27 Feb '07 15:04>
What do you think it is?
1) Their mistreatment of women
2) Their suicidal aggression
3) Their rejection of Jesus
1) Their mistreatment of women
2) Their suicidal aggression
3) Their rejection of Jesus
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesGood grief, this thread ought to stir the pot.
What do you think it is?
1) Their mistreatment of women
2) Their suicidal aggression
3) Their rejection of Jesus
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesWhat's wrong with rejection of Jesus? I reject him too but I am not Muslim. (More specifically, I reject PAUL, who is responsible for the modern abomination that is called Christianity). Muslims are no better and no worse. Christians taught Muslims all about aggression in the Crusades so don't even go there, Muslims are just doing what Christians taught them. Take a peek at Saladin during the Crusades, he was very tolerant of ofther religions even though Christians attacked him. Muslims need another Saladin now for sure. Just because Muslims are a thousand years 'behind' christianity in certain respect, they will tone down the rhetoric eventually just like Cristianity.
The ones who endorse the mistreatment of women, suicidal aggression or the rejection of Jesus. Are there any other kinds?
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI think visited said most of what I was going to say.
What do you think it is?
1) Their mistreatment of women
2) Their suicidal aggression
3) Their rejection of Jesus
Originally posted by vistesdSpeaking of Islam...I read a fairly interesting book recently that devoted some time ot the question of Jihad and "suicidal aggression" here is a quote:
This is not an answer, just some commentary on each of the listed issues:
(1)(a) The Qur’an liberalized women’s rights dramatically over the pre-Islamic culture, and as a religious text, far more than either the Jewish or Christian scriptures; (b) I would argue that the ahadith cited in support of suppressing women are suspect and probably inauthentic ( ...[text shortened]... rd issue has anything to do with the religion, per se. Sonhouse's comments are on point there.
Originally posted by ahosyneyhttp://www.yuricareport.com/Iraq/IraqiConstDraftSubjectsWomentoIslamicLaw.html
I asked my wife, my mother, my sister, and many of Muslim women that I can talk to about this point. They are all educated and study Islam and non of them told me that she feel mistreated in Islam. So if the Muslim woman don't feel mistreated, how do you know that?
BAGHDAD, Iraq, July 19 - A working draft of Iraq's new constitution would cede a strong role to Islamic law and could sharply curb women's rights, particularly in personal matters like divorce and family inheritance.
The document's writers are also debating whether to drop or phase out a measure enshrined in the interim constitution, co-written last year by the Americans, requiring that women make up at least a quarter of the parliament.
The draft of a chapter of the new constitution obtained by The New York Times on Tuesday guarantees equal rights for women as long as those rights do not "violate Shariah," or Koranic law.
The Americans and secular Iraqis banished such explicit references to religious law from the interim constitution adopted early last year.
The draft chapter, circulated discreetly in recent days, has ignited outrage among women's groups, which held a protest on Tuesday morning in downtown Baghdad at the square where a statue of Saddam Hussein was pulled down by American marines in April 2003.
One of the critical passages is in Article 14 of the chapter, a sweeping measure that would require court cases dealing with matters like marriage, divorce and inheritance to be judged according to the law practiced by the family's sect or religion.
Under that measure, Shiite women in Iraq, no matter what their age, generally could not marry without their families' permission. Under some interpretations of Shariah, men could attain a divorce simply by stating their intention three times in their wives' presence.
...