|
28478. Wombat - 7/31/2006 4:02:25 PM Jen:
Wouldn't it be wiser to refer to the Koran itself, rather than interpretations written by people with an obvious axe to grind? 28479. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 7/31/2006 4:05:02 PM This is about Christian propaganda and Jenerator's filibuster, only finding fault with opposing religious zealotry while ignoring one's own religious flaws.
Luke 6:41-42 41 And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not perceive the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, "Brother, let me remove the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the plank that is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck that is in your brother's eye. 28480. Jenerator - 7/31/2006 4:07:14 PM Wombat,
You mean like Muslim scholars and Imams? 28481. Wombat - 7/31/2006 4:13:52 PM Jen:
The way Islam is "organized" post-caliphate, literally anyone can declare themselves a religious leader and write whatever they want, issue fatwas, etc. The web makes this situation worse. 28482. Wombat - 7/31/2006 4:16:18 PM A question for you: Is the treament of women under Islam an adaptation--and in some cases an amelioration--of existing social and cultural mores? 28483. Jenerator - 7/31/2006 5:06:01 PM The way Islam is "organized" post-caliphate, literally anyone can declare themselves a religious leader and write whatever they want, issue fatwas, etc. The web makes this situation worse.
I agree. I spoke with an Imam about this and he says that the people who even somuch as interpret Islam with proper religious training or authority are not to be trusted. He said that doing so is essentally 'sin' to Allah.
Is the treament of women under Islam an adaptation--and in some cases an amelioration--of existing social and cultural mores?
I'm not sure. I can't help but wonder how some current practices reflect ancient ones and if they've morphed from false memory - meaning, people think that's what it was like during Mohammed's time. Clearly some aspects have changed - why some wear the hijab and others the burkha, and it reminds me of how some groups cling to strict dress codes as a sign of religious purity.
Think about it, Buddhist wearing orange, Hare krishnas wearing robes with their specialised haircuts, Mennonites wearing Victorian era dress, Muslims wearing chadors.
People have an inherent need to be seen as pure or pious and set apart. And a lot of the time it is reflected in how women are treated and in their freedoms in society.
What I said upthread, what I find extremely fascinating is that woman are blamed for men's temptation. It is the responsibility of the woman to stay pure in Islam so as to not tempt men. I can't help but wonder if it's always been like that in Islam or if that's a reaction to the freedoms of the West.(?)
Sorry if I'm rambling.
28484. Wombat - 7/31/2006 5:16:01 PM I would suggest that almost all the aspects of the treatment of women ascribed to Islam: sequestration, covering, and female circumcision, were found in the existing cultures. 28485. Jenerator - 7/31/2006 5:37:49 PM in Arabia or near Arabia?
That's interesting.
I am sure you've heard many times that Islam needs a renaissance, do you think it will ever happen?
I say no, unfortunately. 28486. Jenerator - 7/31/2006 5:42:17 PM Last night I was at Walmart. I hate Walmart, but that's a different story.
Anyway, my son and I were sitting down on a bench drinking water people watching after we finished picking up some stuff.
Three separate observant Muslim families entered at different times. Each of the husbands was dressed in Western style dress - jeans, t-shirt/golf shirt and shoes. Each one of the woman was wearing black robes and hijab (two were wearing black hijabs, one white), no make up, ankles covered up and barely looking up (look for 'The Gaze' at Islamworld.net)
And did I mention that it was 101 degrees outside??
That's what upsets me about the hijab - it's most afflicted on women, not men. THEY bare the responsibility for staying pure outwardly. 28487. Jenerator - 7/31/2006 5:43:10 PM Sorry about typos, I am not proofing.
Baby is awake, I'll be back later. 28488. PelleNilsson - 7/31/2006 6:33:53 PM Yes, for my part, I have heard many times that "Islam needs a renaissance" and also regret that the Muslim world has not experienced anything like the Enlightenment, which was the starting point for so many things we, in the so called Christian West, set value on, like democracy, the slowly improving rights of women, the separation of church and state, so on.
But the church's role in this was to fight to the hilt against any change that threatened its self-proclaimed prerogative of defining what is right or wrong. But in the end secularism won the day.
Shall we assume, Jen, that you advocate more secularism in the Muslim world, a moving away from the perceived rules laid down by God? If so, I'm with you all the way.
Another observation relating to your sources. The Koran, like the Bible, is like a box of Lego pieces. By picking and choosing the "right ones" you can build any edifice you want.
28489. PelleNilsson - 7/31/2006 6:46:55 PM And talking about sources. You referred to
http://www.islaam.com/Article.aspx?id=575>
This is an article from 1995. Did you locate it all by yourself? I think not. I think we should know the source of your sources. 28490. concerned - 8/1/2006 1:23:44 AM Concise history of Islam's origins and influences:
The Arabs' direct ancestors destroyed the Middle East's natural ecology, effectively turning Eden into about the closest thing to hell on earth on which mankind could survive. Islam naturally followed.
28491. concerned - 8/1/2006 1:29:02 AM Pelle has put himself in an, IMO, untenable position where he cannot admit any great unilateral inferiority of Islam to Christianity, such as its miserable penchant to call for destructive and pointless jihads. 28492. judithathome - 8/1/2006 2:30:00 AM Pelle merely wants to know Jen's sources...there's nothing wrong with that. 28493. Jenerator - 8/1/2006 3:12:48 AM Pelle,
And talking about sources. You referred to
http://www.islaam.com/Article.aspx?id=575>
This is an article from 1995. Did you locate it all by yourself? I think not. I think we should know the source of your sources.
Huh? I do not understand what you're asking or implying. Did I find that link all by myself? Yes, it was easy, would you like for me to show you how?
First you go to my link islamworld.net, then you look at the various topics listed. I found a few that addressed some of the topics - they are written by various Imams and scholars. I went to one link and it was written by Al-Isrhaad. What's the big deal, do you not like him? 28494. Jenerator - 8/1/2006 3:16:56 AM I went back to trace my steps exactly and it was easier than I expected.
Pelle, if you go to http://www.islamworld.net/ and scroll to 'Islamic Character', you will see a link to 30 signs.
Does that answer your question? 28495. Jenerator - 8/1/2006 3:17:43 AM Oops, it's 'Muslim Character'. 28496. Jenerator - 8/1/2006 2:27:33 PM Rick,
Interesting article!
Morocco’s constitution and secular laws granted women full equality. In practice, Islamic based family law – the centuries-old Moudawana – prevailed.
What do you think needs to happen in order to change tradition or custom? The hadiths outline how women are to be treated and we're seeing more and more of strict Islamism. 28497. anomie - 8/2/2006 11:03:13 AM How to change harmful traditions and customs? It starts in childhood. Doesn't the UN have some sort of program to eliminate child abuse and exploitation? We should work to outlaw religious participation for anyone under the age of consent. We do this for sexual abuse because it's harmful and has lasting effects. Religious indoctrination is just as harmful and the effects are certainly lasting.
|
