or the mini. Such dresses are an indirect invitation to the opposite sex for teasing and molestation. The Qur'an rightly says that hijaab prevents women from being molested

Quote:

If men must speak to Muhammad's wives they must speak from behind a curtain. And no one must ever marry one of his wives.

All Praise be to Allah for that. We are so proud of it.

Quote:

Female companions await those who enter the Gardens of Eden on the Day of Reckoning.

All the people of the Paradise will be married, all Praise be to Allah.

Quote:

Allah will give those in the Garden women of modest gaze whom neither man nor jinn have touched before them.

Absolutely. All Praise be to Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

Shazzer...

Shazzer wrote:

What about the women who are speaking out against their oppression? Not every story out there is fabricated. Some are written by women of faith who have been persecuted due to their gender.

Would you mind proving your statement? (Please do not give me examples of women who are paid to say wrong things about Islam)

Shazzer wrote:

As a follower of Islam, how do you propose to solve this perversion of your religion?

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know