The Islamic thread

Page 25 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

dszd0g

Golden Member
Jun 14, 2000
1,226
0
0
Originally posted by: Sultan
A common misperception amongst the Western world is that women are forced to veil themselves. That is such a ridiculous idea. Why do you think Muslim women object to French laws restricting the scarf? Coz the Islamic Republic of France is forcing them to do so? The article above also briefly mentions the scarf issue. This is a very cheap way to put the religion to bad name.

Orthodox male Jews are supposed to wear kippot. I have heard it argued that Judaism is sexist because only men get to wear kippot. In Reform Judaism, women are allowed to wear kippot if they wish. I have not heard of any cases where Muslim men wanted to wear the scarfs of Muslim women, but feel free to correct me if there is a branch of Islam that does this. It seems the case of either way people will come up with sexism claims: if men or women are supposed to do something then either way women are the victim.

There is an argument that the reason behind the wearing of the garment is wear the sexism lies, but I am not sure I buy that argument.

I do believe that sexism is a real issue, but I do not believe this is an example of it. It is not hard to find much better examples.
 

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,348
1
81
Originally posted by: hatim
No matter what there intentions were they killed civilians did they not? On the pretext of defending their nation...Saddam to was innocent of what the US accused him for... WMDs....Iraq on the whole was innocent and the US had the primary aim of removing Saddam no matter how many civilians lives would be lsot. Do you think the US military is full of idiots? Did they not know from before that civilian casualties would take place? And besides the US is to be blamed for every civilian casualty there...All have been caused by the lack of security which the US bought with them... 300,000 Iraqis and Afghanis is no way out of propertion.....
Do you think less Iraqi civilians would have died if we had not gone into Fallujah to try to make things right? Do you think Iraq would be better off if we just left? Everything we're doing in Iraq now is not for the US - it's for Iraq. We would be infinitely better off packing up and going home.

Oh, and your 300,000 number is completely off track, even when you try to sneak in Afghanistan with Iraq. Try reading any report, conservative or liberal, estimating civilian casualties. http://www.iraqbodycount.com
 

raildogg

Lifer
Aug 24, 2004
12,892
572
126
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Originally posted by: hatim
No matter what there intentions were they killed civilians did they not? On the pretext of defending their nation...Saddam to was innocent of what the US accused him for... WMDs....Iraq on the whole was innocent and the US had the primary aim of removing Saddam no matter how many civilians lives would be lsot. Do you think the US military is full of idiots? Did they not know from before that civilian casualties would take place? And besides the US is to be blamed for every civilian casualty there...All have been caused by the lack of security which the US bought with them... 300,000 Iraqis and Afghanis is no way out of propertion.....
Do you think less Iraqi civilians would have died if we had not gone into Fallujah to try to make things right? Do you think Iraq would be better off if we just left? Everything we're doing in Iraq now is not for the US - it's for Iraq. We would be infinitely better off packing up and going home.

Oh, and your 300,000 number is completely off track, even when you try to sneak in Afghanistan with Iraq. Try reading any report, conservative or liberal, estimating civilian casualties. http://www.iraqbodycount.com

Good points
 

dszd0g

Golden Member
Jun 14, 2000
1,226
0
0
Originally posted by: hatim
The university im studyiying has both male and female students.

In my coutry hardly anyone selnds their daugters to school. This is more true for the poorer...Apparently they think its not important for women to get education as they will be working at home. But then it was the prophet who told both men and women to get knowledge.

You seem to argue with me and then contradict yourself. I realize that these statements are not equivalent ly opposite in meaning, but the way they are presented creates a contradiction.

And yes women are encouraged to work. However more from home.

It seems like you are saying women can have jobs too... but not the same jobs. You are not presenting a very good argument.

Theres nothing a man can do that a women can't.....

And physical differences to equate to mental differences. Man and woman have had different roles since the pre historic stone age. There are so many things that women must do and some which men...

Getting good at contradicting yourself. I read the above as "do equate" and treated it as a typo. Please correct me if that was not your intention.

Just because you donont see more women on the street working doesnt mean that they are oppressed. Thats part of Islamic culture. Men are supposed to earn bread while women are supposed to take care of things at home...Physical differences = emotional differences = different roles

Western culture considers this sexist. A lot of westerm feminists would like to see men take more of a role at home and let women share in bringing in the bread. For these feminists, ideally they would only have to take a few months off at the final stages of pregnancy and when the child is new born and then split time at home raising the child.

Personally I think children suffer a lot in western culture. I personally have noticed where one parent stays home to raise the child the child seems to turn out better. Although, I have one friend whose dad worked from home and raised him while his mom was the main bread maker. He turned out almost entirely like his dad.

The more I learn about women the more I learn that men and women really are the same. The differences are almost entirely in how men and women are raised differently or taught to express themselves. Boys cry, but men don't because they were raised not to. Women do not express themselves sexually the same way men do, because they were taught it is not proper, but that doesn't mean they do not have the same thoughts. Any man who thinks women do not think about sex as much as men, still has a lot to learn about women.

But you must all agree with me that men are more crazy about sex then women.

In general men show it more, because that is what is socially acceptable. I believe it has nothing to do with any difference between men and women other than how they are raised culturally. Women can often be just as big of nymphomaniacs as men.

Because there is no reason why a women in Islam woulld be as oppressed as sex symbols like in the US.....

Yes, in a lot of western cultures women are forced into being objects of sexual obsession. This is oppressive in a different way, especially because most women do not have perfect bodies. We raise women with all sorts of neurosis because of this.

And you feel Bush is a good president?

No.

You will not let a man play in a women's team just because he is a man and not women. Thats DISCRIMINATION....Why?

Yes, it is discrimination. Not all discrimination is bad or inappropriate.

Becasue they arephysically different and emotionally different...
I do not think women are as emotionally different as you seem to believe.

The same way a small boy would not let any girl stare at him.....

Now maybe we are getting to your problem Sorry, that was just too easy.
 

dszd0g

Golden Member
Jun 14, 2000
1,226
0
0
Originally posted by: raildogg
People like you disgust me, really. I mean how the heck can you compare Christian radicals, if there is such a thing, to mass murderers like the extremist muslims?? just wow. Please use some common sense.

There is a huge difference in believing something and then actually carrying it out.

The Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades are good examples of Christian radicals carrying out mass murder. Hitler was a convert to Christianity so I am not sure whether he counts.

Some people would argue, as BBond does, that the US is carrying out mass murder in Iraq. I am not sure that he is wrong, especially if we start using death squads.

Fundamentalists of any religion are the problem. How many world problems would be solved if we could just convince all the Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, and Muslim fundamentalists that they were wrong and to get their act together?
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
have to dig way back dont you? the point is christianity is pretty much kept from causing harm by secularization of states. yet the islamic apologists keep trying to avoid such a thing...ever defending meshing islam with government..as if they can magically reform the toxic brew.
 

raildogg

Lifer
Aug 24, 2004
12,892
572
126
Originally posted by: dszd0g
Originally posted by: raildogg
People like you disgust me, really. I mean how the heck can you compare Christian radicals, if there is such a thing, to mass murderers like the extremist muslims?? just wow. Please use some common sense.

There is a huge difference in believing something and then actually carrying it out.

The Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades are good examples of Christian radicals carrying out mass murder. Hitler was a convert to Christianity so I am not sure whether he counts.

Some people would argue, as BBond does, that the US is carrying out mass murder in Iraq. I am not sure that he is wrong, especially if we start using death squads.

Fundamentalists of any religion are the problem. How many world problems would be solved if we could just convince all the Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, and Muslim fundamentalists that they were wrong and to get their act together?

and this is what year?

And Hitler is the same person who arrested christians for just believing in it? If you think Hitler was any way a person who followed any teeny weeny bit of christianty your nuts. This is the who burnt religious books, closed churches etc. he wanted to remove all religion. he wanted people to worship the state, him and the nazi's.

fundametalist muslims are different from all other religions. end of debate.
 

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,348
1
81
Originally posted by: raildogg
and this is what year?

And Hitler is the same person who arrested christians for just believing in it? If you think Hitler was any way a person who followed any teeny weeny bit of christianty your nuts. This is the who burnt religious books, closed churches etc. he wanted to remove all religion. he wanted people to worship the state, him and the nazi's.

fundametalist muslims are different from all other religions. end of debate.
Repeatedly saying 'end of story' or 'end of debate' is not an appropriate way to end a debate. Things are not simply as you declare them, regardless of what anyone else thinks.
 

raildogg

Lifer
Aug 24, 2004
12,892
572
126
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Originally posted by: raildogg
and this is what year?

And Hitler is the same person who arrested christians for just believing in it? If you think Hitler was any way a person who followed any teeny weeny bit of christianty your nuts. This is the who burnt religious books, closed churches etc. he wanted to remove all religion. he wanted people to worship the state, him and the nazi's.

fundametalist muslims are different from all other religions. end of debate.
Repeatedly saying 'end of story' or 'end of debate' is not an appropriate way to end a debate. Things are not simply as you declare them, regardless of what anyone else thinks.

no, i am looking forward to the debate.

I meant was extremist islamists cannot be compared to any faction in any religion, they are a completely different entity. there is no debating that in my opinion.

by the way, some things are as simple as black and white
 

dszd0g

Golden Member
Jun 14, 2000
1,226
0
0
Originally posted by: raildogg
and this is what year?

2005. That does not mean that history does not matter.

More examples include the witch hunts in Europe and the US from 1484 to 1782 where approximately 300,000 women were put to death.

And Hitler is the same person who arrested christians for just believing in it? If you think Hitler was any way a person who followed any teeny weeny bit of christianty your nuts. This is the who burnt religious books, closed churches etc. he wanted to remove all religion. he wanted people to worship the state, him and the nazi's.

Hitler was confirmed as a Catholic.

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter." (1922)

I am not saying that he was a good Christian. He was insane. You are right that by the 1940's he was no longer a Christian:

"The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity...." (1941)

It was in 1935 that his stance and speeches really changed. He saw Christianity as a threat to the Natzi party.

I said that Hitler did not really count, but I should have elaborated.

fundametalist muslims are different from all other religions. end of debate.

That is where we disagree. Even if your reason is the terrorism and killing of innocent people, Muslims do not have a monopoly. Is it too easy to forget the Irish Republican Army (IRA), which is Catholic last time I checked? There is a 1997 (I believe the cease-fire has held?) example for you.

Although, I came across an interesting quote from Benjamin Franklin: "If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it?" [Edit: Realistically, most of the atheists I know are more moral than the religious people I know.]
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
its rather irrelevant whether hitler was x religion..because he wasn't a fundamentalist of x religion.

as for religions... to pretend all religions are the same is to deny all reason. some are inherently worse. it is just how it is.
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: dszd0g
Originally posted by: hatim
The university im studyiying has both male and female students.

In my coutry hardly anyone selnds their daugters to school. This is more true for the poorer...Apparently they think its not important for women to get education as they will be working at home. But then it was the prophet who told both men and women to get knowledge.

You seem to argue with me and then contradict yourself. I realize that these statements are not equivalent ly opposite in meaning, but the way they are presented creates a contradiction.

Yes my uni is different...Theres a huge difference in the mainstream madrassahs and where I go...

And yes women are encouraged to work. However more from home.

It seems like you are saying women can have jobs too... but not the same jobs. You are not presenting a very good argument.

They can have the same jobs as long as they work in there place. I mean a woman miner won't mean much...There are some jobs a man has to do and some women....Likewise some jobs are for anyone...But it depends on the social atmosphere of a workplace. A man should not be allowed to work at a place where there are only women working.

Theres nothing a man can do that a women can't.....

And physical differences to equate to mental differences. Man and woman have had different roles since the pre historic stone age. There are so many things that women must do and some which men...

Getting good at contradicting yourself. I read the above as "do equate" and treated it as a typo. Please correct me if that was not your intention.

The first one I meant according to islamic law and second physically. Theres no stopping a woman from doing any job according to her will...but there are guidelines which she may follow if she wishes....Nobodies going to get punished for not veiling herself or for working at a man's place...The only place where they will get into trouble is adultery...So we have been shown the best way to avoid adultery....Get married.....

Just because you donont see more women on the street working doesnt mean that they are oppressed. Thats part of Islamic culture. Men are supposed to earn bread while women are supposed to take care of things at home...Physical differences = emotional differences = different roles

Western culture considers this sexist. A lot of westerm feminists would like to see men take more of a role at home and let women share in bringing in the bread. For these feminists, ideally they would only have to take a few months off at the final stages of pregnancy and when the child is new born and then split time at home raising the child.

Personally I think children suffer a lot in western culture. I personally have noticed where one parent stays home to raise the child the child seems to turn out better. Although, I have one friend whose dad worked from home and raised him while his mom was the main bread maker. He turned out almost entirely like his dad.

The more I learn about women the more I learn that men and women really are the same. The differences are almost entirely in how men and women are raised differently or taught to express themselves. Boys cry, but men don't because they were raised not to. Women do not express themselves sexually the same way men do, because they were taught it is not proper, but that doesn't mean they do not have the same thoughts. Any man who thinks women do not think about sex as much as men, still has a lot to learn about women.

But you must all agree with me that men are more crazy about sex then women.

In general men show it more, because that is what is socially acceptable. I believe it has nothing to do with any difference between men and women other than how they are raised culturally. Women can often be just as big of nymphomaniacs as men.

Because there is no reason why a women in Islam woulld be as oppressed as sex symbols like in the US.....

Yes, in a lot of western cultures women are forced into being objects of sexual obsession. This is oppressive in a different way, especially because most women do not have perfect bodies. We raise women with all sorts of neurosis because of this.

There you go...And in a place where adultery would be counted as a huge sin and punishable by stoning or 100 lashes (depending if the offenders are married or not) it would not be ideal... + We have better things to do than have sex...ie preparing for the afterlife...

There have also been numberous empires that have fallen due to love...Imagine the social problems at a lesser level....some of which are depicted pretty well in dramas and films...A huge time waste isnt it? Specially when you can just get married and get reward for having sex?

And you feel Bush is a good president?

No.

Then do something about it! Otherwise you are the oppressed view because not everything according to your view is happening...Now someone mentioned the unhappiness of one women being an indication that they are oppressed because the law is not exactly how she wants it to be. :/
You will not let a man play in a women's team just because he is a man and not women. Thats DISCRIMINATION....Why?

Yes, it is discrimination. Not all discrimination is bad or inappropriate.

What is bad discrimination and why is it bad?

Becasue they arephysically different and emotionally different...
I do not think women are as emotionally different as you seem to believe.

The same way a small boy would not let any girl stare at him.....

Now maybe we are getting to your problem Sorry, that was just too easy.

 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Can we please keep this thread limited to the topic? Everyone can debate about Iraq or Hitler elsewhere.

Thank you.
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: raildogg


Attack on Iraq was because Saddam failed to disarm. He posed a threat to us and our allies. End of story.

The difference between the two is that we don't kill innocent people with intent. Those evil monsters on 9/11 crashed those planes with the intent on murdering as many women, children and men as possible. I was in New York City that day. Will never ever forget that day. The mass hysteria caused by those scum of the earth.

The next day, the city was full of heavy mist, the smell of the rubble. The smell of people being burnt alive, and dead bodies. Those that were around NYC or in it know what I'm talking about.

I definately dont think American lives are more important than anyone else's lives. Thats why we liberated Afghanistan, to give the people there freedom. Look, they just had successful elections there recently all thanks to the USA.

First, how did Saddam pose a threat to us when he had NONE of the weapons Bush and his team of well practiced liars said he had?

And second, I live very near NYC. The "heavy mist" was confined to Lower Manhattan, the prevailing wind for several days after 9/11, mercifully, carried the smoke and debris from the WTC south out over New York bay. I know. I drove the NY Turnpike extension daily right across the Hudson from NYC, right behind the Statue of Libert, daily.

Third, anyone who believes Afghanistan has changed for anything but the worse is delusional. The Taliban still controls large areas and the areas they don't control are controlled by the same warlords who controlled them before the ill-planned U.S. invasion. And opium production, which was ended by the Taliban, is now at an all time record high.

 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: Sultan
Can we please keep this thread limited to the topic? Everyone can debate about Iraq or Hitler elsewhere.

Thank you.

Sorry, Sultan. I'll get back on topic.

 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: Sultan
Can we please keep this thread limited to the topic? Everyone can debate about Iraq or Hitler elsewhere.

Thank you.

Sorry, Sultan. I'll get back on topic.

Thank you.
As you know, you will not succeed at changing the minds of prejudiced people like raildogg, 0roo0roo or RabidMongoose.
I'd rather this thread serves as just for people to learn about the religions.
 

dszd0g

Golden Member
Jun 14, 2000
1,226
0
0
Fixing quotes. The way you wrote your post it made it look like you were adding to what I said. Please edit your post.

Originally posted by: hatim
You seem to argue with me and then contradict yourself. I realize that these statements are not equivalent ly opposite in meaning, but the way they are presented creates a contradiction.

Yes my uni is different...Theres a huge difference in the mainstream madrassahs and where I go...

It seems like you are saying women can have jobs too... but not the same jobs. You are not presenting a very good argument.

They can have the same jobs as long as they work in there place. I mean a woman miner won't mean much...There are some jobs a man has to do and some women....Likewise some jobs are for anyone...But it depends on the social atmosphere of a workplace. A man should not be allowed to work at a place where there are only women working.

My point is that religion and cultures should not assign women a place. The impression that I get from Sultan is that it is Islamic culture that is sexist and not the Islamic religion. You seem to believe that even the culture is not very sexist.

Getting good at contradicting yourself. I read the above as "do equate" and treated it as a typo. Please correct me if that was not your intention.

The first one I meant according to islamic law and second physically. Theres no stopping a woman from doing any job according to her will...but there are guidelines which she may follow if she wishes....Nobodies going to get punished for not veiling herself or for working at a man's place...The only place where they will get into trouble is adultery...So we have been shown the best way to avoid adultery....Get married.....

This again seems to contradict what you said above. What do you mean by guidelines?

Western culture considers this sexist. A lot of westerm feminists would like to see men take more of a role at home and let women share in bringing in the bread. For these feminists, ideally they would only have to take a few months off at the final stages of pregnancy and when the child is new born and then split time at home raising the child.

Personally I think children suffer a lot in western culture. I personally have noticed where one parent stays home to raise the child the child seems to turn out better. Although, I have one friend whose dad worked from home and raised him while his mom was the main bread maker. He turned out almost entirely like his dad.

The more I learn about women the more I learn that men and women really are the same. The differences are almost entirely in how men and women are raised differently or taught to express themselves. Boys cry, but men don't because they were raised not to. Women do not express themselves sexually the same way men do, because they were taught it is not proper, but that doesn't mean they do not have the same thoughts. Any man who thinks women do not think about sex as much as men, still has a lot to learn about women.

In general men show it more, because that is what is socially acceptable. I believe it has nothing to do with any difference between men and women other than how they are raised culturally. Women can often be just as big of nymphomaniacs as men.

Yes, in a lot of western cultures women are forced into being objects of sexual obsession. This is oppressive in a different way, especially because most women do not have perfect bodies. We raise women with all sorts of neurosis because of this.

There you go...And in a place where adultery would be counted as a huge sin and punishable by stoning or 100 lashes (depending if the offenders are married or not) it would not be ideal... + We have better things to do than have sex...ie preparing for the afterlife...

In my personal opinion religion should present a good set of morals, but it should not enforce them. Yes, there should be laws. However, I feel in general laws should stay out of peoples personal lives and especially their bedroom. If two adults want to have sex, that is their choice. I personally do not believe in adultery as in unfaithfulness of a married person. I have never cheated on a partner. In this thread it seems that adultery is also used to refer to premarital sex. In western culture where the divorce rate is what it is, premarital sex is the norm. In many parts of the world it is acceptable for men to have premarital sex, but not women (in some cases as long as the man is not caught). I do not know if this is the case in the middle east? Do men in the middle east have premarital sex? I do not mean is it allowed, I mean is it not an uncommon practice? You said in a lot of Muslim countries now days men are not getting married until they are in the early to mid-twenties. I have a hard time believing that the men stay virgins until that age.

There have also been numberous empires that have fallen due to love...Imagine the social problems at a lesser level....some of which are depicted pretty well in dramas and films...A huge time waste isnt it? Specially when you can just get married and get reward for having sex?

And you feel Bush is a good president?

No.

Then do something about it! Otherwise you are the oppressed view because not everything according to your view is happening...Now someone mentioned the unhappiness of one women being an indication that they are oppressed because the law is not exactly how she wants it to be. :/

I did not vote for him either time and I do speak out. This is a topic for another thread.
Feel free to take it here or start a new thread and PM me.
My 10 reasons why I want Bush out of the Whitehouse

Yes, it is discrimination. Not all discrimination is bad or inappropriate.
What is bad discrimination and why is it bad?

Discriminating as a word just means "distinguishing, or noting and marking differences" (Webster 1913), "the cognitive process whereby two or more stimuli are distinguished" (2. on WordNet 2.0). Just because you note a difference does not make it bad.

These definitions point out that discrimination as a word is not always bad.

Often when someone uses the word discrimination, they mean "unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice" (1. on WordNet 2.0).

When someone discriminates against a group for an unfair or prejudiced reason, that is bad discrimination. A claim like "women are too emotional" for that job would be bad discrimination. Treating a homosexual man any differently than a heterosexual man would be bad discrimination.
 

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,348
1
81
Originally posted by: raildogg
no, i am looking forward to the debate.

I meant was extremist islamists cannot be compared to any faction in any religion, they are a completely different entity. there is no debating that in my opinion.

by the way, some things are as simple as black and white
This is not one of them, end of story.
 

raildogg

Lifer
Aug 24, 2004
12,892
572
126
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Originally posted by: raildogg
no, i am looking forward to the debate.

I meant was extremist islamists cannot be compared to any faction in any religion, they are a completely different entity. there is no debating that in my opinion.

by the way, some things are as simple as black and white
This is not one of them, end of story.

your opinion. my opinion is different. end of story
 

MegaWorks

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
3,819
1
0
Originally posted by: raildogg
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Originally posted by: raildogg
no, i am looking forward to the debate.

I meant was extremist islamists cannot be compared to any faction in any religion, they are a completely different entity. there is no debating that in my opinion.

by the way, some things are as simple as black and white
This is not one of them, end of story.

your opinion. my opinion is different. end of story

I had a debat with an jewish extremist about the Israeli-palestinian conflict and he's views are beyond extreme, end of Story.
 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
My point is that religion and cultures should not assign women a place. The impression that I get from Sultan is that it is Islamic culture that is sexist and not the Islamic religion. You seem to believe that even the culture is not very sexist.

The religion grants special priveleges to either gender in certain cases. This is done to safeguard the position of either gender in the society. There is no discrimination at all for either gender, for example, you quoted literacy; both genders have equal rights to a good education.

The culture of many societies is different from what the religion teaches. Islamic teachings are neither reflected in Pakistan, nor in Morocco with regards to gender issues.

While you think some of these cultures is sexist, this is from entirely your perspective, and I am not saying you are wrong. However, I think the American culture is really sexist, and you can see the exploitation of women on television everyday. What do you think the show "Swan" indicated?

This again seems to contradict what you said above. What do you mean by guidelines?

If taken from the Islamic theological point of view, the woman's duty is to cover herself up, while the male's duty with respect to this narrow circumstance is that he should lower his eyes and not gaze upon the female individual. If employed, both individuals should do their religious duties to avoid common employment place vices, such as harassment, work place affairs, etc. When Hatim says there are guidelines that a woman may follow, these are the guidelines as laid in Islamic 'personal' law.

In my personal opinion religion should present a good set of morals, but it should not enforce them. Yes, there should be laws. However, I feel in general laws should stay out of peoples personal lives and especially their bedroom. If two adults want to have sex, that is their choice. I personally do not believe in adultery as in unfaithfulness of a married person. I have never cheated on a partner. In this thread it seems that adultery is also used to refer to premarital sex. In western culture where the divorce rate is what it is, premarital sex is the norm. In many parts of the world it is acceptable for men to have premarital sex, but not women (in some cases as long as the man is not caught). I do not know if this is the case in the middle east? Do men in the middle east have premarital sex? I do not mean is it allowed, I mean is it not an uncommon practice? You said in a lot of Muslim countries now days men are not getting married until they are in the early to mid-twenties. I have a hard time believing that the men stay virgins until that age.

I somewhat agree, and this is in conformity with the teachings of Islam. There are 'personal' codes of conduct taught by Islam. When these codes are broken, and no other individual is affected, the matter ressts between the person who broke the code and God. When other individuals are affected by such actions, that punishment by the state according to Islamic law has to be implemented.

If two adults commit adultery or fornication, it does not become the state's duty to enforce punishment until the two individuals are proven to have committed such an act. The burden of proof is that 4 witnesses need to see the act occurring; hence, the bar is very, very high. You can understand the burden of proof as meaning that the act of adultery or fornication has influenced at least 4 lives, and therefore needs to be punished.

Let me correct you. The incidence of premarital sex is very very low in many Muslim countries. And yes, a vast majority of the men stay virgins till marriage, at least thats the impression I get from my married friends from Pakistan, Egypt, Jordon, Iraq, etc.

Thank you.
 

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,348
1
81
Originally posted by: raildogg
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Originally posted by: raildogg
no, i am looking forward to the debate.

I meant was extremist islamists cannot be compared to any faction in any religion, they are a completely different entity. there is no debating that in my opinion.

by the way, some things are as simple as black and white
This is not one of them, end of story.

your opinion. my opinion is different. end of story
Exactly my point. Your opinion is not the 'end of story', nor is mine, so stop trying to portray your opinion as fact.
 

dszd0g

Golden Member
Jun 14, 2000
1,226
0
0
I tried looking up some numbers. The percentage of working women ranges from eight percent in Bahrain to 33 percent in Jordan.

The percentage of HIV in the US is 0.6%. In the Middle East it is less than 0.1%, which does support less extramarital sex in the Middle East.

A couple articles I came across:

Iranians arrested for net dating

A well-known Iranian actress landed in court after kissing the director on the forehead during an awards ceremony

Originally posted by: Sultan
If two adults commit adultery or fornication, it does not become the state's duty to enforce punishment until the two individuals are proven to have committed such an act. The burden of proof is that 4 witnesses need to see the act occurring; hence, the bar is very, very high. You can understand the burden of proof as meaning that the act of adultery or fornication has influenced at least 4 lives, and therefore needs to be punished.

However, from what I've read the family can murder a female relative for her "honor" crime and get away with it if they suspect here of adultery or premarital sex. In Lebanon, a man is only guilty of committing adultery if the sexual act takes place under his roof and he confesses to it. If he applogoizes for it, he is usually pardoned. Charges against women do not seem to get dropped.

"Medics say honor killings are usually based on rumors and that postmortems often reveal that the vicitim's hymens were intact."

Let me correct you. The incidence of premarital sex is very very low in many Muslim countries. And yes, a vast majority of the men stay virgins till marriage, at least thats the impression I get from my married friends from Pakistan, Egypt, Jordon, Iraq, etc.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |