Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hate Hitler and everyone who thinks like him, but it doesn't mean I will shut myself off from knowing about them.
Okay, but it still implies a basic shutting off. People learn about Hitler to learn about bad things not to make a detached study of whether he had good or bad things to say. Analogizing all religious founders to Hitler is probably not what your doing, but it's a weird example that implies such.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gplex
Yes, women where no longer treated as animal type slaves, but moved indoors and became house slaves. No longer could a women own property.
With all due respect you don't know what you're talking about here. Islam says women can only inherit half what a man does, so it's a tad sexist, but it certainly doesn't say they couldn't own property at all. This is maybe one of those feminist myths like the idea that Medieval Christians didn't think women had souls.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gplex
Muhammad first wife was a rich and powerful women, but muhammad did his best to make sure no man would ever be put under the thumb of a women (like he was when his first wife employed him).
Although he opposed women leadership I don't think I ever heard he resented her wealth or prominence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gplex
This argument is as silly as jesusfreak777 claiming that christian slavery was not as bad as normal slavery.
Well I suppose initially it wasn't as Christians didn't believe in enslaving other Christians. St. Patrick was pretty clear on that and had lived as a slave. Once Europe became Christian slavery dwindled, although the economic costs of overseeing and the lack of good plantations in most of Europe certainly played an important role. Still some Medieval Christian kingdoms outright banned it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gplex
A few good deeds, do not undo the horrors this man has committed.
It's not about undoing, it's about appraising things in a fair and historical manner.
Whether you like it or not the modern world exists, in part, due to Islam. Islam is what introduced many inventions/ideas of India and China to the West. It preserved Greek knowledge. It also destroyed a good deal of Greek knowledge, but still by making it acceptable for a monotheistic society the West was able to embrace it. And that helped lead to a world where you can talk to me about this.
Okay, but it still implies a basic shutting off. People learn about Hitler to learn about bad things not to make a detached study of whether he had good or bad things to say. Analogizing all religious founders to Hitler is probably not what your doing, but it's a weird example that implies such.
With all due respect you don't know what you're talking about here. Islam says women can only inherit half what a man does, so it's a tad sexist, but it certainly doesn't say they couldn't own property at all. This is maybe one of those feminist myths like the idea that Medieval Christians didn't think women had souls.
Although he opposed women leadership I don't think I ever heard he resented her wealth or prominence.
Well I suppose initially it wasn't as Christians didn't believe in enslaving other Christians. St. Patrick was pretty clear on that and had lived as a slave. Once Europe became Christian slavery dwindled, although the economic costs of overseeing and the lack of good plantations in most of Europe certainly played an important role. Still some Medieval Christian kingdoms outright banned it.
It's not about undoing, it's about appraising things in a fair and historical manner.
Whether you like it or not the modern world exists, in part, due to Islam. Islam is what introduced many inventions/ideas of India and China to the West. It preserved Greek knowledge. It also destroyed a good deal of Greek knowledge, but still by making it acceptable for a monotheistic society the West was able to embrace it. And that helped lead to a world where you can talk to me about this.
Hitler uses the same tactics as religious leaders, tribalism, and family loyalty to convince normal people to do things they would usual do.
I went back to the article and you are right, it was written by feminist, who died in 2005 (old age). The fact remains that female rights have remain the same, while the rest of the world progressive in its morals, the followers of islam haven't.
In part due to hitler too, but I'm going to tell the truth, and not hide it under a false blanket of positive views, as you are.
I'm not "hiding" anything. If I wanted to whitewash Muhammad I wouldn't have agreed that he led war parties, plundered people, took slaves, and such.
I'm just not making people or religious communities into "black-hats" or "white-hats" the way you seem to want. I'm trying to be fair and consider the overall effect. If that irritates you well I can live with that.
I read the quran, and I never said you lied, I said muhammad lied. The word of MUHAMMAD not god.
I dislike all people who start a religion. Muhammad has been record in history as a child marrying, mass murdering, thief, who was a slave trader. He obviously faked his own divine revelations for his own convenience..
lol, I don't remember seeing that.. where did you get it from?
i know your lying, because people who have really read it dont make the same claims you do about it, terrorism, being barbaric, etc. even non-muslims...
Hitler uses the same tactics as religious leaders, tribalism, and family loyalty to convince normal people to do things they would usual do.
I went back to the article and you are right, it was written by feminist, who died in 2005 (old age). The fact remains that female rights have remain the same, while the rest of the world progressive in its morals, the followers of islam haven't.
In part due to hitler too, but I'm going to tell the truth, and not hide it under a false blanket of positive views, as you are.
this is how i know you dont know what your talking about. your comparing hitler to muhammad. muhammad only defended himself and his people if they were in danger. hitler gathered all the jews he could to kill them howeever he wanted. he actually tortured them, starved them, etc. muhammad is no comparison.
if you would look up history, muhammad gave women rights when they were being treated like they were nothing. women would be killed when they were born, they were disrespected and seeing as slaves for men. that all changed when muhammad came and gave them rights.
its just like you ignore this and try and find something else wrong with islam. do you personally know any muslims, have any muslim friends? if you did your mentality would 360 because youd actually see that they are not at all what you think they are...
You only have to read the first 3 chapters to see barbaric terrorist thinking, admittedly when I got near the end, where the chapters were only a few pages each (lazy writers anyone?) I started skimming through it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sukrill
this is how i know you dont know what your talking about. your comparing hitler to muhammad. muhammad only defended himself and his people if they were in danger. hitler gathered all the jews he could to kill them howeever he wanted. he actually tortured them, starved them, etc. muhammad is no comparison.
if you would look up history, muhammad gave women rights when they were being treated like they were nothing. women would be killed when they were born, they were disrespected and seeing as slaves for men. that all changed when muhammad came and gave them rights.
its just like you ignore this and try and find something else wrong with islam. do you personally know any muslims, have any muslim friends? if you did your mentality would 360 because youd actually see that they are not at all what you think they are...
Don't you pretend otherwise, Muhammad, given the power would slaughter everyone who opposed him.
I'll say it again. "The fact remains that female rights have remain the same, while the rest of the world progressive in its morals, the followers of islam haven't".
It is difficult to believe that the status of women, could get any lower then islam has already drag it.
You think jews or christians follow the barbaric laws in their books.. for the most part.. NO. You only need to look at countries dominated by islam to see the bronze age inequality.
I know there isn't any beautiful passages in the quran, that rivals carl sagan. My physic, maths and biology texts book contain far more wisdom and knowledge then the quran.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas R.
I'm not "hiding" anything. If I wanted to whitewash Muhammad I wouldn't have agreed that he led war parties, plundered people, took slaves, and such.
I'm just not making people or religious communities into "black-hats" or "white-hats" the way you seem to want. I'm trying to be fair and consider the overall effect. If that irritates you well I can live with that.
Look I'm not saying that while he was slaughtering his enemies, conquering people, selling their children and raping their wives and daughters (and maybe a few boys), that he didn't do anything good.
this is how i know you dont know what your talking about. your comparing hitler to muhammad. muhammad only defended himself and his people if they were in danger. hitler gathered all the jews he could to kill them howeever he wanted. he actually tortured them, starved them, etc. muhammad is no comparison.
if you would look up history, muhammad gave women rights when they were being treated like they were nothing. women would be killed when they were born, they were disrespected and seeing as slaves for men. that all changed when muhammad came and gave them rights.
its just like you ignore this and try and find something else wrong with islam. do you personally know any muslims, have any muslim friends? if you did your mentality would 360 because youd actually see that they are not at all what you think they are...
So tell me what do you think of this?
Saudi Arabia's religious police (Mutaween) stopped schoolgirls from leaving a blazing building because they were not wearing correct Islamic dress, according to Saudi newspapers.
One witness said he saw three policemen "beating young girls to prevent them from leaving the school because they were not wearing the abaya".
15 girls needlessly burned to death. This was a few years ago, but as far as I know nothing has changed.
The Mutaween are religious police who enforce the Islamic code of law known as Sharia in Saudi Arabia. Members of the Mutaween patrol the streets of Saudi Arabia, often with an official police escort, looking for violations of Islamic law. They have the authority to arrest people for violations, and they can order floggings, imprisonment, and public humiliation as punishments.
Among other things, the Mutaween look for women who are not dressed in accordance with the Sharia, people of the opposite sex fraternizing, signs of homosexual behavior, violations of Muslim dietary laws, and other signs of “un-Islamic behavior” such as listening to rock music.
this is how i know you dont know what your talking about. your comparing hitler to muhammad. muhammad only defended himself and his people if they were in danger. hitler gathered all the jews he could to kill them howeever he wanted. he actually tortured them, starved them, etc. muhammad is no comparison.
Explain that to the Banu Quraiza.
Oh, I forgot. You can't. They're all dead. Muhammad had all their men beheaded, and all their women and children sold into slavery.
Muhammad arrived in Yathrib in 622, where the local Jews offered him safety and sanctuary from his oppressors in Mecca. Within 5 years, Muhammad and his companions rewarded their generosity by expelling, slaughtering or enslaving every single Jew in the city, renaming it Medina. It was pure, unadulterated ethnic cleansing.
The similarities to Hitler's "Final Solution" cannot go unnoticed by any reasonable person.
It is pretty unnerving, but it's not quite like the "Final Solution." The Banu Qurayza were punished for not aiding in the defense of Mecca during an attack or maybe even aiding the attackers. It's maybe more like Tsarist persecutions of sects that refused military conscription or Lenin's Chekha killing off groups deemed opposed to the Revolution.
The idea of killing off all Jews was not in Islam so far as I know so in many places Jews lived under Muslim rule for centuries. Still Muhammad's similarities to any old seventh-century expansionist ruler does make him less sympathetic to me than most religious founders.
It is pretty unnerving, but it's not quite like the "Final Solution." The Banu Qurayza were punished for not aiding in the defense of Mecca during an attack or maybe even aiding the attackers. It's maybe more like Tsarist persecutions of sects that refused military conscription or Lenin's Chekha killing off groups deemed opposed to the Revolution.
Alas... that would be easier to credit were the Banu Quraiza not the final act of a three act ethnic cleansing. The Banu Nadir and Banu Qaynuqa preceded them... avoiding the executions only because of intervention by allies among the Ansar.
The episode in Yathrib/Medina marks a critical point in the evolution of Islam and Muhammad's relationship with the other "people of the Book." It is the point at which he abandons any hope of being recognized as a Prophet by either the Jews or the Christians, moves the Qibla from Jerusalem to Mecca, and establishes Islam as a faith apart from its Abrahamic fore-bearers. With it he institutionalized the Muslim antipathy towards the Jews that has characterized the history of Islam ever since.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas R.
The idea of killing off all Jews was not in Islam so far as I know so in many places Jews lived under Muslim rule for centuries. Still Muhammad's similarities to any old seventh-century expansionist ruler does make him less sympathetic to me than most religious founders.
Alas... the experience of Jews under Muslim rule might have lasted "for centuries," but not because of centuries of toleration. Even the "Golden Age" of Moorish Spain was punctuated regularly by periods of violent oppression under the Almohads and Almoravids (for example). And at other times they were tolerated merely as cash cows. For example, during the Ottoman Empire it actually became illegal for Christians and Jews to convert to Islam because the caliphate was so dependent on the jizya (the "humiliation tax") to fund its military adventures.
There is, within Islam, a deep and theologically unavoidable brutality based primarily on the centrality of the Sunnah. The Qur'an is itself a small book, and so non-comprehensive theologically that if one were to depend on it to understand Islam, you would miss a number of Islam's "five pillars" almost completely.
Instead, Islam is founded on the model of Muhammad as the perfect man. And as an exemplar of behavior, a 7th century Arab warlord does not hold up well across the centuries.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.