Saudi Arabia, are baby girls sexually exploited if they do not veil?

child hijab

A Saudi cleric has called for all female babies to be fully covered by wearing the face veil, the niqab, citing reports of little girls being sexually molested.

In a TV interview on the Islamic al-Majd TV, which seems to date back to mid-last year, Sheikh Abdullah Daoud, stressed that wearing the veil will protect baby girls. The Sheikh tried to back his assertion with claims of sexual molestation against babies in the kingdom, quoting unnamed medical and security sources.

Recently picked up on social media, Sheikh Dauod’s statement prompted wide condemnation from his fellow Saudis on Twitter. Some tweeps called for the Sheikh to be held accountable because his ruling denigrates Islam and breaches individual privacy.
Sheikh Mohammad al-Jzlana, former judge at the Saudi Board of Grievances, told Al Arabiya that Dauod’s ruling was denigrating to Islam and Shariah and made Islam look bad.

Jzlana urged people to ignore unregulated fatwas and explained that there are special regulations set by the Saudi authorities to administer religious edicts and appoint those who are entitled to issue them.
He said that he feels sad whenever he sees a family walking around with a veiled baby, describing that as injustice to children.

The fatwa has prompted wide condemnations from Saudis on social media websites.

Burkas for babies is disturbing! Now the baby victims are blamed for men’s crimes. Allah help us stop the ignorance,” one user wrote.

Other Twitter users called for the imam to be held accountable for his statement.

Saudi Cleric Abdullah Daoud should have his “Sheikh” status stripped. He is effectively blaming baby girls for being molested!” one said.

The uproar reached other Muslims outside the kingdom.

What the fatwa?! Saudi cleric Abdullah Daoud says baby girls should wear face veils to prevent abuse. How about a fatwa on abusers instead?” an Indian Muslim wrote on his Twitter account.

Read:

Al Arabiya

Advertisements

291 Responses

  1. Haha!

    The guy who’s giving this fatwa and the guy he’s addressing must be from the same sing sing:)

    Covering of the face isn’t part of Islam yet many not only do but are encouraging 5 year olds to do it.

    Modesty is one thing, Mary was
    Modest, Pharoa’s wife was modest, It is encouraged by Judaism, Christianity and Islam, but a child covering her face takes the biscuit.

    I wonder what prompted this in the first place.

  2. Whether or not the babies are veiled, following the recent news stories and saudi muslim clerics who think of nothing other than just sex, or raping their daughters.
    Veiling is just an another pathetic excuse by this sick maniac cleric.

  3. Its surprising all craps I hear from Saudi ..never stops…Most disgusting thing is they “use” religion to justify their craps as if they are the pioneer of relgion

  4. This is from that crazy man whose daughter just died by his hand because he questioned his 5 year olds virginity and repeatedly abused her. As crazy as Saudi Arabia can be I see that they are protesting this crazy man’s whole life.I personally have no problem if a woman wants to wear a veil but when it is forced it is crazy.Anyone that could ever even think to veil a baby because they may be raped is as sick as the people who rape them.I really think this too. I have noticed in the news stories coming out of Saudi that they have been cracking down on the rapes of children and babies.At least no we read get to read that their are some over there that fully will not tolerate this. Let’s just pray that they do keep fighting this crime against humanity and all hope that everyone can see the cleric that said this for what he is a perv.

  5. I also have a question.Why is it that most cleric’s over there do not promote the verse that tells me to advert their eyes,especially when children are concerned?There is a reason that there is an age limit that girls are made to wear their Abayas or complete coverings.Seriously,this is a time that this verse should be promoted???? I am not against Islam I am against religion not being practiced responsible.Any religion.

  6. @mymeinkampf, Correction this is not the same guy that killed his daughter. The other man is Fayhan Al Ghamdi.

  7. This is just another TV sheikh with weird interpretation. What is interesting is the impact of the internet on the issue of wild fatwas. I think there is a positive impact.

    In the old days these weirdos can get away with radical ideas. Today the social media exposes them and they are forced to moderate their views. The movement of internet campaigning just started, with only 2-3 years now and already has an impact. I predict it will just grow from here and those sheikhs will start thinking twice before proposing such ridiculous ideas.

  8. Ibrahim,

    There is no known picture of Mary or Jesus. The pictures you see are nothing but renditions of what someone thought they might look like nothing more. In fact there is no historical evidence that Mary ever existed. So any basis on Mary appearance is meer spectulation based on nothing more than art created by someone’s imagination.

  9. What MoQ said. So glad to read the Twitter outrage against these stupid people.

  10. It is amazing the amount of attention these nutjobs get from the Western media. I just read about this from thesamerainbowsend blog and agree wholeheartedly with her post. Fatwa basically means religious opinion and since the nature of this opinion is completely bizarre the only response should be Duh? The guy was just looking for a cheap publicity and he certainly got that from the Western media. Here in the Islamic world, we simply regard it as the nonsensical rant of a nutter. http://thesamerainbowsend.com/2013/02/09/five-myths-about-saudi-arabia/

  11. I predict it will just grow from here and those sheikhs will start thinking twice before proposing such ridiculous ideas.

    Moq I hope you’re right but the social media’s abhorrent sure doesn’t deter crazy radical ‘clerics’ from the West like Pat Robertson. And the sad thing is, the audience he receives seems to agree with his hateful preaches.

  12. Actually I think Zakir Naik is the equivalent to Pat Robertson.

  13. MrsB
    Very true.
    According to similar guys like him you aren’t even supposed to visit masjid al nabawi!
    Very strange ideas.
    There are Hadith about looking after children and the elderly or being concerned for them. He basically disregarded all if that.
    He also tried to introduce some ideas that had no basis such as benefit as a criteria which has again no basis from Islam as justification for action.

  14. @mrsB,

    Actually it does. In the US Pat Robertson along with many other old guard evangelicals are losing audiences. Yes they do hold some of their older base, but the new generation is looking else where. More moderate preachers like Joel Osteen are becoming more popular and get more audiences.

    It is an evolution not a change that happens over night.

  15. You’re absolutely right there aren’t any Polaroids of the people mentioned above.

    But there are texts that contain the information about them.

    One such is called the Quran.

    Since its proof that it is a revelation is the fact that nobody can produce three verses like it, whatever established from its basis is perhaps even more sound than Polaroid.

    You see with time Polaroids tend to fade.

  16. I first noticed the power of social media here when the second Jeddah flood occured- and everyone went to the internet to post and find out what was going on- because in the first flood no one knew. There’s no turning back. People here are often the ones encouraging international media to cover the absurdities. Because this is a shame based society and the international looking ridiculous is more likely to bring a result than just individuals speaking up. It’s become a tool. In fact, they just announced Lama’s father will not be getting out anytime soon- though the court case is still in progress. Intervention by the royal family apparently.

  17. Regarding this topic. Perverted men with sexual intentions will not be deterred by what the baby is wearing. They’re perverts! Just like perverted men with criminal sexual intentions will not be deterred by hijab and/or niqab. Dress codes don’t prevent these sorts of crimes they rather muddy the water by setting up the victim as some how responsible for what criminal perverts do. A non-criminal man will not assault women.

  18. You’re right. It is simple and a fairytale.
    Then why is it nobody has been able to reproduce the like of it?
    Since it is the work of a human being another human being ought to produce something similar.

  19. This is just a loony with a platform. No one in Saudi Arabia takes him seriously…why propagate like he has support?

  20. @Amal, I totally agree!!

  21. @mrsB, my thoughts exactly 🙂

  22. What an idiot! Suggesting the veiling of babies is madness. Veiling will not stop a person’s perversion! Making a consistent example through an extreme punishment of these sick individuals for these crimes be they a prince, a celebrity imam, an ordinary man will be more effective!Shariah law should have no biase! It should be 100% compliant.

  23. “Then why is it nobody has been able to reproduce the like of it?”

    We certainly have produced many better books. We have libraries full of them. Including complete sets of law books codifying morality, science books that actually explain things, political books that describe beter systems of governing, poetry books that are superior in their verses, etc.

    What is the miracle you’re talking about? Be specific this time if you really want to make a point. You seem to speak only in platitudes.

  24. MoQ
    So the claim that it is not a inimitable should be proven by me as well as proving it is inimitable!
    Producing great works is one thing being able to produce something similar to the Quran in Arabic with the same or better eloquence, form, rhetoric etc is quite another.
    You ask which part of the Quran to produce?
    I leave that as an open book exam for you.
    The challenge is to produce a minimum of three verses.
    Can you dig it?

  25. Actually Ibrahim the Quraan is very easy to imitate for Arabic writers with good skills. Not many attempt out of fear. There are many Quraans with fake verses that pop up from now and then. The fake verses do not get noticed because of their linguistic weakness, but rather because of comparisons with standard versions.

    Much of the Arabic poetry of the period before and after Islam is actually better in its linguistic verses, meaning and elegance.

    I am not a writer, so of course I cannot produce a fake, neither will I try. However, there are plenty of underground writers who did. Obviously, they have to stay underground or they will be killed as you may expect how your religion of mercy will treat them.

    I assume you know Arabic, since you make claims about the linguistic miracle of the Quraan. Or is it you are just repeating what you have been told blindly (i.e you are the fake). If you do, then you should look up Abu Lahab blog. He is a writer and he produces thousands of verses with the same structure as Quranic verses and with the same quality. All of it is fake. Or perhaps he may have thrown a few real verses in to see if you can spot them.

    Have fun reading.

  26. The best rational way to prevent babies and children from being abused in any way is to avoid placing them in the care of pedophiles or potential pedophiles. As for proper attire, as long as the clothing protects her from insects (a lot of that here), harsh weather and is made of comfortable material then she’s good to go.

  27. Interesting MoQ.
    So the Quran challenges people to produce a copy like it and there are underground writers who have produced something similar to it?
    But out of fear they remain anonymous along with their work.

    However there are some who have not only insulted Islam but they have written and drawn attention to their artistic ‘flare’ but they are out in public.

    Have I missed out anything you mentioned above or misunderstood you?

    My question is can you point us to such a sample of work or any copy of the Quran written anonymously?

    You why most Muslims know that this guy in Saudi is wrong?

    It is precisely because no human being can produce the Quran or better yet, to date no human being has been able to produce anything similar to the Quran.

    It puts these anonymous scholars and this Saudi guy in the same boat.

    Wannabe Prophets:)

  28. So the Quran challenges people to produce a copy like it and there are underground writers who have produced something similar to it?
    But out of fear they remain anonymous along with their work.
    However there are some who have not only insulted Islam but they have written and drawn attention to their artistic ‘flare’ but they are out in public.

    Wham Bam Thank You Ibrahim!!! It does seem strange right!

  29. No the blogger I told you about has a web site (i,.e you can read it, it is not hidden) It is in Arabic as you would expect for the subject matter. I am sure if you speak Arabic you could have found it by now (it shows up in the first page in a google search) and you would have understood what he writes.

    I have this little suspicion that you cannot read Arabic, So you cannot even discern if there is a linguistic miracle or not. You just repeat what you have been told blindly. So can you actually read Arabic to a level where you can make such judgement?

    Also, you assume that people want to be prophets. This writer is a critic. He writes to proof that he can do it. He is not interested in converting people to a religion.

    Again, you make a claim of the miracle of the Quraan, but you cannot explain it. Actually in the last few days you have been here you claimed that you can back up any thing you claim. So far every time you are challenged to back up your claims you avoid it.

    Let me state it clearly:

    What exactly is the linguistic miracle of the Quran?

  30. @MrsB,

    Have you heard of a writer called Salman Rushdie. If you actually believe that people can write a fake Quraanic verses and not remain anonymous, then you live in the same alternate universe as Ibrahim.

  31. To answer your question since language is an issue I’ll point you here https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theinimitablequran.com%2F&ei=_FsbUb-ZKsqh0QXO4IDIAQ&usg=AFQjCNGnqda88jB4NVw4A1dAs-vh8dRHbg&sig2=ASkJPEGV0VhqP1943GYSYw

    The Nature of Islam is the the Lawgiver is Allah. So if this funny Saudi shake starts spewing out funny things he is either communicating with Him which makes him a prophet or a phony.

    I keep assuming everyone knows these things.

    Apologies, 1001 of them.

  32. MoQ
    Salman is my point precisely.

    And you mentioned that people like him aren’t allowed to write what they want even thought their work is out there.

    So what about writing a simple three verse chapter like the Quran.

    None of the Arabs at the time the Quran wa revealed could produce it, I’m wondering whether you’re thinking that modern technology can aid the ‘Arabs’ of today…or or or

    My question is since you deny it is a miracle why hasn’t anyone produced it?

    It’s not nice to be quick at categorizing people. I’ve never insulted you nor even addressed you personally.

    Only your thoughts.

    And honestly it is bit similar to the funny shakes in Saudi.

    They refuse to change and when you prove to them how wrong they are they become defensive.

    I don’t even know who mrsb is until I read her posts.

    Hi MrsB.

  33. oh please! Salman was given a knighthood and lives lavishly. His life is better than most religious people living in North Korea, an atheist nation.

  34. @Ibrahim,

    Your assumption is correct. I know about all of the arguments about the miracles of the Quran. However, none of these arguments actually produce evidence, just the same type of arguments you made. In summary the argument goes something like this:

    The Quraan verses are so unique, that a human no matter how much he/she tries they cannot produce the same form. Not even 3 verses.

    Yes they speak about forms of poetry and rhymes, etc. But they never provide specific of why it is miraculous. They just assume ignorance of the reader about Arabic as a substitute for actual proof.

    The concept that verses of the Quran cannot be reproduced has proven wrong many times. The fact that you are not aware of it, does not make your argument correct.

    Let’s try another one. have you heard of a book called the True Furqan” . Look it up if you have not. It is a book produced with the same form of verse as the Quraan, but with a twist. It is made to promote Christianity. The book is written in Arabic and translated into multiple languages.

    According to your linguistic argument, then the True Furqan must be the word of the divine also.

  35. @MrsB,

    That is not the point. The point is he had to go into hiding for years because of a fatwa from the Ayotalah Khomani sanctioning his death with a money award.

    The reason, his work of fiction questioned the authenticity of the Quraan.

    It is amazing how you miss that simple important point like and I have to explain it to you.

  36. Precisely the untalented Salman Rushdie wrote, according to western scholars, the most appalling, uninteresting, low quality piece of crap (or literature for the less educated lots) and he got a knighthood for that. So please don’t lump his name and the Quran together, yuck .

  37. I’m not the only Muslim in the world.

    How come every has heard of Pepsi, MJ even Rushdy but not your dodgy scholars?

    You amongst even non Muslim Arabs there is recognition of the Qurans superiority.

  38. Ibrahim, I can write a holy book which is ten times superior to the Quran in a week.
    I would start with forbidding slavery, rape and giving women equal rights, and forbidding pedophelic marriage.

    This alone would make my book superior to the Quran.
    And baby girls would not have to be veiled to hide them from perverted men.

  39. @Ibrahim

    You finally went back to your platitudes. That is all your’e capable of producing 🙂

  40. Ibrahim, your comments are so weird, all over the place, you can never answer anybody, you keep spewing your unfounded propaganda and when you cannot answer a question you scuttle off, like a coward.
    You are either trying to confuse us to death or you have such an undisciplined woolly mind that you cannot think straight.

    Oh, and btw, it took me 1 minute to write a set of rules which are superior to the Quran, the hadith and the example of you prophet, go figure!

  41. No I didn’t miss the point and you didn’t have to spoon feed me the point (thank you Baba). I just ignored the part where I was suppose to sympathize with him since his intention was to provoke with an inflammatory title and he was waiting for such responses anyway, and he got them in spades. Mr Salman Rushdie has also stated he has no sympathy for the director of The Innocence of Muslims for the same reason.

    Ah I am more superior than God and can write a better book but I can’t be superior enough to not judge hijab women and their clothing choices nor can I stop insulting (or pointing out ‘facts’) other peoples religion and wish to see the demise of all religion. Yes far far superior than God indeed…

  42. @MrsB,

    If you chose to ignore it then why respond by twisting my point. I did have to correct you.

    “I was suppose to sympathize with him since his intention was to provoke with an inflammatory title and he was waiting for such responses anyway”

    I thought you are a peaceful person. I guess I was wrong, your comment suggests that people deserve to be killed for writing a novel. What a Shame!!

  43. Mrs B, I think one can call North Korea a ”Necrocracy” All North Koreans have to endlessly praise and thank the ”dear leader” for their life and their meager food and everything, Now the ”Great Leader” is dead he still rules, with the ”Dear Leader” as his substitute, they are one ”Dear-something” away from a trinity.

    Please understand that such dogmatic ideologies are the same as religions.
    Your own prophet started out that way, he proclaimed himself Allah’s best friend, receiving the booty and slaves that should have gone to Allah
    In islam, the Great Leader conveniently comes up with new rules and revelations when the dear Leader needs them.
    And the Great Leader is supposed to have dictated this book which The Great leader and the Dear Leader can’t get right straight away and have to amend it, even though they plagiarize large parts from earlier books the Great leader tried to inspire and even though they both stole from earlier Arabic poets.

  44. @ MrsB I hardly think most pedophiles or molestors have MOLESTER tattoed on their forehead and what of fathers and relatives who secretly molest these young children? and it seems like in most cases here in Saudi it is someone related to the victim. The problem lies in the mentality of a culture where its religion has condoned certain traditions that today are looked upon as sick.

  45. No i don’t think ppl should be killed for so and so. I think ppl should be responsible for so and so. If I intentionally went up to a Jew and said his religion is so and so in attempt to ridicule him, the fault lies on me and I shouldn’t expect ppl to pity me if he box my head. i didn’t say I agree he should Die, I said I don’t sympathize with him since he wanted that response.

  46. You’re right expatlady, molestors don’t usually advertise their vocation but since parenting my child is up to me, I should be more aware and careful on who cares for my child. Fortunately up till now, I have been the sole caregiver for my child, even when she is with someone else, I am always within eyesight, I am obsessive over my girl like that. Never had my own time since she was born. She’s nearby as we are commenting.

  47. That’s probably how long it took the Saudi shake to spew out his fatwa.

  48. Oh god expatlady, are you suggesting that my religion endorse molesting one owns child? That is far from the truth. I hope i misunderstood you.

  49. it seems like in most cases here in Saudi it is someone related to the victim. 

    This situation isn’t exclusive to Saudi nor ME. Unfortunately most cases of child abuse and sexual abuse involves a close relative as the perpetrator, world over. According to my belief as a mother who loves her child more than anything, child abusers should be hanged and beaten like a pinata until he bleeds to death.

  50. Ibrahim, I see you do not deny that my set of rules are superior to the Quran.

  51. The fatwa that baby girls need to covered is just too insane. I am glad everybody here agrees with that. But according top the article, *He said that he feels sad whenever he sees a family walking around with a veiled baby, describing that as injustice to children.*
    So t his means there are already parents who think they should veil babies??? that’s child abuse.
    And let’s not take fatwas too lightly, Salman Rushdie is still under threat from the evil death fatwa put upon him. These fatwas can live a very long life.
    Didn’t Bin Baz write a fatwa that women cannot ”be allowed” to drive? That seems to be still active in full force in Saudi Arabia.

    I think this insane child abusing fatwa deserves, and needs all the outrage and ridicule it gets.

    Even Saudi men should be disgusted and insulted by it, for it implies that they are all pedophilic baby rapists who need to be saved from being forced into molesting a baby because of the titillating sexyness of an uncovered baby.

  52. Hi Aafke A,
    I am a simpleton. What convinces me is a human being doing something like walking on water, turning a stick into a snake and er producing the Quran.
    If you’ve done that then we’d call you the next prophet.
    Yours is to disprove and provide thenproof since you are denying or negating.

    When you can’t then we move on.

  53. Don’t change the subject. My list of rules is superior to the Quran, which is immoral when it comes to these subjects. You do not answer this because you will have to admit the Quran is wrong.

    I don’t have to be the next prophet, I am not alone in this. Fact is that most people are far more moral than the Quran. Even you, that’s why you can’t discuss this.

  54. “Saudi Arabia, are baby girls sexually exploited if they do not veil?”

    That is an amazing question:)

  55. Affake-Art
    A person’s refusal to accept that there is a relationship between them and a Creator would lead them to conclude that they are superior, indeed it is a complex that does not require one to actually deny that relationship.

    If I ask you for an example of what you see as immoral it would be something that another person would deem moral sound.

    This is because when you decide to determine what is right or wrong because you sense something with your five senses you also thought you could apply the same principle on actions. For example, you tasted sweetness from say honey and you tasted sourness from lemon.

    This sensation is not quite the same as an action. Regardless of how many times you sense an action all you will be doing is sensing it.

    Take this funny Saudi shake, he thought he could use the example of a person being sexually attracted to a child as a reason to make the child cover its face! He went straight from sensation to what…

    How is that different from your moral code?

  56. Ibrahim, you said the quran is magical and perfect and stuff \.
    I say it is full of contradictions and especially full of bad and immoral teachings.
    I said I can write a much better book beginning with a couple of rules contradicting the Quran.

    Islam says you can keep and make people into slaves.
    I say that is immoral and wrong.
    Islam allows the rape of women and children under certain circumstances.
    I say rape of women and children is always immoral and wrong.
    Islam says women are deficient and gives women less rights than men.
    I say men and women should have equal rights, one is not better than the other.
    Islam allows pedophilic marriage.
    I say pedophilic marriage is wrong and should be forbidden.

    I am better, more just and more moral than Allah, the Quran, the hadith and you prophet together.
    Therefore I can write a better holy book. Therefore your book isn’t that good.

  57. When you say your moral code is better or worse Aafke you are judging things bit when you are asked for proof you run away.
    I am sure if you ask the funny duddy shake what his proof is he won’t be able to find it which is why he started to say rubbish like to prevent the child from this or that.
    You don’t want to be compared to that do you? I think you are an intelligent girl. And I think you are intelligent so I will explain intelligently.
    As a Muslim we do things to seek the pleasure of Allah. This means morality is what he defines as morality. This means anyone who doesn’t believe in this they see life as something else.
    So it’s not about you saying what you believe in an then I saying the same thing and what…?
    We come from two different bases which makes us see the same action with different values. You see a woman covering as bad, but a Muslim sees it as good.

    Your comments were in Spam. If this happens please do not repost multiple times but contact administration so we can look for your comment and take it out of spam.
    Moderator

  58. When you say your moral code is better or worse Aafke, you are judging things but when you are asked for proof you run away.

    I am sure if you ask the funny duddy shake what his proof is he won’t be able to find it which is why he started to say rubbish like to prevent the child from this or that.

  59. Islam says you can keep and make people into slaves.
    I say that is immoral and wrong.
    Islam allows the rape of women and children under certain circumstances.
    I say rape of women and children is always immoral and wrong.
    Islam says women are deficient and gives women less rights than men.
    I say men and women should have equal rights, one is not better than the other.
    Islam allows pedophilic marriage.
    I say pedophilic marriage is wrong and should be forbidden.

    Wrong on all accounts. Lying is immoral Aafke and you are doing a lot it.

    Islam forbids pedophilic marriage as the first requirement of marriage in Islam is consensual agreement between both party. A baby/child is incapable of giving consent.

    Islam does not promote slavery but informs how to treat them. Big difference.

    Islam forbids rape of any kind. Liar! 4:19 Quran

  60. *
    I am better, more just and more moral than Allah, the Quran, the hadith and you prophet together.
    Therefore I can write a better holy book. Therefore your book isn’t that good.
    *

    Bragging and vanity is ugly and immoral. 23:3 Quran. Therefore Quran in my humble opinion is far superior.

  61. Islam should have forbidden slavery, rape, and pedophilic marriage, instead it supports these immoral acts.
    So the Quran is a badly written book with bad morality, and I could do a better job.

  62. Addition
    Quran encourages the emancipation of slaves. 2:177, 9:60 w hen the Quran was revealed, slavery was in wide practice throughout the Arab World, thus, it would have been impractical and detrimental to place an immediate ban on the slave trade, forcing all slaves into unemployment/poverty. The Quran uses a better psychological approach to win people’s hearts in the struggle against slavery and all forms of discrimination by placing a strong emphasis on human dignity and equality and encouraging the freeing of slaves.

    You do tend to make sweeping statements without any proof to back up do you. Just because you keep repeating it doesn’t make it suddenly true.

  63. Morality shouldn’t be based on sensation nor emotion. Evidence is this ‘sheikh’ who based his moral code upon seeing babies being abused astaghfirullah therefore making a fatwa that babies need to be veiled. Morality based on human’s weak senses allows for Nazis to morally accept the annihilation of Jews. Morality isn’t just about not harming others. Drug abuse may not harm others but the abuser himself nevertheless it is still immoral. Suicide is immoral albeit not directly harming others.

  64. @MrsB indeed the problem of chid molestation by a parent or by relative is not exclusive to the KSA. I hardly suggested it was otherwise. I am refering to cases here in KSA that I have read about or heard ie. very recently the father who raped and murdered his 5 yr old.
    In light of this incident and now the rantings of this individual about veiling babies I said: ‘The problem lies in the mentality of a culture’ I am sure you are familiar with the practice of child marriages as early as 1 yrs old I remember reading somewhere. It is simply cultural and was not uncommon among Arabs. The jurists can hardly escape the influence of their culture and cultural ethos. Though the Quran did not permit it, they allowed it because it was widely prevalent around them. They also tried to find justification for it in the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) Sunnah. I am not suggesting that islam endorses child molestation but as a non muslim I begining to wonder whether it condones it! Notice that the fatwa doesn’t tell muslim men to stop raping babies and that they should be punished. It just says cover your babies up so they do not tempt muslim men to rape them! How many religious figures speak out on protecting the rights of women and children or talk against violence against women here? or respecting women as their equal? The cleric’s reasoning seems to presume that the men are incapable of controlling their sexual urges towards women and that the only solution is to deny a young girls and women their identity for her protection. It seems to imply that men are incapable of controlling their sexual urges and therefore not responsible for their actions (rape, molestation, etc.). It’s as if the conclusion is boys will be boys so girls can’t be girls. Sounds like condoning to me.
    Check out this article I came across:
    http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Contemporary_Pedophilic_Islamic_Marriages#Permitted_in_the_Qur.7nn
    This article suggests that islam condones pedophilia. What are you thoughts?

  65. It’s interesting that you raise the issue of slavery while on this subject. All people have their own sovereignty and their will. Islam freed more slaves than any idea out there you can throw. Just ask any Indonesian. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/colonial-atrocities-explode-myth-of-dutch-tolerance-1439153.html

    Besides, the Imams in Saudi have never even tried to use slavery to justify their crazy ideas.

  66. Moderator
    Thank you

  67. Islam allows slavery, it does not forbid it. islam allows pedophilic marriage, it does not forb id it. As pedophilia is allowed, it leave room for fatwa’s like ”baby girls have to be veiled”.

    As expatlady says, again the guilt is put upon the woman, or in this case the baby. If Islam would forbid pedophilia and rape outright, (and not allow in it in the guise of marriage or slavery) then this fatwa would have been far more difficult to be made.

  68. expat lady – very good weblink you give. i bookmark it. i study later.

  69. One word only on the topic of covering babies … SICK!

  70. @expatlady
    That is an excellent question.

    But would you question Christianity when priests are known to rape little boys to the extent that the Pope resigns ‘allegedly’ for this reason?

    Pedos are disgusting but it is interesting how Islam is labeled with it especially when Muslims also abhor it…

  71. Ibrahim, yes, we question all rape and by anybody.
    Muslims do not all abhor it, the old men who are ”marrying” little girls and rape them under the guise of ”marriage” clearly have no problem with pedophilia. The parents who sell these girls into sexual slavery have no problems with it either, nor do the imams, like the Grand Mufti and Ayatollah Khomeini when they give out fatwas and edicts that grown men can ”marry” underage, prepubescent girls and use them for sex.

    And all these people claim they have religion, Islam on their side and are following the example of the prophet who, according to your perfect holy books had sex with a 9 year old.

    This is immoral. Your religion, your books, your prophet and your religious leaders are immoral.

  72. You don’t need religion to have morals but this is something that many Gulf people don’t understand.

    For some people, as long as you are a good Muslim, you are a good person, as well. What about the cleric who was a good Muslim (that is to say he observed all the rules of his religion) but that didn’t stop him from repeatedly raping, torturing and killing his own daughter?

    Some of the nastiest bullies I met in the Gulf were considered “good Muslims” just because they prayed regularly, consistently and daily. But just because they prayed didn’t mean they treated the other people as human beings. Especially if those human beings were non-Arab and non-Muslim foreigners working far from home.

    I am not including Christians here because Christians do not allow religion to determine their lives to such an extent as Muslims.

    Now let the “this-happens-everywhere” brigade come in.

  73. MoQ, I am a Muslim and I do believe the Quran to be a special and unique book but I do not think this is just because of its linguistic merit. I am not an Arab so the complexity of Arabic used does not really mean much to me. I am sure linguistically it is not difficult to produce something similar. However, and I’m sure you’ll politely disagree, I believe that the Quran has a spiritual dimension. Not in some mystical, magical way but just in that by studying it with an open heart you find a connection with God. It appeals to our inner humanity and nature and therefore can bring something beautiful to your heart. It encourages you to strive to be a better person and to be better towards humanity. This is the beauty of the Quran.
    I also believe it can be interpreted in many ways, metaphorical as well as physical. I believe that many of the tales of the prophets are not just recounts but are allegories which teach us something about human nature and the laws of God.
    I do understand that not everyone sees the Quran this way. To some it is just dry words on a paper. I am just explaining that I don’t think it is a literal ‘no-one can produce verses like it’.
    I am also of the opinion that a person sees reflected back at them what they are searching for in the Quran. The earlier Muslim mathmaticians saw numbers and devised a code from their interpretation. Some people want magic and find miracles and supernatural events there. Other people looked and saw science and a theory of evolution. My father loved history and so he saw patterns and depth from those dimensions. Some people see rules and regulations and stick to them.
    I am sure you wont agree with this but I just wanted to share my opinion and let you know that not all Muslims see the Quran as just one level. It has many levels to it and I find new ones each time I study it. That is it’s true beauty.

  74. Salam Expatlady, well as far as wikiislam is concern, I highly recommend you to search about Islam elsewhere as the site is very biased and did you know that practically Anyone can post an article there? Most contributors are ex Muslims so I can see the hostility against Islam. Now as far as Islam condoning marriages to babies, that is where you are mistaken. As you probably know in Islam marriage can ONLY take place with the consent if the woman as well as the man. It is clearly stated in the Quran. This surely gives enough meaning for those who are actually looking for truth that the bride must be capable enough to determine hr own life,responsible enough to know
    how to make important decisions. Babies do not even know the difference between their poop and chocolate so does she fit the requirements of marriage per the Quran? There are many fatwas that never gets highlighted in the Western media such as fatwas against suicide bombers by Sheikh Muhammad bin Salih al Uthaymeen. I suggest you research about Islam from venues that aren’t hostile towards the religion. I am not certain about why some Arabs still culturally accept child marriage but I am sure you have heard of a Najd woman who ask her husband to divorce her because he dared to peek at her face.It is a weird culture that is against Islam since there is no awrah between husband and wife in Islam yet it happens so you tell me if Islam is still to be blamed foe such practices despite its teachings.

  75. Two things that doesn’t make a wrong into a right and that is annoying repetition without proofs (usually done by uneducated people) and shouting. Aafke, my toddler constantly repeats herself but that doesn’t make her action of playing with trash correct. She has no proof to state otherwise. You’re behaving like a toddler because I ask for proof meaning can you show me the verse in the Quran that condones rape and child marriage? Please don’t change the topic, you ate avoiding this all the time. Since you accuse the Quran of so and so therefore kindly provide evidence.

  76. @ol blue eyes,

    First I want to say, it is refreshing to see a commentator from the other side, who can communicate and not go in circles and platitudes.

    I have no issues with someone like you seeing the Quraan as a spiritual book that gives them comfort. These are your rights and you should not even have to explain it, but I am glad you did.

    I have been consistent on my view of religions for years here. I think people have the right to spiritual believes and to worship if they choose so. I appose the interference of religions in 3 areas: Science, Politics and Law.

    Based on your discussion above, the Quraan can be interpreted differently based on the individual. Hence it cannot provide a stable base for law or politics nor a common ground between individuals. Further, it is full of violence and support for what I consider immoral behavior (example Slavery). I know you find peace in the book, but others find violence and an extreme focus on threats of humans (believers and none believers).

    The issue with arguments like Ibrahim makes is he will claim that the book in beyond question then he proceeds to claim that we should implement the rules from it as it is revelation from the deity. I and others will challenge such claims because they are inaccurate and they do impact our lives if they are implemented.

    Again, if Muslims just leave their religion as a spiritual pursuit, you will likely not see these counter arguments.

  77. @MrsB,

    “You’re behaving like a toddler because I ask for proof meaning can you show me the verse in the Quran that condones rape and child marriage? ”

    Have you considered that Islam condones the taking of slaves from enemies. Your prophet actually did that. Have you also considered that when the slave is a woman, her owner can have sex with her as his right. To be clear, if a person forces a woman into servitude then has sex with her then that is RAPE….

    Now if you want actual Hadiths and Verses about enslaving women, I can show you those, but I have done that many times here before. I think you should do some research for once, then let me know if you cannot find them.

  78. Some of the nastiest bullies I met in the Gulf were considered “good Muslims” just because they prayed regularly, consistently and daily. But just because they prayed didn’t mean they treated the other people as human beings. Especially if those human beings were non-Arab and non-Muslim foreigners working far from home.

    In that case, they aren’t very good since the Quran clearly says to treat non Muslims with kindness and just in 60:8. You gotta be able to see the difference Reality Check. In Islam there are two types of rights. One is our rights towards God ie pray, fast, hajj etc the second rights is with People and other creations ie how we treat people, animals and the environment. I remember my dad teaching me on these two rights when I was a kid.

  79. Moq you said I should do some research for once meaning you are saying I have not been doing any? Moq you are perhaps one of the more refined commentor but that doesn’t excuse you from not studying history. Slavery was widespread before Quran was even revealed. To add, they were at their masters absolute mercy or lack thereof. They had no rights. When Islam came, the Quran specifically mentions their rights and encourages their freedom. In terms of enemy if war, the Quran specifically mentioned to keep any captives alive and in good condition, the Quran forbids killing them despite being enemies who might have killed the Muslims brother or father etc. the The only method mentioned in The Quran for gaining captives (more correctly termed ‘prisoners of war’, not slaves) is during warfare, after which they must be released or ransomed. Keeping them is not an option:
    Therefore, if you encounter those who deny the truth (in warfare), then bring about the captives until when you have subdued/overcome them, then strengthen the bind. Then after either grace/favour or ransom, until the war lays down its burdens. That, and had God willed, surely He would have gained victory Himself from them, but He tests some of you with others. And those who get killed in the cause of God, He will never let their deeds be put to waste. 47:4

  80. An encouraging story related to this one from UAE.

    http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2013/02/14/266158.html

    Sorry it is in Arabic speakers can use google translate. In short a court in UAE sentenced a man to death for torturing his 2 daughters resulting in the death of one of them. His girlfriend also received a life sentence.

    What is more, UAE also issued new laws aimed at protecting kids.

    Hopefully Saudi will take a lesson from the actions of the government of the UAE and follow suit.

  81. @MrsB,

    “The Quran for gaining captives (more correctly termed ‘prisoners of war’, not slaves) is during warfare, after which they must be released or ransomed. ”

    You are stretching the prisoner of war definition. Prisoners of war cannot be sold nor their women can be used as sexual objects. A prisoner of war is a person who is captured in battle. Since women and children usually do not fight in battles, then capturing them is not imprisonment it is taking booty of war by turning them into slaves.

    The verse referring to ransoming assumes that the enemy is still viable and you can use their prisoners to gain returns. When the enemy is completely defeated, everything becomes booty. The men can be killed, women and children enslaved. Look up he story of Banu Quraizah, it is in all books of Hadith (Bukhari and Muslim included).

    Islam did not improve on the issue of slavery. As a matter of a fact, since you keep referring to history, every Islamic dynasty enslaved starting from the time of the prophet, through the rightly guided kalifas all the way to the 20th century Ottoman empire.

    How do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you deny such clear historic facts that comes from your own religious and history books.

    Again, forcing women into servitude then having sex with them is RAPE….

  82. “The verse referring to ransom…” Moq you shouldn’t edit verse according to your needs. The verse refers to ransom AND release of captives. Now in war never before have I seen enemy soldiers hugging and kissing each other. They kill. However, the Quran, being moral and superior, forbids killing of captives. It encourages release. Bear in mind there is a clear verse in the Quran that mentions if a slave ask for freedom than the owner must grant it and not only that but he must facilitate the slaves undertakings upon receiving his freedom. Aa far as women as slave of war, I understand that since their husbands and fathers were killed these women of that era had no shelter nor caregiver therefore,according to the situation of that era it was an act of mercy to keep the women and provide for her,not just sex if she wants but shelter and financial needs etc. Unlike the widows and orphans after WWI who were left roaming the streets of Europe and ended up as prostitutes because no men were moral enough to take them and care for them. That is in history,look it up.

  83. @MrsB,

    Blaming that the behavior of your profit and his religion which encourage the taking of slaves on being just part of what was expected in that era, makes your divine inspired message less so. Think about it.

    Regarding your claim that Islam does prohibit killing the captives. I told you to research Banu Quraizah for a reason. I am disappointed that you do not know your religion nor your history, you do not even want to learn:

    Here is a Hadith from Sahih Bukhari:

    “Volume 5, Book 58, Number 148:
    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

    Some people (i.e. the Jews of Bani bin Quraiza) agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Muadh so the Prophet sent for him (i.e. Sad bin Muadh). He came riding a donkey, and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet said, “Get up for the best amongst you.” or said, “Get up for your chief.” Then the Prophet said, “O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict.” Sad said, “I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives.” The Prophet said, “You have given a judgment similar to Allah’s Judgment (or the King’s judgment).”

    What followed, all the men captured in battle were killed. The boys who had pubic hairs were considered adults and killed. The women were enslaved and given as booty to Muslim fighters or shipped as gifts to leaders of other tribes to gain their loyalty. Look up the other hadiths for these details, it is gruesome.

    How merciful according to you. They took these women as slaves to give them shelter after they killed their captured men.

    Also, what a display of intellectual acrobatic for you to claim that slavery is equivalent to providing financial support and shelter. Women slaves in Islam work to please their masters. They are not given wages, they can be traded for money and they have to perform sex with their master if he wishes. If they are sold, they have to please their new master in the same way. They have no control on when or who they get sold to in such cases. I hope this makes it simple and clear, since you seem not to understand what slavery means.

    It is amazing how you argue that others do not know Islamic history or Islam, when we can demonstrate to you over and over, that we know it more than you.

    I know you will claim that I am arrogant by saying such things, but seriously you have less than elementary knowledge of Islam and its history. It is OK to be not knowledgeable about a topic, but it is foolish to keep arguing from ignorance.

  84. Moq,
    1) I don’t take orders kindly.
    2) It is typical of you to use the old “you disagree with me therefore you are less knowledgeable”. That tactic may work with others less confident but not with me.
    3) You have reading disability/problems with understanding. The Quran gave rulings on how to treat slaves and that is suitable for any era since even till this day there are slaves ie sweat shops, human trafficking, menial waged laborer, slave laborers a , and such are at times even patronised by brands and business organisations based in the so called western liberal and democratic societies. The Quran serve as a purpose for Believers to act upon whereby he finds himself in such environment. Therefore the Quran never promoted slavery. You,if really have even the basic knowledge in Islam should at the very least admit that. But instead you go on pulling aromatic stunts as usual. It is very sad that you’re not willing to learn eventhough I may be younger.

  85. since you seem not to understand what slavery means…

    Perhaps it is you who have some kind of hindrance to be capable of fully understanding slavery in the Islamic context. Unlike the western idea of slavery which is oppression,torture,no rights etc, Islam gave slaves rights thereby it is different front the slavery you’re referring to. in Quran 4:36 the Quran has elevated the status of slaves by making an obligation to do good to ones parents and in the same breath to do good to their slaves. Now that totally opposes the definition of slavery to that of the Western concept whereby occupation of other lands and its people were the norm.

  86. From my studies of Elementary Islam, I take the Quran as the highest source of knowledge, Sunnah second. And in Islam it is clearly stated (an actual rule) that if the hadith contradicts the Quran then the Quran has higher authority and that hadith is moot. You gotta love ranking! So do you think I should take the hadith over the Quran?

  87. You see Moq, the hadith collection is huge and I’ll be honest with you, I do not recall of that hadith you gave. But first rule of hadith or fatwa or whatsayyou is it shouldn’t contradict with the Quran as it could be heresay but the Quran is God’s word according to us Muslims.

  88. MoQ, Thanks for your reply. I do believe the Quran to be a revealed book but I do think we should question it. I actually think that the Quran is deliberately open to interpretation and – in some senses- vague. We have been given a brain and we are meant to use it. We are reminded again and again not to blindly follow what our father’s followed just for the sake of belief.
    I think we are meant to think for ourselves. If a person believes in God then they must believe that God could have chosen to send a clear, unquestionable book that we call understand easily. If God didn’t do this we must ask ourselves why. My answer is that we are meant to use our own humanity to guide us to a humanitarian interpretation. Also, humans have been given free will in their spiritual choices. God could prove His existence by coming down on a cloud or some such proof. If He chose not to do this we must ask why. I believe because we are not meant to be forced into our religious choices.
    I do not disagree that there is violence mentioned in the Quran but I do disagree that this means the book itself is flawed. Is religion to blame for violence? There is a good book called Murder In the Name of Allah which discusses this subject. Violence was a huge part of life at the time the Quran was revealed so it is therefore not wrong to discuss it. I do not believe that the Quran promotes violence or slavery. The life of Muhammad demonstrated that he himself did not have a great thirst for blooodshed or slavery, contrary to some opinions.

  89. MoQ, as for the incident of Banu Quraizah it is more complex than your comment suggested. They were in a pact of mutual defense with the Muslims when Medina was being attacked at the time of the Battle of the Ditch. Due to this agreement the Muslims considered that that side of the town was safe from attack and posted no men there to guard the women and children.
    The Banu Quraizah then went secretly and made an alliance with the confederates to allow them to enter Medina and attack the Muslims from behind and by surprise. Their plan would have meant that all women and children could be slaughtered or captured and all Muslim men killed – not in open warfare but through deceit and subterfuge.
    As the word of Arabs at that time was considered to be a strong bond and to go back on an agreement in such a manner was considered to be the ultimate act of betrayal and cunning.(and because it put the population of Medina in grave danger) it therefore had to be punished. Just as any other group would have been punished at that time for the same act.
    The punishment of beheading was not ordered by Prophet Muhammad himself. An arbitrator was chosen by the Banu Quraizah and he gave the verdict. Muhammad never gave beheading like this as a punishment which is why the incident of the Banu Quraizah stands out as more cruel than the dealings of Prophet Muhammad with any other tribe. The usual steps that he took to deal with people who reneged on their agreements or who made pacts with the confederates was to banish them from Medina, not to kill them.
    I believe this is a fuller version of the events.

  90. @ Ibrahim The difference being of course that when Catholic priests commit child abuse they do so knowing that they are indulging in a criminal act punishable by a prison term if prosecuted.

    In the middleast the victims have no redress the abuse is perfectly legal through the condoning of child marriages. I cant even agree with you that muslims abhor child molestation/pedophelia because of the perveying attitude of silence and turning a blind eye to the issue. Sure there are the few that protest through forums like this but how about public outcry! the call for punishment to the perpetrators? how about the number of agencies that support and protects against violence against women and children here in the middleast? the number of family counseling centres to support victims and educate against child abuse and violence against women??

    Bottom line is at least Catholic Church has acknowledged its crimes and cooperating in an investigation. What can you say about muslim clerics especially this nut job ranting on veiling babies rather than addressing the root of the problem and calling for punishment?

  91. Thank you ol blue eyes for explaining the Whole story to all of us. Moq, very sly of you to keep the full version to yourself, tsk tsk!

  92. @MsB,

    Actually, you are the one who told me I did not history at the start of this conversation. Now you are crying foul when I display it is you who doesn’t.

    The Quraan did not disallow slavery nor did it prohibit a man from taking slave women as sexual obejects. Actually the qurran said specifically a man can have as many slaves as he likes on top of his 4 allowed wives.

    I know you’re having problems accepting me checking your bad arguments. You issued a challenge and I answered it with specific evidence. You do not stop there, you go on and on even giving such ridiculous statements as “Slavery of women is an Act of mercy”. For sane people such statement is equally disgusting to saying “a woman who got raped must have brought it on herself by dressing provocatively”

    For your information the hadith I gave you does not contradict the Quraan. It describes an event in history. That is the essence of Hadith, it is the recorded history of the prophet and his followers as collected by scholars who authenticated the sources. So if you are not familiar with Hadiths which describe major events like wars, then you are ignorant of the history of early Islam. Hence I merely stated a fact about your minimal knowledge.

    Again I started with a specific proposition to answer your challenge about rape and Islam. I provided the right evidence using the example of slavery. You argued against Islam and slavery of women, so i provided you with specific evidence of that also. Then you argued that those women should be taken as slave as an act of mercy since their men died in battle, so I provided you evidence that men got executed after capture. All along, you just keep pivoting because you do not want to accept the premise of:

    “forcing women into servitude then having sex with them is RAPE….”

  93. Sa ol Blue.

    How anyone comes to Islam is by using their aql (mind). You rightly point out how we should not even be Muslims because our parents are Muslims. It is a choice we make and should not be an emotional one.
    In the family of Imran 190 He asks us to question what is between the heavens and the earth, and come to the conclusion that it is created. However once we are Muslims, we take what the Prophet brings, See An Nisa Chapter 4 Verse 65

    As for the origin of the Quran it can only be from one of three sources, the Arabs since it is in Arabic, Mohammed or someone else. It can’t be the Arabs because none of them had been able to produce it and the Quran challenged them to produce it. see Hud Chapter 11 verse 13 and Yunus Chapter 10 verse 38. The Quran even brushed aside accusations that the source of the Quran was a non Arab see An-Nahl Chapter 16 verse 103.

    Since the source of the Quran is Allah, it must mean that the one who brought it is His prophet and messenger. If there are mistakes or flaws in any part of it the message, it means that the source is incapable, erroneous and flawed which means that Islam is flawed and erroneous.The reason for this is because when the Prophet makes mistakes in delivering the message then the message itself is wrong.

    The Quran was revealed over 23 years,with its various parts in stages. See Al-Isra Chapter 17 verse 106 for the reason. The Prophet instructed the Sahaba when he received the verses from Gabriel. Since then and to this day there have been many huiffaz (Quran memorisers).

    The Quran is words and meanings. Allah says ‘It is an Arabic Quran without any crookedness’.39;28. The challenge I mentioned earlier addressed the people in general and not a specific reason. So the Quran says in 17:88 for instance ‘..they could not produce the like of this Quran even if they helped one another.

    Bear in mind, that the one who was sent with the Quran only spoke it and never studied it.

    So you see , it is not US saying any of the above. It is what is the Quran that is challenging creation.

    History has not recorded the Arabs of Quraish with producing the Quran or anyone to date.

    When a funny shake says Babies and EVEN women should cover their faces, they must justify this with a proof for us Muslims.

    When a person says that the Quran is not revelation or it can be produced, they must provide the proof or ADMIT their inevitable FAILURE.

  94. @expat lady
    See above

  95. @expat lady
    You are right and those who commit the crime receive even worse punishment than Catholic priests.

    You see in Islam men are allowed to get married and women are allowed to get married. Islam recognizes that natural instinct for procreation and even institutionalizes it in the form of marriage with all the rules regulating it.

    This is different from suppressing it and not providing any specific channels for its (recreational instincts etc) satisfaction. When it does not happen you don’t question Islam like you didn’t question Christianity.

    You question those who claim to be adhering to it. Someone above pointed out that the worse people he or she met were those claiming to pray etc, if I met those same people I would probably say the same thing because they probably did something unjust to him or her. We are commanded to do justice even to those who do not believe in Islam. You know when Islam was applied, do you know how many hands were chopped off?

    Do you know how many were unjustly killed in different parts of the Muslim world today? Even in those places where the Christians were accused of raping little kids, at least they have records of case dating back God knows when.

    Poor little Lana, how many more are in her situation? When we say crime, it is not the little guys committing them. It is those big shots who refuse to change the status quo. Make a distinction please. When people do not implement the criminal law on a person, it is a completely different sophistication of evilness that you must identify. For example, who employs the police, who employs the lawyer, who employs the judges, etc etc. Where does all that lead to?

    When you question the Imams even you get a back lash you know why? Because the employer and the employed want to maintain their positions. It is nothing to do with the application of Islam, for Islam has accountability in all directions..

    There is Islam and then there are Muslims. They are living in a huge disparity today for political reason dear Lady Expat. It is not fundamental.

  96. Moq you’re right the hadith you’ve given didn’t contradict the Quran. I learned that after ol blue eyes taught me. We learn everyday. Next, it was you who claim to be the authority on Islam but seem to not know the real story about banu quraiza, or perhaps you knew but left that bit out on personal grounds. I admitted that I don’t recollect that hadith but thanks to you and ol blue eyes, I learn 🙂

  97. Typo
    “You are right and those who commit the crime receive”
    should read
    You are right and those who commit the crime must receive

  98. @MrsB,

    I am not being sly. You stated that in Islam, it is prohibited to kill prisoners. It is assumed that if you are fighting with someone then they are your enemy. So the premise that he was mad at them as an excuse to change the ruling is ridiculous for your argument.

    @ol blue eyes,

    You had a lot to say. So lets start where I agree with you. If you believe that a person should not follow Quraan to the letter and we should develop rules based on what we think is right, then great. That is what I call secularism. Keep religion as spirituality.

    Regarding Banu Quraizh and who made the judgement, The prophet was the leader he is responsible for final judgement. The hadith even indicated that he agreed and Allah agreed. Very merciful don’t you think? At the end 600 men were executed. That is a massacre by anyone’s definition.

    Also, my point was not to recite the entire story, but to provide MrsB with evidence against her argument that women are not enslaved and that prisoners are not killed. Who was at fault for the war is not necessary important for the big picture. We know the prophet and early Muslims fought with everyone and subdued all the tribes in the region. Not the example of peaceful existence is it?

    Regarding that there are no other examples of atrocities against tribes. Consider the attack on Bani Mustaliq:

    “Sahih Bukari Volume 3, Book 46, Number 717:
    Narrated Ibn Aun:

    I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn ‘Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn ‘Umar was in that army.”

    Same pattern of violence. He attacked the tribe suddenly, killed the men who resisted then get the booty in the form of a slave women and of course the usual cut of riches.

    I know this is how the world was at the time. However, Muslims argue that this is a prophet with guided by the supreme being. But when we look at the behavior it is no better than the average warlord of the time.

  99. Moq now you’re just twisting my words. You do have a problem with me checking your bad argument thus resorting to mucking up my claims. I said the widows of war were taken as slaves to receive care etc and that is merciful, not slavery of women as a whole is a merciful act. Then you resort to sweeping claims that Islam allows pedophilic marriage without acknowledging my Quran explanation of marriage rulings. Lastly you keep beating around the bush about Islam didn’t forbid slavery but never answered my query whether does the Quran promote slavery?

  100. Well spotted. MrsB

  101. Moq you were being sly. If your intention was to truly educate then you would hv provided the whole story. but you didn’t thus you’re sly. I am waiting to learn a out that new hadith you’ve been so kind to provide. I am sure there is a story you are failing to explain just like the one about treachery of those banu quraiza incident. A treachery that allowed women and children to be killed. Gruesome!

  102. Hmmm widows of war taken as slaves?

    Why not wives, why enslave them?

    How about not not killing 600 prisoners and not making them widows to begin with?
    You seem to miss the point as usual!!!

    Finally, Where did I in my comment state anything about pedophile marriage?

    I can make that argument, but I did not as that will add another thread.

  103. @MrsB sorry I neither have the time nor the interest in researching further. I realise no faith can claim moral superiority since child marriages have been practised in various cultures and societies across the world at one time or another. In modern times, however, marrying children is no longer acceptable and no excuse should be used to justify this. You cant deny however the damning fatwas qouted on that website and other citings from the Quran that surely could not have made up. I have nothing against Islam but I find the false adherence to Islamic principles and the “holier than thou” attitude of some Muslim societies similar to the blatant hypocrisy and double standards of 19th-century Victorian Britain, where the outward appearance of dignity and prudishness camouflaged an extreme prevalence of sexual and moral depravity behind closed doors. In those days, too, there were many men willing to pay to have sex with children – until a plethora of social movements arose that resulted in changes in laws and attitudes in society.

    In the mean time, I stand firm in my belief that child molestation, child abuse and violence against women is condoned until society here changes its rather passive attitude to these issues and Islam actively speaks out against such violence and henious acts against women and children ontop of all the other points I raised earlier with Ibrahim:

    ‘how about public outcry! the call for punishment to the perpetrators? how about the number of agencies that support and protects against violence against women and children here in the middleast? the number of family counseling centres to support victims and EDUCATE against child abuse and violence against women??’

    People can argue till Kingdom come about the wisdom of the Quran and defend Islam but If the moral standards and strict ‘religious’ beliefs are not strong enough to keep men from raping babies and young girls …you have a major problem. The attitudes of men like Abdullah Daoud display what is wrong with society here.

  104. Nope i didn’t miss the point. You have problem of comprehension. Treachery in Islam, especially on such magnitude must be dealt with death. As for taking widows as wives, that is why the allowance of polygamy marriage came. ib 4:25 the verse confers the women slaves the rights and dignity of a wife not as booty calls.

  105. @MrsB,

    This what we get from your arguments.

    So you are for
    – slavery Because it is mercy. I love the logic of that!!

    – killing captives of war, which is opposite from what you stated earlier by the way 🙂

    It is not my comprehension that is the issue. It is your confused positions and lack of logic.

    Have a good night I am signing off.

  106. MoQ,
    I dont have a problem with secular laws. Religious values certainly can inform laws but in many instances today where Muslim countries use Shariah to make laws there doesn’t seem to be much justice or tolerance. It seems that many Muslims are becoming more entrenched in their views of ‘halal’ and ‘harram’ without understanding the philosophy behind certain actions. But that doesn’t mean the values themselves are wrong.
    As for the Prophet being no better than a warlord at the time I cannot agree. For 13 years he lived under persecution and marginalization. After the boycott years his uncle and (only) wife died as a result of deprivation. When he returned to Mecca – and the people who had cast him out and vowed to hunt him down and kill him – he entered in peace and reconciliation. From the whole town perhaps only a dozen people were exempt from the amnesty due to their war-crime like action and even some of these were forgiven. So I feel he was better than a war lord. When he had the greatest opportunity for revenge he didn’t take it.
    Have you read the charter of St Catherine’s – an agreement with a Christian group? The mutual protection and good will expressed there does not sound war like to me.
    In the years of peace in Medina, before the conquest of Mecca. more people converted to Islam than ever before because they were attracted by the teachings. If he were no better than a war lord of the time then he would have won more followers through conflict and fear, which he did not.
    Also, the Banu Quraizah were punished for their actions. What about the Muslims who were sent to teach Quran to some tribes and were slaughtered in cold blood? They were not sentenced for a crime but were set upon and murdered. So, for his time he was far better than the actions of many.

  107. MoQ

    There were slaves before Islam so when Islam came it treated the issue in two ways, making it easier from the slaves point of view, and freeing slaves.

    It lifted the slave and made his blood protected, unlike if you look at slavery under the Romans, Persians or any other of that time. You would want to be a slave under a Muslim than a slave under any other people! If you were a Muslim you had the same rights as any other Muslim.

    Islam encouraged the freeing of the slaves.
    Islam has rules for the freeing of slaves.
    There are so many accounts from Hadith where a person would atone for a crime by freeing a slave. There are accounts of the Prophet freeing slaves.

    Islam made one of its fundamental pillars zakaa to include money going towards freeing slaves. The Arabic word used is riqab or freeing slaves. See Quran 9:60.

    Before Islam you could end up as a slave if you couldn’t pay your debt, ironic today many with credit card debts still feel like slaves!
    A person also sold himself to slavery for a specific period. Some even sold free people into slavery. War also resulted in people ending up as slaves.

    When Islam came it specified the rules relating to the person who was in debt, it specified the situations for the person who sold himself as a slave, it specified the rules for the one who even sold a free person into slavery.

    As for the captives in war it specified their situation. If they wish to live with Muslims it again specified their situation. Islam even specified the situation of women and children.

    ISLAM PREVENTED ENSLAVING.

    There are no slaves today under the banner or Islam. There are capitalist slaves today working for nothing and selling their products for extortionate prices. Let’s not forget those sex slaves that exist in Asia who cater for weirdos in Speedos and even pedos from where I wonder…

  108. All I read is a lot of white noise caused by endless intellectual acrobatics to make rape and slavery a good thing because Islam allows it and the prophet, the ”best” of men, gave the example, by committing genocide, by enslaving women and children, and by raping them.
    And I understand the dillemma.
    The Quran has no problems with slavery, rape (in certain circumstances) and pedophilic marriage.
    The hadith tell of these crimes as normal and this is what the prophet and his men did, and Islamic history also tells us that Mohammed and his band of brigands did these crimes.

    And the Quran, hadith and the example of the prophet must be right…
    Therefore slavery, rape, and pedophilic marriage must be right. Even if they are not.
    And so we get a perfect illustration on this blog how people’s innate good morality is being warped and twisted by religion.

    I wish you could all realize that you are better than this. None of you would even think of making excuses for slavery, rape, and pedophilia if it wasn’t in your religion.
    You now need to go all out and twist words and explanations and drown yourself into a quagmire of illogical twists because you really are better than this.

    My problem is that because of your support to a dogma and ideology which specifically allows slavery, rape, and pedophilic marriage you cannot speak or even think what you really feel and in the end you are the support base for the modern repeat of these crimes, the old men who ”marry” and rape little girls. the crazy religious leaders who make up fatwas like women need to cover one of their eyes, and that babies need to be veiled.
    Or the religious leaders who fantasize about importing sex slaves from other countries (in this day and age!) and infect their believers with these immoral ideas.

    If you, as Muslims, do not realize the flaws in your religion and stand up to them you will remain the power base for all these silly, wicked fatwas and continuing crimes against humanity.

  109. @Ibrahim “ISLAM PREVENTED ENSLAVING, There are no slaves today under the banner or Islam.”
    As usual misquoting, There is slavery still existing today and only in Arab Muslim Countries such as mauritania, you also have the new form of slavery in the form of indentured labour laws in Saudi and other GCC.

    BTW Slavery was established in Saudi Arabia and other GCC countries only in 1960’s because of pressure from United States. Had it not been for pressure by US, Saudis would have been happily practicing slavery under the banner of Islam.

    Oops also lets not forget that Kuwaiti Law maker who wanted to re-introduce slavery by enslaving russian women in chechenya to satisfy the perverted desires of arab men.

  110. Slavery still exists and it is an exclusively practiced only by Arab Muslims….

  111. @MrsB: As woman yourself do you honestly believe that a woman can be forced in living with a man against her will as a slave to satisfy his perverted desires?

  112. Ahmed, I presume you mean ”….Slavery was abandoned by saudi Arabia……”? Because that’s what they did in the 1960s (Bit late in the day)
    Btw, if one makes a typo which makes ones comment unintelligible one can ask Carol to amend it.

  113. Ahmed, *Oops also lets not forget that Kuwaiti Law maker who wanted to re-introduce slavery by enslaving russian women in chechenya to satisfy the perverted desires of arab men.*

    Yep, that’s what I was pointing to in my comment.
    As long as Islam allows slavery there will be people to try and re-instate it. And as long as rape of women and children who are man’s property is allowed in Islam it will continue to happen.

  114. Haha Moq if that’s what you got from all my comment then I have misjudged you. Not only do you have reading problem, You have No reading comprehension whatsoever. I didn’t say slavery is OK I said Quran has elevated the status of slaves.
    Aafke, you only hearing white noises? That’s a pity. Maybe you need to visit an ear specialist. plus again you’re just repeating nonsense without giving any evidence. At least Moq tried to give some hadith eventhough he may have forgotten the whole story.

    Ahmed said Slavery still exists and it is an exclusively practiced only by Arab Muslims…….You have got to be kidding me or your bad experience with them has blinded you and made you prejudice towards Arabs. To name a few types of slavery still in existence (without the rights that Islam prescribes) are child labor, debt bondage, human trafficking, penal labor, sweatshop. In 1997 four Nigerian women went to London as children and were made to work for no pay in household around London for 9 years. So save the lies please. Slavery is not dead just less recognized.

  115. @aafke: oops typo’s forgive my english as second language 🙂
    Yes it is a fact that Islam allows slavery, but muslims must wise up beyond that. Slavery can’t be abolished in Islam just like Slavery still persists in other religious texts.
    But muslims must take a page from others where people wised up beyond the shackles of religion and abolished such practices like polygamy, slavery, etc.

  116. @MrsB: As usual cherrypicking a few criminal incidents, as in your example I am sure those who enslaved these nigerian women got into trouble with the law and are now in prison. But when you take Arab Slavery practiced today like in Mauritania, the perpetrators don’t get into trouble and is condoned by the government and in GCC indentured labor is the law.

    In Saudi you would find thousands of poor blue collared workers not paid their salary and kept in indentured servitude for ever, I have been there and seen it first hand.

    And yes Arab Racism and attitudes have actually made me a better man, instead of identifying as a fundamentalist muslim i now idenitify myself a human first.

  117. oh Ahmed learn the difference between cherry picking and citing examples. You made a stupid sweeping generalization.You made a careless claim of slavery being exclusive to the ME. Therefore you need to wake up from your bad experience and learn the truth about slavery. https://www.freetheslaves.net/SSLPage.aspx?pid=375
    20 million modern slaves is not a ‘few’ cases dearie.

  118. Pakistan along with India and Nepal harbors the worlds largest number of slaves from generations due to small debts. 18 million!

  119. Again slavery in India and Nepal is a Criminal offense when these criminals are caught they face the strong arm of the law. Not like in GCC and Arab nations where it is perfectly legal or condoned.

    BTW keeping in line with these blog rules i wouldn’t want to digress further away from the main topic, which is ridiculous fatwas by arab muslims again…

  120. @MrsB,

    Let’s see if it s bad reading on my part or your own words like this one:

    ” Aa far as women as slave of war, I understand that since their husbands and fathers were killed these women of that era had no shelter nor caregiver therefore,according to the situation of that era it was an act of mercy to keep the women and provide for her,not just sex if she wants but shelter and financial needs etc.”

    and on the killing of captured fighters

    “I am sure there is a story you are failing to explain just like the one about treachery of those banu quraiza incident. A treachery that allowed women and children to be killed. Gruesome!”

    Again MrsB. I provided the story of Banu Qurizah not to cover who is right or wrong to initiate the fight. Actually, I disagree with ol Blue eyes version of the initiation. However, that will be a long thread of arguing the sources. The point on regardless of who is wrong or right, In ever fight people on both sides think the others were bad otherwise why set to fight them. At the end of the war there will be a winner/loser possibly. That is where the issue of what you do with captured fighters and women and children comes into effect. You stated in Islam you do not kill the captured. I provided evidence against that. Now you practically switched positions.

    You really do not have positions thought out clearly before you get into debates. Your arguments are just a process of pivoting every time someone proves you wrong.

  121. @ol blue eyes,

    First, you made a statement that Banu Qurizah were the only incident where Muslims treated their enemy with harshness. I provided another example to the contrary. You skipped that and moved on to new items. The repeated actions of the prophet and his followers in attacking tribes, killing their men and enslaving their women and children is what war lords do.

    I cannot respond to all of the items you wrote in your comment as it will take a book not a comment to go through them. I had debates here which covered most, so I won’t go over them again.

    Now the point about Mohamad and his followers prosecution. Realize the Muslims lived in Mecca for 13 years while their leader was adamant about challenging the local religions and asked for abolishing their idols. In all 13 years none of them were killed. Of course such attacks on religion created animosity. If the Meccans were so bad, why did they let them live. It is quiet the opposite when the prophet became powerful, if he had control over a tribe, they either converted to his religion, killed or forced into paying a heavy price for protection. When he became even more powerful, the protection money option was taken away.

    The time where Mohamad actually got a bounty on his head is after he formed a pact with the tribes of Madena. An act of treason against his own tribe. Note his followers who remained in Mecca like Ali were not killed even after the escape of the prophet.

    I hope you understand that there are 2 perspectives on these issues. Again my argument is not to unwind who is right or wrong in these fights (it takes more than a comment on a web site to do that),. My point is prophet did act as ruthless as any warring tribal leader of the time. There is nothing divine about that.

    Further, his followers took the banner of violence and invaded others long after his death.

  122. Actually, when reading Islamic history from Islamic sources it still seems to me, although it’s not presented in that way, but it really gives the impression that the Meccans were extraordinarily tolerant and goodnatured, if the Mohammeds actions were really those as described by Islamic history.
    A very friendly, open and tolerant people, those pre-Islamic Meccans.

  123. @ Ibrahim

    “There is Islam and then there are Muslims. They are living in a huge disparity today for political reason dear Lady Expat. It is not fundamental.’ Ibrahim your statement does not make sense. What exactly are you trying to say?

    You said earlier ‘Pedos are disgusting but it is interesting how Islam is labeled with it’

    ‘Pedophilia is permitted in the Qur’an, was practiced by Prophet Muhammad and his companions, and some Muslims today continue to commit the crime, following their prophet’s example.’

    The late Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran, Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution said ” A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however is prohibited from having intercourse with a girl younger than nine, other sexual acts such as foreplay, rubbing, kissing and sodomy is allowed. A man having intercourse with a girl younger than nine years of age has not committed a crime, but only an infraction, if the girl is not permanently damaged. If the girl, however, is permanently damaged, the man must provide for her all her life. But this girl will not count as one of the man’s four permanent wives. He also is not permitted to marry the girl’s sister.”

    ‘One of the most disturbing things about Islam is that it does not categorically condemn pedophilia. Indeed, it cannot, for to do so would draw attention to the pedophilia of Muhammad, the founder of Islam. Many Muslims cannot condemn pedophilia even if they would like to, for they would have to abandon Islam. Muslims tacitly approve of pedophilia, even if they are embarrassed to say so. So mesmerized are Muslims by the example of Muhammad’s pedophilia that they are unable to categorically denounce pedophilia or feel shame. It is prevalent in many Muslim countries disguised as child marriage. The UN is today trying to stop the evil of child marriage among the backward Islamic regions of Asia and Africa.’

    http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Pedophilia

  124. @expatlady

    I am amazed because you got all your information from wikiwho?
    .
    It is interesting that you think that the girl you mentioned has been permanently damaged when there is no book of Hadith today that can be called worthy if it does not have a Hadith narration from Aisha (RA)

    None of the Arabs of Arabia before Islam claimed that the marriage of Mohammed (saw) was wrong just like none of them could produce the Quran.

    So what makes wikiwho any better than the Arabs who lived, hated and even killed the Muslims

    Is it because they worshiped Allah, the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth..

    Let’s see what better reason you can come up with that has not already been addressed comprehensively.

  125. @ Aafke-Art
    You are absolutely right. The pre-Islamic Arabs were tolerant to the extent that there were Christians, Jews, and other denominations of Christianity living amongst them.

    The Arabs tolerated even the Mohammed (saw) until they realized that Islam was challenging their lives, values, culture, and most importantly, reason for existence.

  126. @ahmed
    Arab Islam is not the same as Islam.
    Things done for arabism have been justified by Islam. That does mean it is Islam.
    It’s like this fatwa, the Arabs might challenge it, but if you ask any Muslim he will ask for the proof which crazy shake cannot provide.
    It’s like nazi hitler era. The people knew it was wrong but what happened after the war, were they rounded up and shot? There are crazy arabs, and there are Muslims,.
    Don’t confuse the two because of a grudge or whim!

  127. Sorry for the typo
    That does mean it is Islam.
    should be
    That does not mean it is Islam.

  128. It’s not the typos which make your comments incomprehensible. It’s your rantings, your insane arguments which never answer the arguments of other people, which never keep to the topic, and which contain the most insane propaganda bullsh*t.
    And most reprehensible is your refusal to look at the immoralities of your religion but to keep repeating how great it is is despite it’s propagating the most horrendous crimes and bad morality.

    It is possible that this ranting of yours is a ”tactic” to get the conversation away from the faults of your ”perfect” religion, that would be the only glimmer of sentient thought I can discern in your verbal harangue.

  129. @aafke
    It is impossible for a person to harbor such hatred but I guess with dialogue it is possible to understand its source.
    You comment about the Arabs. I agree with you and give you further proof.
    Then you produce the above. A minute ago someone makes a typo you even suggested that the sites owner should be able to correct them.
    Was the comment about Hitlet which set you off?
    Your attitude is no different from the crazy Saudi shakes.
    Emotional and devoid of any intellectual argument. And when they are proved wrong they resort to insults.
    How can there be dialogue when hatred is the basis for some people’s arguments?

  130. I don’t hate you, I am just tired of your verbal diarrhea.
    And I tried so hard not to use this term but it is really the only one that fits your… well…. uhm… verbal diarrhea.

  131. Phew! Had me worried there for a Sec. You know the hardest change is the one that addresses a persons thought.
    Perhaps it seems like a dose of the laxative now, with patience and understanding you may start to listen.
    Which question in particular do you think I haven’t answered ?

  132. @Ibrahim,

    Don’t you think you come across a bit racist with all the comments you make about Arabs as a group of people?

    Just wanted you to think about that.

    Your world is full of generalities. Most of your arguments are platitudes. That also extends to people you, hence you sound racist. You do not want to discuss actual problems with Islamic ideologies you’d rather blame it on Arabic people. That separation allows you to feel good about yourself/ideology by laying blame for it somewhere else, but it has the issue of intelligent people seeing through it.

  133. Moq
    Your basis for thinking and mine are different. So how can we see the same thing in the same way?
    Racist? I am pointing out that there is a difference between an Arab and a Muslim. How’s that being racist?
    I pointed out the difference between rational thinking and scientific thinking not sure if you saw it earlier or perhaps it was on the last post on Lama.
    But I am a Muslim. If you were a Muslim you would be my brother. Islam teaches us that we take our color from Allah and who is better at coloring than Allah?
    It even addressed people’s colors:)

  134. MoQ, I did not anywhere say that the Banu Quraizah was the only incident where they dealt in harshness. I do not think you quoted me correctly at all there. But it is categorically the only incident where a whole tribe were given a punishment of beheading.
    Also, when I provided examples of where Muslims had been slaughtered and massacred you claim you do not have time to comment. So I must assume that that you only have time to comment if you are talking to a ranting person who cannot follow a clear train of argument. Perhaps it is more fun to do it that way and bait the bear but after a while even that gets tedious.
    I think we will have to agree to disagree about whether the Prophet was a warlord or not. I personally see many examples of his humility and compassion, his tenderness and spirit of forgiveness. You did not comment on the amnesty of Mecca. Not a typical war lord- like action.
    As for the followers of Muhammad spreading their religion with the sword, yes I cannot deny that fact. Jesus taught his followers to turn the other cheek and yet his followers still spread their message with violence and persecution. Perhaps this is an inevitable flaw in human nature – the need to conquer and control – and religion is not the cause but merely the tool used to do so.

  135. @ol blue eyes,

    I never said in battles that Muslims did not get killed nor that other tribes were always friendly and kind. I do not even have to go into that.

    My premise is that for a person who you claim was guided by a divine being, he certainly showed very violent behavior that equates to what tribal leaders did at the time. The fact that others behaved violently also, does not excuse the fact that he was acting in a similar fashion. If you claim that a person is the example for humanity (i.e. setting a high moral par) then such things like the following are inexcusable at anytime:

    1) Taking slave women for use of sexual purposes
    2) Allowing his followers to kill 600-900 captured people in one afternoon
    3) Taking booty of war
    4) Lusting after women including one of them was married to his adopted son
    5) Marrying a 9 year old
    ….
    Etc.

    So far most of your arguments have been, that is what people did at the time. Great then he was just another warlord acting based on what is acceptable for his time and lets drop the pretense that he was unique in his peaceful qualities. I am sure that if he was guided by an all knowing deity he would have known the above things are immoral as that is intuitively obvious for civil people of today without guidance from the almighty.

  136. MoQ, I have nowhere said that he did what others did at the time. I have cited examples as to where he has displayed compassion and mercy but you seem to disregard them.

    As for your list of immoral behaviour then you have also not really explained the facts but have just plucked distorted facts out of the air. The Prophet did not ‘lust’ after his adopted son’s wife. Zaynab bin Jasht was his cousin and their marriage was previously proposed but he refused. He himself proposed the match with Zaid. Once Zaid had made it clear that he did not want to continue in the marriage, they were divorced. Feeling somewhat responsible for proposing the match in the first place he then offered his own hand in marriage to her. This would have promoted her status in society and given her ease after the pain of divorce. Where is the ‘lusting’? Why is this immoral?

    It is not universally acknowledged that Aisha was 9 when she was married. That is the lowest of a series of estimates. Why do you assume that this estimate – narrated by a questionable narrator – is the correct one?

    We have discussed the Banu Quraizah incident and acknowledged that the choice of punishment was not made by Muhammad, nor did he ever propose it elsewhere.

    There is no evidence that Muhammad kept women as sexual slaves. He married a bondwoman and marriage to such women was promoted. They were not raped and used as sex slaves.

    Why do you ignore evidence which does not fit in with your own view of events? I have not discounted or ignored your points yet when I raise one then you don’t have time to comment. It seems that you are not really interested in discussing events but only in pushing your own point of view even when shown that there is more than one way to see a situation.

  137. @ol blue eyes,

    “We have discussed the Banu Quraizah incident and acknowledged that the choice of punishment was not made by Muhammad, nor did he ever propose it elsewhere.”

    And I countered that he was the leader. Throwing blame on someone else is just a cop out. He could have taken his responsibility and punished them with something else. You always have excuses. If today president Obama delegated the responsibility to punish prisoners of say captured Taliban in Afghanistan to one of his generals and that general decided to commit a massacre we will all hold Obama responsible also, along with the general. Never mind that the prophet knew about the judgment and did not stop it. This is why Muslims never sound credible in any argument. You guys have more excuses than reflection on the issues.

    Regarding your examples of the prophet being merciful as in the example of Mecca. There was an advantage for him not to kill people there. It is his city of his birth and he has already dictated his terms of surrender. In exchange of getting the city without a fight, he had to offer safety for its inhabitants. Also, Mecca was a trading center with very skilled people from his own tribe. It is beneficial to keep these people alife as long as he gets loyalty. What you call merciful, I consider a political move.

    Regarding, lusting after women, The story of Zainabe bint Jahsh in summary: the prophet declares Zayed as his son. Zaid later married to Zainab bint Jahsh. Who had an encounter with the prophet, where Zaid had the impression that the prophet was interested in her. This lead to the divorce, then the prophet comes up with a revelation in the Quran, which gives him an exception from marrying the wife of a son based on the technicality that Zaid was adopted.

    Now that is just one of the women issues. Let me list you some more: Safyah Bint Haay, who was captured in the conquering of Khaybar, the prophet took her as his wife in the same night he killed her husband (plenty of Hadith there for you to read). How about Juwairiya from the tribe of Bani Mustaliq, who was captured as a slave and the prophet had her the same night. He always got the first pick in these cases. Having sex in the same night with women from the tribes who you just killed the men, is not just lustful it is twisted sick lust.

    Now again my argument is not that the prophet may have acted like men of his days, my argument is that such morals could not have been guided by the a divine being.

    Regarding that I only argue points that fit with my point of view. I countered most of your arguments with specifics to teh point where my comments are taking pages of space. You keep adding more, and each time you are presented with evidence you come up with more excuses.

    Things like taking slaves and even having sex with them after killing their ken, gets “well that is what people did in those days”
    Presiding over massacre of hundreds of acptured men “well that decision was delegated to someone else, he cannot be responsible”
    Marrying a 9 year old, I do not think you responded to that but I can imagine it will be like this “girls of those days were married that young and they were ready for it”

    The fact is you are the one who is ignoring the flaws, because you just want to believe. I, like many others, did not start by wanting to believe bad things about Islam and its prophet, but when analyzing the history there is no avoiding the evidence. The morals of the prophet of Islam are nothing more than the morals from a dark age in history. Hence, if you use his example as a moral guide for humanity, you will get counter arguments. It is one of the 3 areas, I stated earlier, I oppose religions on.

    Now if you revert back to the position, that your religion is a spiritual pursuit then, you won’t get any arguments from me.

    Note: you never indicated why you think your prophet is special or can be a moral guide to humanity with all the flaws I stated.

  138. Moq the more you respond to me, the more display of reading disability i see on your part. Oh I didn’t suddenly switch positions on captives of war. Regarding the Banu Quraiza affair, the point that made me ‘understand’ the harsh punishment meted out was the act of treason. Treachery on such level should be dealt harshly. If you think otherwise, then hopefully you’ll not be a leader of any country anytime ever. As for the rest of your random picking of questionable hadith (untrustworthy chain of narrators, contradictions with Quran) that is not beneath you so I wouldn’t expect otherwise of you. I know I know, next time if I wanted to learn about the history of India I will ask my baby girl since it doesn’t really matter which source we take. Now the only ones who are avoiding any real discussion is you and fear Aafke. You, for avoiding the simplest question whether you think the Quran encourages slavery or not. And Aafke, well she is just sharing some emotional discussions without providing proofs.

  139. Moq:

    Your statement on the being is flawed:

    “my argument is that such morals could not have been guided by the a divine being.”

    These morals can be guided by a divine being…….. just not a just, compassionate, mercyful or loving one.

    There is just part of me that goes back to the Gnosis accounts of the Adam and Eve story. In that story God as is worshipped here is the enslaver and evil. The serpent is the liberator who shows compassion for them by ensuring they obtain knowledge and frees them.

    Quite interesting that the fundalmentalist Christians of the time hunted them down, killed them and tried to wipe out all writings (burning the text) supporting the version off the face of the earth.

    Of course, burning of texts to ensure one’s own version of things is not exclusive to Christianity now is it?

    😀

  140. @mrsB,

    Treason can only be done by people who are on your own army. Banu Quraiza were not part of the Muslim Army. And people who commit treason are usually tried (not killed on same day) and usually limited to the leaders not the entire army (tribe). Also, in this mass killing they did not stop at adult men. Boys as young as 14 were killed, because they had the crime of growing pubic hairs.

    Over all 600-900 people were mascaraed in 1 day. All decapitated. Imagine the amount of blood that produced (blood thirsty will be a fitting description I think). This was not punishing a person for treason as you claim, this is a massacre and an enslavement of people, no matter how you much you try to twist it.

    The rest of your comment is just drivel not worth replying to.

  141. @bigstick1,

    “These morals can be guided by a divine being…….. just not a just, compassionate, mercyful or loving one.”

    You got a point. I stand corrected.

  142. @mrsB,

    Regarding ahadeth that I site, they all come from Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, the most trusted books of Hadith in Sunni Islam. I even quoted that for you every time, with book number and hadith number, etc. You are just too lazy to even check them, you’d rather claim that others are cheating on their references. You really should be ashamed of yourself.

    It is late now, rest is better than arguing with someone that is so under educated about her own religion, that I even have to point such details to religious sources.

  143. MoQ, I do not mind discussing ideas with you but when you claim to have the ability to mind read and apparently know what I’m thinking before I express it then it is clear that your mind is already closed. You are not the enlightened debater you claim but just someone else who thinks they have the definitive answer before anyone else expresses their point of view. Their isn’t much point having a discussion then as you already know what I will say. Perhaps you can continue the debate by yourself seeing as you already know my thoughts before I even express them.
    Btw, I had addressed the issue of Aisha. This just proves you are not actually reading what I post.
    Also, these women you claim were enslaved were given the chance to leave and divorce the prophet. They never took this and chose to remain in the marriage. Hardly enslaved then, especially as Safya was herself wealthy and did not need financial support from the prophet.
    As regards Mecca, many Meccans were already with the Muslims and their skills and status would have been there. I do not understand why he had to dictate merciful terms of surrender, there was not need. The Meccans were not merciful when they attacked Medina. Nor were they merciful when they mutilated the bodies of the Muslim dead. Nor were the tribes merciful when they slaughtered in cold blood Muslims sent to them to teach Quran (at their request btw). I notice all these incidents are not mentioned by you.
    You do not need to respond as you do not seem to read what I say and only have time for pushing you own agenda – even to the extent that you claim to have telepathic powers.
    Have a nice day anyway.

  144. ‘It is interesting that you think that the girl you mentioned has been permanently damaged when there is no book of Hadith today that can be called worthy if it does not have a Hadith narration from Aisha (RA)’

    @ Silly Ibrahim if you bothered to read comprehensively before you respond you would realise that my “comments” are not mine! but excerpts from wiki. You said yourself you find it interesting how pedophelia is associated with Islam and I showed you just an example of information available online associating pedophelia and Islam.

    I have yet to come across anyone or any articles that can effectively contest these pretty damning accusations towards your prophet’s marriage to Aisha as not being pedophilic or that child marriage is not pedophilic. Just look up the definition of Pedophelia FGS! Are you saying that those passages qouted and statements from the Ayatollah et al. in wiki are made up? can you prove to me that they are? I am not muslim and you seem to be. Assuming these are works of ex muslims so what.

    What is puzzling and interesting here is religious clerics fail to speak out against child molestation in the Kingdom. Pretty bizarre dont you think? You would think that they have a moral obligation to do so. How can you not say then… that there is not an attitude of condoning by the passive attitudes towards the issue of child abuse, child molestation and child marriages??

  145. @expatlady
    …that my “comments” are not mine! but excerpts from wiki’

    So you thought you’d share a strange idea from wikiwho that isn’t yours because you disagreed with it, right?

  146. @moQ

    We’ve explained what our stance is. You disagreed with it.

    The question for You is what is your criteria for determining what is right or wrong?

    Prove that it is the correct basis for judging.

  147. MoQ, I do not mind discussing ideas with you but when you claim to have the ability to mind read and apparently know what I’m thinking before I express it then it is clear that your mind is already closed. You are not the enlightened debater you claim but just someone else who thinks they have the definitive answer before anyone else expresses their point of view. Their isn’t much point having a discussion then as you already know what I will say. Perhaps you can continue the debate by yourself seeing as you already know my thoughts before I even express them.

    Haha I agree a thousand percent. Moq does fancy himself as the enlightened one. Ah, I see because I happen to disagree and deny your stupid made up claims then I am under educated. At least I am not sly 😉

  148. Plus Moq you are playing the game of ignoring my question. Why?

  149. Expatlady, if you were a college student, I am afraid you won’t be getting great marks fom your professor for you like to use questionable sources. You see, I have informed you before that practically ANYONE can write an article on wiki, not a certified non-biased scholar who holds no hostility to the subject matter.

    Ahmed, you claim In Nepal and India it is against the law to keep slaves. Well they are doing a damning job at keeping the law. Imagine if it was legal? 18 million is a lot of slaves!

  150. “I have yet to come across anyone or any articles that can effectively contest these pretty damning accusations towards your prophet’s marriage to Aisha as not being pedophilic or that child marriage is not pedophilic.”

    Well perhaps you should look elsewhere besides wikiislam?

  151. @MrsB and Ibrahim since you claim to be so “knowledgeable” then rather than criticising the “fodder” that is readily available on the internet how about actually addressing the issue here and answering my questions earlier as an objective muslim 🙂 Lets stop with the “intellectual” flexing here and actually start talking some sense. Bunch of try hards. Mind you most of you have all gone off topic pff!

  152. MrsB is right, there are calculations you can make using Islamic history which could point to an older age for Aischa. And these are used by Islamic apologists to make Islam more palatable to western converts. Western converts always get the sugarcoated version to draw them in, with lots of, for example, explanations why a girl would have loved to marry the prophet after he had all her male kin murdered Nazi-style and her husband tortured to death. And I suppose it would have been better than being gang raped by his band of marauders, and being passed on from one man to the other, and I thought that by accepting marriage her immediate female family would be spared too.
    In fact one of the prophets buddies was convinced she would kill him in revenge on her ”wedding night” and stood guard outside the tent all night,. I supposed she was too shell shocked for any such actions.
    And of course she did not have any ”wealth” she had just been dmoted to slavery. Slaves have no possessions, they are posessions. Her husband was tortured to death because he would not reveal the place where the tribe hid their gold.

    Anyaway, back to the sugarcoated version of Islam for western converts: in the middle east, or societies where Islam is firmly established, it is apostacy (punishable by death, and trust me, they do kill you) not to take the hadith at their face value. And the hadith clearly state that aischa was 6 when the prophet married her, she got really sick, probably with a high fever, for all her hair fell out, and when it had grown a bit, and the question of her mahr was settled, (Mohammed did not have the money to pay the mahr, money for sex) he started using her for sex when she was 9. Which is pedophelia. It really is. There is no other way you can describe a man of over 50 using a small prepubescent girl of 9 for sex.

    Even if it was common for that time we now know better. And an all-powerfull, all-knowing skydaddy should have known better in any time.
    So either the hadiths are wrong and the quran an hadith need to be edited.
    Or Mohammed and his skydaddy are a bunch of evil entities whom you should not worship.
    Or, there is always the possibility, you agree that women can be made into slaves, can be raped, and women and children can be raped under the guise of ”marriage”.

    And as the religion condones, and even sets the example of old men having sex with small girls, it is only logic that after rulings have been made that any girl, at any age, can be used for sex, that another ruling is made that they should be covered from baby onward because they are always available for sex. (after ”marriage”)

    A baby girl by this logic, is a sexual object and capable of, and responsible for, arousing sexual desire in any man, no matter how immature she is, and how decrepit and geriatric he is.

  153. Expatlady, actually I have answered your questions. Even Ibrahim have answered your query.

  154. Aafke, do you mind providing source about Ayesha falling sick after her marriage to Nabi peace be upon him? I never heard of that before.

  155. ol blue eyes:

    If you can get ahold of a book titled, “Textual Criticism and Qur’an Manuscripts,” by Keith Small and then read chapter 12 then go and actually read the read the rest of the book it might given you a different perspective.

    I actually think you would find it quite interesting.

  156. @MrsB, India is way 1000 times better Saudi, Saudi it is legal for the employer to do indentured servitude, while in India the law enforcement actively hunts down such practices.
    In India or any other non-muslim secular countries we don’t have muttawas asking girl babies to be covered up. (period).
    Saudis really prove by their words and actions that they belong to stone age…

  157. OB eyes:

    This is a book written by a scholar and is discussing it’s history. It is not a book that is evaluating the religious aspects but the actually ancient texts and the evolution to what it is today.

    I wanted to clarify this point.

  158. MoQ et al
    Very smooth how you avoid the question…
    What makes your criteria correct?
    The crazy shake who says little girls should be covered cannot prove his criteria is correct, can/could you differentiate yourself from that type of thinking?
    Answer the question then.
    A step at a time so that my very shallow and limited and contradictory mind can follow your very enlightened thinking..

  159. Ahmed,when you make statements that are laced with racism its pretty hard to take you even a bit seriously. I’ve never been to India and did make plans to go after my highschool studies. my dad gave me the thumbs up initially but changed his mind after his best friend, an Indian national, advise against it. His reasons were that it was unsafe for me and my friends to go there as poverty has warranted some unwanted social issues such as pick pockets etc. Im not blaming the country though, its poverty issue is complicated. Now as for your rant about slavery being illegal in India but not in Saudi I have to disagree. it is illegal here. however implementation-wise that’s another story what with wasta and racism etc but then again that issue is also a problem in India and other countries including the West, bribes, intimidation and so on. that’s why there is still 20 million slaves worldwide with India Nepal and Pakistan leading. The big fishes are just too powerful. Harsher law might make a dent but I am skeptic about that. Bad guys run the world nowadays unfortunately.

  160. Bigstick, why do you presume that I am not already aware of the allegations and claims about the compilation of the texts? Is it going to tell me that manuscripts were burnt and any not agreeing were destroyed? I am already aware of those facts. I will have a look online but I doubt its going to reveal any new criticisms that haven’t been previously discussed and read by me.

  161. Oh btw Ahmed, i would still love to visit India one day. my cousin has been and she said it was beautiful. she brought back some lovely saris and for that alone i am planning to go.

  162. MrsB, the hadith of Aischa telling she fell sick and all her hair fell out is from Bukhari. So it seems the poor girl fell very seriously ill, and was lucky to get better, because all her hair falling out seems to denote a life threatening illness, probably with very high fevers.

    Narrated Aisha: “The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Alright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

  163. Thanks Aafke.

    Still she could be sick from a number of reasons and if there is one thing my dad taught me and that is to never accuse until beyond ANY doubt. My dad is more moral than the western legal law of beyond reasonable doubt. To accuse anyone of such harsh crimes wrongly is very immoral.

  164. ol blue eyes, if you’re not going to read the book Bigstick encouraged you to read, then you won’t know what is it says.
    And you certainly have no right to make conclusions about it. If you want to dismiss the book the least you should do is read it. Otherwise you are just being silly.

    I suppose you don’t want to read it because you are scared it might give you a more rational look at your new religion. And any rational look at any religion exposes it flaws, so then you might come to the conclusion it is not really that great a religion.
    And I understand your fear. And it is your own decision, for you to make, if you dare to read it or not.
    You are free to shy away from anything which might criticize your new found religion.
    But at least be honest about it.

    Bigstick I will look for the book, it sounds interesting.

  165. MrsB, I did not accuse anything or anyone for Aischa falling sick? I just mentioned it as a part of the story as narrated by Aischa. Anybody can fall sick. And it seems she got something very bad. And she recovered to full health it seems. That’s all.

  166. A-Art, I did not say I would not read the book I merely enquired what was in the books. This is not because I am afraid of what is contained there but because in fact I have already read previous material about the compilation and I wondered if there was a new angle to this particular text.

    Today you only called me silly. Not as bad as unhealthy and un-nautral as you believe my marriage to be.

    Are you actually able to make a comment without resorting to personal insult?

  167. OB Eyes:

    Why do you assume that it is all about the burning of the text? It is not. It is about the development of the ancient manuscripts, the different variants, and the known history that impacted the development and so on. It is not about what the hadith or Quran states but the actually ancient text itself. It is about scholars studing the ancient manuscripts and it is also an interesting read.

  168. ob eyes, why do you claim your marriage is unnatural? Whom (or what) are you married to? Pray enlighten us, this could be interesting.

  169. Of course I can make a comment without insulting somebody…
    As soon as somebody can make a rational and honest comment here my comments will not insult them. :mrgreen:

  170. PS, ol blue eyes, did you read the hadith of Aischa claiming she was only nine when Mohammed started to use her for sex?
    Do you really think that is an example people nowadays should follow?
    the question is simple. You have the choice.

    The holy books of your religion condone and support stuff like slavery, rape in certain circumstances, and pedophilic marriage.

    Do you
    a- think the books and the example of the prophet are wrong and the books need to be edited and your religion needs to be changed to prevent these crimes now and in the future
    b- agree that as your prophet and his invisible skydaddy promote these actions you will support slavery, rape, and pedophilic marriage.

  171. It is about time the Muslim clerics stopped imposing further and further restrictions on women just because Muslim men can’t control themselves in the presence of women. It is not the women’s fault that men can’t stop devouring them with their eyes and maybe the men would not have had those hungry looks on their faces if they were not forbidden to meet and talk to women outside their families. Somehow the men are always absolved of all responsibility for how they feel and behave in the presence of women and it falls upon the women to do everything within their power to stop men from behaving like men. I have never seen such a woman-hating culture in my life – it is always the woman’s fault; it is her responsibility to do things that keep the men calm.

    Well, good luck with that! What’s the next step – covering the baby girls’ faces and making them grow in darkness from the moment they take their first breath? And since when is looking at anyone “sexual exploitation” or even “sex”? Honestly, the Muslim world allows too many idiots to occupy positions of influence and power – idiots who want everybody to be miserable, don’t want anyone to enjoy life and who want everyone to do as they say. The more miserable the average Muslim becomes in this life, the more he is promised in the life after. Good luck with that, too, because some people will die never having lived a normal life that was truly theirs!

  172. Reality check, *What’s the next step – covering the baby girls’ faces and making them grow in darkness from the moment they take their first breath?*
    But that’s what this step is isn’t it? This is ”the next step”: This cleric is calling for babies, baby girls, to be veiled. To rescue the girls from being sexually exploited by men.
    Or is it to…. rescue men from being sexually aroused by the sight of one of these sexy, seductive, titillating baby-girls….

    Now I wonder what’s going on in this scholar’s mind… I would certainly not leave any baby near him at any time!

  173. @MrsB, calling me a racist without even knowing me is just an another charms of yours. And trying to shift the focus and blame to others and bringing in entirely unrelated topics is also a lame pathetic means of Arabs and Brainwashed fanatical muslims…

    Bottom line, Saudis and Arab countries have been the source of majority evil in last 2 decades, and thankfully i come from a country where i don’t have religious leaders forcing babies to cover them up.

    And you may wanna talk about some criminal incidents like safety for women, though i realize in india there is some crime it is just as similar to any urban metropolis. If you are visiting india from Saudi then ofcourse you will enjoy a breath of fresh air from Saudi.

  174. I would not call India that safe for women either. Not so long ago a female student was beaten and raped to death. But the difference is that finally there was a huge public outcry against this crime which forced the police to act. Even though a religious leader put the blame on the victim for being beaten and raped to death.

    This horrible story at least shows us the people, the power base of religion, can force their religious and secular leaders to follow moral concepts which are superior to their religion/dogma.

    You can also see this in Europe, where Christianity has to tow the line and look sweet, give women rights, even starting to give rights to gays. And they are still losing their flocks.
    You can see the power of secularism and more highly developed morality because even Islamic teachers have to sugarcoat their religion, apologize for it, and twist the holy books of Islam and Islamic history to make it more palatable to the higher morality of the West, otherwise they would not gain new converts.

    This is also proven every time a new convert comes on this forum; they never know their own new holy books, they only know what they have been spoon-fed and the apologist evasions.

  175. Aafke,
    So could you prove what secularism’s criteria for right and wrong is and how it is superior to Islam?

  176. Ibrahim, just take a look at secular countries versus Islamic countries.
    Secular countries are more peaceful, have less crime, have more money, have better health, have more freedom, women have more rights, have better justice, and they invent and make stuff.

    People in secular countries have better lives. In all aspects of life.
    And secular countries publish books.
    I read somewhere not so long ago that 27 Muslim countries have published fewer scientific papers than Harvard University alone in one year.
    As far as intellectual and scientific advancements go Islamic countries are virtually a vacuum.

  177. Aafke
    I read something similar also. The points you raised are accurate. Think like me for a second. If all the values I hold are accurate but I don’t know how to prove that would that make me follow something wrong? So if I see countries that are more advanced etc but on spiritual leek they are not i won’t be able to reconcile many things. Now work in reverse. Suppose you were Greek (for example:) and you know about Greek culture etc. the current Greeks only inherited their culture but have been able to produce the like of their forefathers, does that make them hold similar ideas? Would I refer to Greeks and make you think of I don’t know Samoans?
    The question is if I am saying that how I see things is different for us to agree you have to either let go of your ideas or agree with me or I you, so if you say secularism is superior for people to decide whats right and wrong, you have to establish for instance how people think, how people judge, how people ultimately can be superior to their Creator.
    Forget about proving or disproving that there is or isn’t a creator, the human being is capable to know what is right or wrong, is established on what basis?
    Did that make any sense ?
    I’m not insulting you nor trying to ridicule you, just trying to understand.

  178. A-Art – so how do you explain that Muslims were producing far superior poetry, art, medicine and the like for centuries. They far excelled their ‘secular’ counterparts and their works were used as a basis for the enlightenment in Europe.
    Yes, I agree, Muslims countries and their laws in today’s world are wide open to criticism and comment. However, how can Islam be the cause of this when Muslims were renowned scholars and leaders in many fields until the inquisition drove them mercilessly out of Western Europe.
    How do you reconcile both sides of Muslim learning when the Holy Book remains unchanged?

  179. ol blue eyes on February 15, 2013 at 3:15 pm said: ” … so how do you explain that Muslims were producing far superior poetry, art, medicine and the like for centuries. They far excelled their ‘secular’ counterparts and their works were used as a basis for the enlightenment in Europe”.

    There is much truth to muslim accomplishments however much of it somewhat exaggerated. The reason for these so-called accomplishments was that muslims were allowed to think and question koran and hadith through the ijtehad (sp?) process. I had posted this article few months back but it will be worthwhile to read it again …

    http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/why-the-arabic-world-turned-away-from-science

  180. Bigstick, that is a great lecture by Neil Degrasse Tyson.

  181. AA:

    The funny thing is, is that the greatest golden age period for Islam was when it was secular. 😀

  182. Bigstick, Islam is a religion, it cannot be secular. What was the point you wanted to make? The golden age of Islam is when it wasn’t a religion? It has always been a religion. Islam has never been secular.

  183. OB Eyes:

    Secular doesn’t mean you disregard religion just that you don’t hold it above any other belief. You allow all beliefs and treat them equally.

    So in this case, Islams most influential era was when it was open to all aspects of all beliefs. Therefore its best period was when it was the most secular in nature.

    Next that segment is quite interesting and there is more to it if you find it on Youtube there are longer segments.

    I hope this explains the situation to you.

  184. Bigstick is right. The moment Al Ghazali came in and started his fundamentalist revival it was over with the Golden Age. The Golden age of Islam only existed because people were not very religious and they were tolerant of other religions and societies and cultures, and they were open to everybody. Freedom. Like the ”christian” countries today, which aren’t really christian but secular.
    And since this Golden age was stopped by Islam, hundreds of years ago, nothing came out of the islamic countries, and they ahve actually gone backwards. Same as what happened to Europe when the Christian church took over: ”The Dark Ages” which is where Islam is now.
    The dark ages came to a stop when the Enlightenment started, and religion lost power.

    Religions stop any kind of progress where they rule, be it in morality or science, progress stops, and actually civilizations go backwards.

  185. Religions stop any kind of progress where they rule, be it in morality or science, progress stops, and actually civilizations go backwards.

    I disagree. Religious LEADERS who aren’t particularly religious stop any kind of progress where they rule, be it in morality …. Now concerning the Golden Age of Islam you mention that it was the shining moment of Islam because it was secular ie practicing tolerance, open to other people etc but that IS What Islam is all about. Just because the leaders nowadays aren’t showing tolerance doesn’t mean Islam isn’t. THe Golden age of Islam proves that Islam encourages tolerance and good harmony within its society. The main teaching in Islam and any other religion for that matter is do good unto others. Might I remind you that the minute secular changes into an atheist state all the tolerance goes down the toilet and we see former Albania and N.Korea and Ussr etc. The moment atheist leaders gets power, there is no more happiness for the people. That’s why I see Islam is better. Golden Age of Islam has proved that for centuries but give me one Atheist State era that can be used as a good example of peace and lovin’. Even France the most secular (is it even secular anymore to dictate how people should dress) country of now is starting to show deterioration in terms of tolerance and openness to others but that’s what happens when atheist has some foothold. they demand you to dress a certain way, they tell you that only their culture is acceptable and then we actually have atheist supporters from here. All this is done under the guise of democracy. Democracy my foot!

  186. Mrs B:

    I cannot wait until you develop the intellect to distinguish the difference between atheists – no believe in god and political doctrines such as communism or other political autocratic rule.

    Until then you just sound absurd or intellectual deficient.

    I certain don’t want to debase you anymore than your religion already does. 😀

  187. BigS
    Define secularism.
    Define Islam.
    Now reconcile the two.

  188. Ibrahim:

    By today’s standards they cannot be reconciled. Depending on whose history you go with it is either due to secularism due to allowing everyone during a 3oo year period having a voice and unfetteedr knowledge base that allowed questioning/investigation during a time of expansion into other’s terrority and it was necessary or the history could be the alternative that Dr. Warner provided.

    Islam is a politically crafted dogma that challenged Judiasm/Christianity due to the need of caliphate al-Malik to have a religious tool that validated his reign.

    Secularism is a government which keeps religion on a equal footing but separate from government endorsement to the best of their ability thereby allowing all to have the ability to contribute to intellectual pursuits.

    Hope that helps 😀

  189. @ol blue eyes,

    “The Meccans were not merciful when they attacked Medina. Nor were they merciful when they mutilated the bodies of the Muslim dead. Nor were the tribes merciful when they slaughtered in cold blood Muslims sent to them to teach Quran (at their request btw).”

    You do not seem to get my point no matter how clearly and how many times I repeat it to you.

    My argument again is that the prophet was no different than the brutal people of his time. Hence, there is nothing special about him. And he is not guided by an all knowing and merciful God.

    There is no need for me to argue how badly others behaved. Since no one is claiming they are saints. We leave them in the pages of history and no one follows them. However, your religion claims that your prophet is the best man who walked the face of the earth and he should be emulated. I have presented many arguments that showed him to be brutal, slave taker, womanizer, etc.

    No matter how much evidence is presented, from Islamic books (not from questionable ant Islamic sources), you and other apologists will make excuses, engage in intellectual acrobatics, and personal attacks.

    At the end of the day, you can believe in all of these extreme leaps of logic, but that does not make your argument sane.

    I have already replied to every excuse you and MrsB presented. I am very satisfied that I have made my case. There is nothing I can add without wasting time.

    At the beginning of our conversation, I thought may be you are actually more sane than others I encountered here. However, you turned into the average apologist.

  190. Ahh by logic Bigstick, then I cannot wait for you to find the intellect to distinguish Islam and political manifestation and cultural mysoginist 🙂 But then again while we are at it, the idea that there is no God is what motivate these dictators to set up rules that are unGodly and to dampen any religious activities. As far as I can observe, it is better to live in the Islam Golden Age than the Atheist State and I’m just saying.

  191. Lol Rofl, the minute someone clearly disagrees with you in an instance that person is no longer sane and becomes an apologist. Hahaha the logics are so illogical today. Please don’t beat yourself up too badly, Moq.

    Ahmed I forgot to address you about racism. I don’t know you but when you make remarks that are clearly discriminating towards an entire race, that makes you a racist. And racist never holds up a good argument, they lose all credits in anything they say.

  192. Mrs. B

    Well, since that aledged age hasn’t existed for over 1000 years I would say your out of luck.

    All abrahamic religions were created by political men for political purposes but some people need their delusions. You are definitely one of them.

    Who knows with your state of mind you could believe you transported yourself in time to that age. Enjoy the make believe.

    Oh and how you go on about Atheist I can take a page out of Moq tactics and also call you a racist.

    🙂

  193. @aafke, Yes, my country India does have crime against women which is a blot on our civil society, but as you mentioned we the people have the courage to speak up and force the government to listen to us.
    Unlike in Saudi where the Imam from the grand mosque in Mecca that protesters asking for civil rights are “deviants”.

    At least in India i have hope in the people and civil institutions which are standing up for the woman’s rights, more freedoms, etc. And when it comes to our leaders we don’t shy away.

    But i must point out that back in India too, the Saudi sponsored Salafi schools and madarasas are very much brain washing indian muslim kids. And there is a phenomenal rise in the number of women covering up.

    I find it very lame when MrsB compares India and other Secular countries with a fundamentalist Islamofacist state like Saudi.

  194. @MrsB,

    Since you keep asking about the Quraan encouraging/allowing slavery.

    http://www.quran4u.com/Tafsir%20Ibn%20Kathir/033%20Ahzab.htm#النَّبِىُّ إِنَّآ

    Look up Ayah #50 (surat al Ahzab). This link also includes the explanation from Ibn Katheer, the most authoritative and accepted Tafsir (explanation) of the Quraan.

    I am really tired of feeding you information. Have you thought may be I was not answering your challenge, because you keep bringing new ones and you just sound too lazy to even attempt researching your own religion to understand it.

    Regarding you rejecting Hadith as evidence. I assume you are Sunni Muslim. I hope you understand that the word Sunni also means a person who follows in the behavior and manners of the prophet. Since Hadith is the primary source of knowledge about the behavior and mannerism of the prophet. If you deny Hadith then the entire idea of Sunni Islam becomes invalid.

    The Hadiths about taking captives into slavery do not contradict the Quraan. Now the challenge to you is to show specifically how these Hadiths contradict the Quraan. All the major scholars, who spent all their lives in the study of the religion, do not make such claims they actually affirm my point.

    However, I should remember who I am speaking to. A person who seems to have not even attempted to read the works of scholars, the Hadiths, the Tafsirs, etc. Yet you seem to always have the energy to argue from ignorance.

  195. BigS
    “Islam is a politically crafted dogma that challenged Judiasm/Christianity due to the need of caliphate al-Malik to have a religious tool that validated his reign”

    Islam existed well before al-Malik. Are you saying that Islam has no rules for politics hence it was ‘crafted’?

    If by your definition of secularism, Islam is not reconcilable with it, are you saying that Muslims should stop adhering to Islam so they can be secularists?

  196. @MoQ,
    So even though you failed to read all of the comments I posted and were then able to predict what I thought without my expressing it we fundamentally disagreed on the fact that Muhammad was not better than a warlord of his time. I did not try to excuse anything but I cited examples of where he was better in his behavior than other people of his time. I gave examples of his mercy but these were brushed off by you.

    Because we disagree you now judge me to be insane. By extension anyone who does not share you viewpoint is not in full possession of their mental faculties. As I previously said, a closed mind. I am not trying to make you agree with me, I am just expressing my own point of view. As you said, there are different viewpoints to any situation.

    How can you discuss with someone clearly when they come to a point at which they say – because you do not agree with me you are not sane, If the basis for a debate is that then is hardly any point in debating as the conclusion is already reached before any discussion has begun.

  197. Come on Moq you don’t mean that. You tired of giving out information? but why? you were in full zeal to hand out information when it comes to your advantage. Oh do remember, I am under educated therefore I needed a very specific answer not giving a whole page about Islam but thanks for that coz I read it and it just reaffirmed my faith that Islam is a great religion indeed but nothing about Islam encouraging slavery in the Quran. Moq you killing me. Yalla you need to spoon feed me the answer because you are the enlighten one and I am in need of your grace. Bigstick I don’t particularly feel prejudice towards all atheist. I never showed that in my comments. I merely pointed out the facts of atheist ruled nations and its glory 😉

  198. Ol blue eyes, you’ve just learnt a hard lesson. If you ever disagree with Moq and his comrades you are insane and stupid. If you’re religious and believe in God then God forbid you are in need of some serious evolution therapy. Going into a debate with Moq means he’s the one doing the debating and you listen and learn. If you agree with him then talk but if you talk while going against his understanding then prepare to be rubbed as insane.

  199. MrsB

    The rules of Islam should be discussed with those who believe in Islam.

    As to whether Islam is suitable for solving people’s problems is discussed with non Muslims.

    A valuable lesson indeed.

  200. Mrs B and OBE, and Ibrahim.
    It seems to me you three do have a lot to learn, especially about your own religion.

    I have also noticed that whenever somebody does answer a question or challenge of yours, and backs it up with evidence, you three refuse to read it.
    I have never seen you comment on any claim of yours which was debunked.
    I have never seen either of you report on reading these links to your own holy books.
    Instead you both immediately come up with something else. Anything. Any other claim, imaginary tale, pointing fingers to other religions, claims about ”it was different then”… Anything
    As long as you are not forced to learn about your own religion.

    That’s why I have only once gotten a response (and it was not on Bedu) to the question of which choice to make:

    1 Pedophilic marriage (and slavery and rape) is wrong, the Quran and hadith need to be edited where they condone/support it and the prophet was not a good example when he did it.

    2 Pedophilic marriage (and slavery and rape) are good and moral because Islam says so and the prophet gave the example.

    You all have been really good at ignoring this challenge. Don’t accuse others of ignoring anything until you have made your choice!

  201. Someone who is an atheist will have a hard time reconciling rationality with revelation.
    Someone who is a believer will have a hard time reconciling textual evidences with ration.
    Pass the hurdle of belief in Allah and the Quran is a miracle for Mohammed therefore Mohammed is a messenger of Allah.

  202. @MrsB, you condone the practice of enslaving women and using them as sex slaves, you condone polygamy and all those practices of islam which are abhorred today, you very well seem like a islamofacist. An islamofacist who feels all abhorrent practices sanctioned by islam as an solution for manking in your misguided thought.
    You may call me a racist I don’t mind because I am only bothered about what I am thought off by only sane and people closest to me. But you do fit the profile of a islamofacist

  203. It’s so sad to see timely threads like this one get hijacked my mrs. She doesn’t realize that blogs like these are to have a meaningful discussion on the topic and not to try to proselytize others to her brand of radical/orthodox/militant islam. She has a very shallow knowledge of Islam, especially Qur’an and Hadeeth. She needs to study Islam indepth so that she can make intelligent contributions to discussions here.

    What bothers me also is that she is acting as the self-appointed/self-anointed spokesperson for Islam, under the guise as its “defender”. I will be frank and honest here when I say that it looks like to me at least that she is more interested in the quantity of her posts than the quality of her posts. Perhaps there is a hidden agenda on her part to be #1 poster is 2013? Hope I am wrong but that’s what i feel.

  204. Ibrahim, why should rationality and revelation be separate? I fundamentally disagree. Your statement above seems exactly the same as Christians who think faith alone is enough to get to heaven. Faith itself is not enough.It is actually faith and good action. Faith can be used as a means for war and suffering so you have to use rationality as part of your faith to become a better person. If more Muslims thought about this then we wouldn’t have so many terrorists.

  205. @MrsB,

    “I am under educated therefore I needed a very specific answer not giving a whole page about Islam but thanks for that coz I read it and it just reaffirmed my faith that Islam is a great religion indeed but nothing about Islam encouraging slavery in the Quran. ”

    I did Give you a specific Verse from the Quraan. It is verse 50 from Surat al Ahzab. I even provided you with an easy link, if you clicked and scrolled down to verse 50 you would have had found it quickly. I just did that and timed it. It took 5 seconds for all of that. Then it took 40 seconds to read the The verse and the section associate with it. So your argument that I did not give you a proper specific reference is false.

    Now here is the shorter version of the Tfasir of part of the verse to be sepific:

    “. وَمَا مَلَكَتْ يَمِينُكَ مِمَّا أَفَاء اللَّهُ عَلَيْكَ …
    those (slaves) whom your right hand possesses whom Allah has given to you,
    means, `the slave-girls whom you took from the war booty are also permitted to you.'”

    So God references slave girls taken in Battle as Hallal to use for sex. How is that not encouraging slavery? Consider your self spoon fed.

    Again, You said the Hadiths I provided contradict the Quraan. It is your turn to do some work and show us how they do specifically. Otherwise I have proved my point over and over, because you cannot provide counter arguments.

  206. Ol Blue Eyes
    Jazakallah for your comment.
    The shake at the centre of this discussion claimed that a five year old should wear niqab. His reasoning was to make her more modest or it alluded to that. There is no reason from what has been revealed in the text to make a five year old cover.
    Also suppose you wanted to pray fajr 8 raqaat, would this make you more closer to Allah because you prayed more for fajr?
    Besides how does a human being know what Allah wants of her ? Therefore as Muslims we accept what Islam asks of us and change to fit into Islam not change Islam to fit us or follow Islam when it suits our interests.
    I think there is a difference between understanding problems by using our intelligence and applying Islam through exerting our effort at connecting the rule to the problems.
    This is what i understand from my limited understanding.

  207. Ibrahim:

    You asked me how I ……..again I define Islam and secularism. I defined them. I do not believe Muhammad or Jesus or Moses ever existed. You also failed to read what I provided to you otherwise you would have known this. Christianity is a political dogma, Judiasm is a political dogma, Islam a political dogma and the only thing that differs them from Communism and Authoritianism is that these individuals who crafted the dogma brought in the boogie man.

    Again this is what I provide to you earlier and I cannot help it if you did not read it.

    http://voicesofthefaceless.com/2013/01/13/some-interesting-points-made-in-the-book-the-hidden-origins-of-islam/

    Mrs. B:

    I consider most people who believe in religion to be nice people who believe in something similar to Santa Claus. So they have a nice old man, who they believe cares for them, looks after them, who expects them to be good, and provides them a present at the end of a timeframe a define goodness. It is a fairytale and is a nice delusion for nice people then they associate it with a particular type of religion that has certain rituals to make it real for them.

    HOWEVER, they do so by not appling the majority of the text into their lives otherwise they are not so nice anymore. The problem is that these nice fluffy types fail to understand the undercurrent and individuals who believe in the literal word of the text/dogma. Thus by doing so they are fodder to progress in dealing with the problem of the reality of what religion is and to dealing with the true adherents to the religion which is the assimilation of humanity into a political dynamic static society that benefits the very few who are the controllers of that dynamic.

  208. Thanks for link bigstick1.
    The thing is Islam has rules for a persons ration ship with herself, her creator and others. Christianity has rules for relationships with yourself and your creator. It does not provide rules for life because it is not answer the question of life and what came before it. This also applies to Judaism. Communism can be more comparable to Islam because at least both have answers to how life should be lived. The only reason today that Islam is not like Budism or Christianity is precisely because Islam challenges how people should live their lives. It has answers tondo with economics, society, etc.
    we always disagree bigstick1 because fundamentally I accept that the Creator has a say in how i live my life. The separation of life and politics is at the core of secularism. As a Muslim we strive to seek the pleasure of Allah. I will check out your link and get back to you if you don’t mind waiting 😉

  209. @OB,

    “Because we disagree you now judge me to be insane. By extension anyone who does not share you viewpoint is not in full possession of their mental faculties. As I previously said, a closed mind.”

    I never called you insane. Unless you are referring to this:

    “but that does not make your argument sane.”

    or this

    “I thought may be you are actually more sane than others I encountered here. However, you turned into the average apologist.”

    Surely you must understand that a person can be sane and make insane arguments. You are taking this personally and engaging in a strawman argument. I am referring to a specific point(s), not your entire mental capacity.

    In the second one I am comparing you to other apologists. Who I do not consider Insane, but present the same level of sanity as you do in their arguments. Sorry if I was not clear.

    In a debate you should develop thicker skin than that. If you throw around arguments, people are free to attack the arguments. If you are so attached to the them to the point that the argument is your entire person, then that is your own judgement not mine.

    Now for me, You called me closed minded, MrsB called me sly and a person who forges hadith, etc. You never see me complaining. I just present my arguments against your comments.

    So get over it.

    Finally, I just want to remind you how we got here. It is you inserting yourself in the discussion about the killing of the captures of bani Qurezah. Where your basic argument that the 600-900 men being slaughtered does not mean anything, because the prophet did not make the judgement. Yet he was the leader who commands the army who captured them and eventually cut their heads off. They were under his control. Not holding him responsible for their fate is an insane “argument”.

    Further, Sleeping with one of the women who were captured in the battle at the night of killing her husband and ken is an extremely twisted form of sexual abuse.

    People with clear thinking will see it that way. However, I do not blame you for how you arrived at such illogical conclusions, because you start with the conclusion that the prophet could not be such a person, so you are compelled to twist logic to make it so.

    Regarding, the fact that the prophet may have had good deeds as in the case of the treaty to enter Mecca. Let’s give you that for sake of argument. How would that erase his violent behavior somewhere else?

    As an example, when Hitler annexed Austria under pressure, he did not send his army to kill the Austrians. He marched in triumphantly into Vienna and declared them as part of Germany. Does that erase his other actions? or would it be considered a move to expand his powers?

  210. Mrs B, Ibrahim and ol blue eyes, I notice you are still ignoring my challenge.
    You have to ignore it because you cannot face the facts, I understand you.
    But that doesn’t mean you are not moral cowards.
    You cannot face the fact that your religion is flawed and immoral, and it forces you to be immoral. It is so bad that you cannot say outright that Slavery, rape and pedophilic marriage are evil things and your prophet was an awful example when he engaged in these immoral acts.

    1 Pedophilic marriage (and slavery and rape) is wrong, the Quran and hadith need to be edited where they condone/support it and the prophet was not a good example when he did it.

    2 Pedophilic marriage (and slavery and rape) are good and moral because Islam says so and the prophet gave the example.

  211. Mariam Saidona Ismail, Thank you for commenting and pointing out that: *She has a very shallow knowledge of Islam, especially Qur’an and Hadeeth. She needs to study Islam indepth so that she can make intelligent contributions to discussions here.*

    It would help the conversation if people were more knowledgeable or at least willing to read up on the verses and hadith when they are given to them.

  212. Ibraham:

    I can wait. I look forward to your thoughts even if you and I will agree to disagree. 🙂

  213. Mrs B, Ibrahim and ol blue eyes, I notice you are still ignoring my challenge.

    Aafke, I just visited AB blog today. Was busy yesterday so please excuse me for having other priorities beside catering to your questions. Dato Mariam, are you the lecturer in my former university IIUM? If so then I can understand the animosity you have against me because I know you from reputation. Thanks for the compliments, I take it as one coming from a person like you. Besides you didn’t add anything relevant to the discussion aside from being personal with me.

  214. I t’s so sad to see timely threads like this one get hijacked my mrs. She doesn’t realize that blogs like these are to have a meaningful discussion on the topic and not to try to proselytize others to her brand of radical/orthodox/militant islam.

    Data I didn’t realize I was hijacking the thread. As for proselytize others and the rest of your garbage (similar to your lecture) well that is completely wrong since if you even tried to read properly, I never start an argument about Islam till the others start opening the topic with animosity. Now I was only giving my side of the debate. Before you start hurling accusations, kindly do some research and you will probably be able to see that it could be that Aafke, Moq and …… who are trying to convert us to atheism? after all they never let a thread go without convincing (attempting) us that religions ate all bad. As for the lastpart of your whining, you are being too funny. Winner of 2013!

    No name calling please.
    That inludes ‘funny’ ‘typos’
    Moderator

  215. @MrsB, you condone the practice of enslaving women and using them as sex slaves, you condone polygamy and all those practices of islam which are abhorred today, you very well seem like a islamofacist. An islamofacist who feels all abhorrent practices sanctioned by islam as an solution for manking in your misguided thought.

    Now where on earth did you come up with that? where in my comments did I actually condone any of that? polygamy?I am neutral about that as its not my business how people chooses to arrange their marriage and sexual businesses.but Im baffled at how you came up with that one but hey, racist minds never make sense. as for slavery i never ever said i condone it. Ever so watch your mouth. I was merely presenting the reason why Islam is neutral about it rather Islam takes steps to deter its existence and elevated the status of slaves etc.

  216. Aafke i just reread your question. I have answered that extensively on the post about requirement for a minimum age in KSA so i will not repeat myself because A. I am really of little time these few days due to family events and B. I doubt you re looking for an answer but I will direct you to my comments on the earlier topics. If you’re still baffled let me know. Now I need to go.

  217. Sorry moderator I wasn’t intentionally mocking anyone..I was writing in a hurry using my smartphone while preparing to go out for a quick errand and i wrote Bigstick as usual but my stupid smartphone decided to change Bigstick to lipstick. Honest mistake.

    No problem

  218. MoQ,
    I am not taking your comments personally. Perhaps I am not always expressing myself clearly and that might have to do with when I just post a reply in between doing the million other tasks I have each day. In fairness, perhaps I should sometimes take a bit longer to consider my replies before posting. It was not my intention to give or take offence. I personally feel that in religious discussions there should never be any need to make personal remarks and looking back perhaps I have made personal remarks so I apologise for that.

    The main point of our discussion is that you believe that Muhammad was not better than a common war lord of the time. I do not agree and feel that he displayed mercy and compassion on many occasions. He made charters with other religious groups and tried to develop interfaith co-operation. I do realise that violence played a role in the birth of Islam but I view that as self-defense and a part and parcel of the society at the time.

    As for having intercourse with a widow on the day of her husband’s death, there are clear hadith that the walima took place some time after the time of which she was captured. There are also clear hadith which relate that she was happy to marry Muhammad. Her previous husband had struck her on the face and left a scar when she related her dream that a moon fell into her lap so what little we know of him does not sound great. There is no record of Muhammad having ever lifted a finger towards her.

    I do not actually like the word apologist as I do not feel there are apologies to make. I do not hide from the truth of Islamic history but I do view it in a different light. What you see as oppression and provocation, I see as defense and protection.

    I hope that we can agree to disagree on good terms.

  219. A widow????????
    Mohammed just had all her male kin murdered and her husband TORTURED to DEATH!
    And she and every other woman and girl was about to get gangraped.

  220. ”interfaith co-operation” as described in the Quran, 2 191:193
    And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]… but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah.

    or Quran 2:216
    Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not..

    Another nice bit of ”interfaith tolerance” from the Quran 8:12
    I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them

    8:39
    And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah

    Quran 9:5
    So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush

    Tolerance… 9:123
    O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness

  221. It was quiet shocking to see an Egyptian Arab Lady calling for muslim men to molest Israeli Women, just an extension of the enslaving attitude and teachings:

  222. here is the video link:

  223. That’s horrible. I don’t understand that mentality in anyone!

  224. ahmed, on February 17, 2013 at 5:26 pm said: It was quiet shocking to see an Egyptian Arab Lady calling for muslim men to molest Israeli Women, just an extension of the enslaving attitude and teachings

    That video is sick! Just imagine if a person of Jewish or Christian or Hindu faith had made a similar statement calling on men to “molest” Muslim women. There will be world-wide lootings and burnings and beheadings by the muslims.

  225. That’s horrible Ahmed. Israel ladies are mothers and wives and sisters too so its such a horrible thing to even say to another woman. ignorance is prevalent everywhere astaghfirullah mixed with evil unfortunately.

  226. Achmed, the Egyptian lady is only putting to practice what many Quranic verses and hadith consider to be the difference between Muslims and non-Muslims.

    This Kuwaiti woman, (I think she ran for parliament) quotes muftis and Islamic scholars and hopes Kuwait will implement a law which will allow a legal trade in sex-slaves to keep Kuwaiti men from zina. Because raping a woman who is enslaved and sold for money is not rape it is legal.
    This is only following the sunnah/example of the prophet. .

  227. @Aafke
    That was predictable.

  228. @OB,

    Great, I am for calming it down. I guess MrsB’s name calling rubs off on all of us. I will try my best to be objective.

    “I do not actually like the word apologist as I do not feel there are apologies to make.”

    The definition from the online dictionary and a few others have similar definitions:

    ‘apologist:
    a person who defends, in speech or writing, a faith, doctrine, idea, or action.’

    You defend Islam ( a faith), so by definition you’re and apologist. It does not mean you issue an apology.

    “He made charters with other religious groups and tried to develop interfaith co-operation.”

    I am not sure how you come to such conclusion, especially since you actually read the religion as compared to others. You also indicated earlier that you are a free thinker, but you seem to ignore simple facts otherwise you won’t come up with such statement. Let me give some of these facts:

    1) The prophet called for the destruction of all idols in the region. Actually one of the first acts of the prophet when he entered Mecca is to destroy the idols. Do you really think these are the actions of someone who accepts other faiths. Think please!!!

    2) Further, the Meccans were actually very accepting of deities. They did not mind adding a new god to their collection.Mecca gained riches because of that, they had the most diverse set of gods in their house of worship (the Kaaba). For them that is a trade advantage against all of other houses of worship scattered across Arabia (yes there were more than one Kaaba, including the one Mohammad sent his army to destroy in Yemen). Adding the god of Islam to the collection would not have been an issue. But the prophet would not have any of that, he wanted all other Gods removed. Again think!!!

    3) The prophet and his followers fought with everyone. By the time they were done there were no surviving religions in Arabia. All Jews were pushed out of their traditional homes. No other idols survived. People were converted to Islam by force. When some group fights constantly with everyone, do we blame everyone or do we suspect that may be just may be they are the aggressors. Looking at the event your selfdefense explanation looks extremely implausible. A more plausible explanation is that Muslims were very aggressive and did not compromise. Think it over please!!!

    4) Islam does not recognize any religions except the Abrahamic religions. All polytheists are considered Mushrokon (includes 1 Billion Hindus) and they are not granted any status under Islam, Their blood and positions are Hallal (allowed to Muslims). Same for all others like Atheists, Buddhist, Confucius, etc. How is that an interfaith friendly man, when he does not even recognize more than half of the worlds population (now and then) as humans who’s lives should be protected. Think please!!!
    5) Also think, how come people always see the light in a sudden flash after they get run down by Muslims armies. They all convert from their religions. Is it plausible they just give up their religion out of love of Islam, or is it more plausible that they do it out of fear of death once they are defeated knowing the prophet won’t tolerate other religious believes.

    Etc. I can add more if you like, but the above should give you pause to contemplate with an open mind. .

    Regarding, “As for having intercourse with a widow on the day of her husband’s death, there are clear hadith that the walima took place some time after the time of which she was captured. There are also clear hadith which relate that she was happy to marry Muhammad.”

    Let’s look at what happened. Abu Ayub stood guard at the prophets tent as he is having intercourse with Safiyyah and said the following when asked by the prophet “I was afraid for you with this woman for you have killed her father, her husband, and her people.” The wallima as a matter of fact happened after the sex.

    Also, do you really for 1 second believe that any person who had her father, brother and husband killed by someone, would suddenly just be so be star struck by the prophet that she cannot help it but give herself to him. In what logic does that fit, Seriously, think!!!

    When you have so many stories that have a very low probability of happening, any free thinker will think the chance of all of them to be true is near impossible. That is unless you have a predisposition to believe and suspend logic.

    I am very interested in the logic that leads you to the conclusions you stated.

    Sorry for being long, but you threw around many claims.

  229. @MrsB,

    “@Aafke
    That was predictable.”

    I think some of what that Kuwaiti woman said did not sound much different than you. Replay the video and notice her comment that indicated that the Chechnyan captives would be better off not to go starving, if they become sex slaves to Kuwaiti rich Muslims. How is that different than what you stated earlier about early Muslims taking captives as slaves and I quote you here:

    “…… therefore,according to the situation of that era it was an act of mercy to keep the women and provide for her,not just sex if she wants but shelter and financial needs etc.”

    Are you changing positions now?

    By the way, since you always insist on us replying to your challenges (which I did when I had the time), I also, asked you to back up your claim about how the Hadiths I quoted about slavery contradict Quraan. Are you going to answer that?

  230. @MoQ & Aafk.

    Suppose Islam does stand for all that you state what’s your point?

    Muslims obey Allah and His Messenger.
    Muslims believe in Allah and His Messenger.

    Islam is built on worshiping and believing in the Creator, or the other round.

    Are you saying that human beings are better than Allah?

    Prove it.

    You know what is in the books of Hadith and Al-Kitab.

    Prove that the human is better than the creator at deciding what is right or wrong and I promise you, Abu Jahal will smile with you.

    If not, this is all noise and Abu Jahal will cry with you.

    Prove your claim that the human being is better than the creator.

    Prove your claim.

  231. Ibrahim:

    You cannot prove a nothing. Quite frankly, it should be you who have to prove that the nothing is a creator. Oh, and a book written by men doesn’t cut it. I just wrote a book that states the creator is an twirling eggplant.

    Can you prove me wrong?

  232. “Prove that the human is better than the creator at deciding what is right or wrong and I promise you,”

    What a ridiculous question to ask to an atheist. We do not believe Allah exists, your question is moot.

    Why don’t you give this a try, since you claim she exists, prove it!!!

    I really want to see you try 🙂

  233. Susie wrote a post about that Kuwaiti woman here http://susiesbigadventure.blogspot.com/2011/06/kuwaiti-bimbo-wants-return-of-sex.html and what Susie said hits the nail on the head

    “Al-Mutairi’s irrational arguments for promoting sex slaves for Muslim men only further demonstrates the great chasm in the disparity of the attitude that exists between stereotypical radical Muslims and the rest of the world. In fact, this latest outrageous idea of hers has been called “a gift to Muslim haters,” has provided juicy fodder for Islamophobes, and has caused al-Mutairi to be labeled “Kuwait’s version of Ann Coulter.”

    Moq, the verse you gave isn’t proof that Islam encourages slavery. Have you heard of the verse 13 in Surah Al Balad? Now concerning the verse you gave the connotation of the verse is about marriage and informs us that slaves are also marriageable without prejudice. If you read this link http://www.alislam.org/quran/tafseer/?page=860&region=EN&CR= you will read about Maria a slave girl who was given to the Prophet but he didnt keep her as a slave,instead he married her. It shook the entire meaning of status and slavery because the Prophet was the head of religion and state and marrying a slave should be beneath him according to society but he married her and made an example to follow contrary to previous traditions of sexual slavery. The verse 50 of al ahzab basically instructs to marry without prejudice and if you read the following verses it lists down the people allowed for marriage.

  234. Moq i did answer you just now as time permits but itis awaiting moderation as i have posted two links. Havepatience.

  235. Moq, I disagree. Nowadays we have shelter, human rights, NGOs unlike centuries ago so you cannot compare the two situation. And the kuwaiti woman was talking about purchasing slaves from another country.that is prostitution in my book. I do not condone slavery, no matter how much you think i do or try twisting my word.

  236. @Louise Enakai,

    I am afraid to tell you that video is just one of many that come out of Arabic TV. Actually it came from one of the more moderate channels “AlArabya”. If you follow the religious channels you will find much worse. For example calling Jews the decedents of Pigs and Monkeys is a very standard saying.

    Recently a Muslim immam called the rapes of protesting women in Egypt as something they deserved, because they were likely becoming Salebeen (a derogatory word for Christians in Arabic). Although these women were Muslims, but since they are protesting against the Muslim leader, they became Christians by default. Hence, raping them is Islamicaly allowed in his mind. That man still makes the rounds on TV shows and also has his own Channel broadcasting from Egypt.

    Sickening…

  237. I am not twisting your words. I am quoting them exactly. You are the one who said Slavery is merciful in that situation. Now you say you do not condone slavery. Make up your mind…

  238. Now, if you can, just wait for my comment with the two links to pass moderation and maybe it would answer your question. Now as for your Banu Quraiza issue, I take it your source was Ibn Ishaq, the least accepted author by any scholar based on his alliances to the Jews and even noted hadith narrators such as Bukhari never took any of Ibn Ishaq’s work as valid source. Now would you mind looking at a different source about Banu Quraiza. I admit, I did an in dept revision of the event as the last time I learn about it was probably in school. Note that only the guilty leaders were executed, not hundreds of men including teen boys were killed. http://www.haqq.com.au/~salam/misc/qurayza.html

    Even in facing treachery, the Prophet still was just and merciful.

  239. No my source is not Ibin SIhag. I quoted you the source in my original. It was Sahih Al Bukhari. I even told you that again in a later comment after you accused me of fabrication.

    I did not just quote you the Hadith, I quoted you the source, down to the book and the Hadith number.

    Now you want to turn this into a discussion about the validity of Ibn Ishag works.

    Here is what I wrote exactly quoted from my comment. 5 days later you still do not get it LOL

    Here is a Hadith from Sahih Bukhari:
    “Volume 5, Book 58, Number 148:
    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
    Some people (i.e. the Jews of Bani bin Quraiza) agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Muadh so the Prophet sent for him (i.e. Sad bin Muadh). He came riding a donkey, and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet said, “Get up for the best amongst you.” or said, “Get up for your chief.” Then the Prophet said, “O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict.” Sad said, “I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives.” The Prophet said, “You have given a judgment similar to Allah’s Judgment (or the King’s judgment).”

    There is a reason, I think you never get the points that people write. Even when it is clear facts, you argue.

  240. Mrs. B:

    I read that link that dribbles. I am struck with the fact that it doesn’t provide any scholarly source as well. Next Malik could have simply not liked the way Muhammad was protrayed.

    Then I have to say the statement where it slams the accounting for being 145 years after the alleged death of Muhammad being too far removed is laughable. The same can be stated on everyone of the hadith and depending on the source even the Quran is far removed.

    The simple fact is that nothing proves that Ibn Ishaq had any ties with Jews and then there is whole parallel of events with Flavius Josephus the historian for the make believe Jesus.

    Next there are hadith in Bukhari that also wrote this accounting and this has been pointed out. I am at a loss with how you keep moving points or failure to grasp information.

    Now all that tells me is that the whole thing is make believe but if you are going to go on about the make believe then give me some credible scholars on this one.

  241. The issue of banu qurayza was mentioned only three times in an Islamic perspective, once in the Quran Surah Al Ahzab 25-26 and once in BukhAri sahih and once in Muslim sahih and none mentioned the massacre. In fact the verse in surah al ahzab specifically mentions …so that some you slew and some you made prisoners… Which can no way be seen as an endorsement for massacre.

    When the enemy surrendered, the Prophet did not immediately slay them all, very contrare to a war lord nature. Instead he consulted with the Jewish leader. The Prophet asked the Jewish whether they will be satisfied if one of their own pronounce judgement and they agreed thus the reason why Saad bin Muaadah was elected. Saad knew the Jewish law and according to their law only a Jewish law can dictate the Jewish community. You cannot compare Obama in this case. He passed judgement based on the Jewish law, Deutronomy 20:12-14 andit was a Jewish law for treason.

    Now Moq, sometimes you accuse me very harshly of being naive, uneducated about my own religion and my answer is That is quite possible since i am no scholar. I am a Muslim simply giving my insight and research on topics I find interesting.If my insights disagrees with yours, it doesnt make me insane or wrong.

  242. Let me clarify:

    The whole thing is make believe meaning it was constructed as a political dogma by man nothing more.

  243. My comment got lost. Sorry Moq, I am only human, not God, and I forgot that comment you gave, about Bukhari. But still I was not refering to that part of the banu qurayza issue. I have made a very long comment about exactly that hadith but it got lost still that hadith doesnt mention anything about a massacre. That is why i said you must have gotten the massacre story from ibn ishaq, an untrustworthy source. Bigstick, if you didnt like that link, can you look at this one http://foreverislam.blogspot.com/2010/02/banu-qurayza-massacre-or-myth.html

  244. @bigstick,

    Now watch her comeback with the whole thing about the killing was not the prophet’s fault. It was the donkey, who Sad bin Muadh rode, who kicked them all to death 🙂

  245. MoQ:

    I am sure a goat ate something that would have shed more lilght on the subject. Damn goats. 🙄

  246. The central point which thsi discussion started on was the taking of slaves. The Hadith Clearly states that the taking of women as slaves is something Muslim do. And I am still challenging you to proof that this Hadith contradicts the Quraan as you claimed.

    Then take a wild guess why they want the women!!!

  247. You do love making assumptions Moq. As i said, one of my comment is in moderation and the other got lost so chill please.

  248. Moq, play fair. I am asking you where did your source about the massacre came from because it is not in the hadiths nor Al ahzab. As per your challenge, i have answered it but awaiting moderation.

  249. By the way I agree with BigStick. Ibn Ishag is as authentic a source as any other Hadith collector like Bukhari and Muslim. But I will leave that for later, I think you are trying to divert away from your claims using a red hearing argument.

    Also, I know that you may not remember everything, but before you dismiss my source it would be wise for you to check what I wrote instead of claiming i took it from Ibn Ishag. That is the part that is not excusable not the fact that you do not remember.

  250. what assumption did I make in my comment? Enlighten me, or did you miss the point again.

  251. Bigstick, you cannot just shoot down sources without clarifying why you think it is a dribble. After all you are the one who loves throwing out sources randomly about fathers married to daughters as to pass it off as an islamic practice. Please explain which part of the article is ‘dribbly’ to you? As for stating the article has no scholarly source please refer to its footnotes below.

  252. Mrs. B:

    I looked at the sources and none of them that I could discern were from any scholarly source that would lend support on the allegations of the author of the article. Now the sources sited would have only been to substantiate the location of the source materials but not the conclusion.

    As far as the Flavius Josephus parallel I almost laughed as it was such an incredible stretch and smelled of a conspiracy theorist on a limb.

    Now I read the other article and he also make certain allegations and quite frankly they just do not hold water and he too does not have any known references of material linked to the article. Actually, after reading it and how he applies his logic it again sounds like he has gone out on a limb. In fact the more he goes on, the more convinced I was that it was more likely that the story stands equally with reliable hadith.

  253. The assumption that I would make a comeback about a donkey kicking them all to death. Did you miss that part?
    As for creating a diversion, far from it. If you are going to use his source, then I have to question it since supporting claims must come from good sources (trustworthy). Now ibn Ishaq is unreliable on these grounds:
    A. Rejected by many other scholars including Imam Malik, Bukhari.
    B. known to be careless in collecting stories
    C. Weak isnad or chain of transmission which is the basis of hadith
    D. Known for taking sources from the Jews.
    E. Most important of all, his report about Laylat al Qadr (the first revelation), contradicts all the hadith versions. The hadith collectors Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, etc were more careful in collecting their hadith (their chains of transmission).
    F. None of Ibn Ishaq’s original work survived and this should be a red flag. What we have today is a twice removed and further edited loose biography at the hands of ibn hisham, a student of al bakki who was a student of ibn Ishaq.

  254. Moderator, please take out my comment from spam. Thank you.

  255. @MrsB,

    “I am asking you where did your source about the massacre came from because it is not in the hadiths nor Al ahzab”

    Actually the Hadith I gave you gave you a good hint about the order of the killing. If you want all the details, you could have researched them like I told you it is really easy if you take the time instead of me giving you every detail and covering teh site with hadiths.

    Here are another one for you. Ibn Ishag clean 🙂

    From Ibu Daud:

    “Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi: I was among the captives of Banu Qurayza. They examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.”

    Sickening isn’t it? How do you think they will make such an examination on boys to determine if they had grown hair. Not the leaders only got killed (like your apologist link claimed), boys also died. A massacre!!

    For the rest please do some search on your own, I am sure Carol won’t appreciate me keeping posting sources.

  256. No I did not have an assumption about you coming back at the donkey joke. I think you assumed that I made an assumption is more accurate 😉

  257. Mrs. B:

    I read it again. First, the article did not site the reasons you listed. Next, there is a reference in the Quran, the hadith and sira. Then the person actually brings up how it can be justified by Jewish law on the slaughter and booty. His suppositions simply doesn’t get him to the point that he is trying to pursue, however for me it just solidifies more so that the story has a firm standing with the other hadith stories.

  258. http://www.examiner.com/article/did-muhammad-kill-900-jews-part-ii

    The Quran surah al ahzab contradicts with the massacre story Moq. Next I wish my comment came out of spam to answer you false allegations on the event. Because I did do my research and pasted it here but it didnt appear.

  259. Part three of the above link

    In Part III we will explain through authentic references what actually happened. It should be noted that even Hadeeth have their limits. Some collectors of Hadeeth recorded nearly half a million Hadeeth, and proceeded to discard all but a few thousand due to lack of reliability in the chain of narration. While this certainly helped improve the accuracy of those Hadeeth kept, no work of human hands is fool proof.

    Therefore, when considering a Hadeeth, we must always apply the following strategy. Regardless of the Hadeeth’s alleged accuracy, if the Hadeeth contradicts a teaching of the Holy Qur’an, and cannot in any capacity be understood to coincide with Quranic teachings, the Qur’an always takes precedence. This is beacuse the Qur’an is the infallible word of God that God Himself has promised to safeguard (15:10), while Hadeeth have been collected with no promise of Divine protection.

    With this premise in mind, the most accurate scenario proceeds as follows. The Battle of the Ditch was a viciously lopsided battle, in which an army of nearly 20,000 attacked the Muslim army of roughly 1200. Salman Farsi, a Persian Disciple of the Prophet Muhammad suggested they build a ditch along the most exposed side of Medina to ward off attackers, hence the name of the battle.

    While natural barriers protected Medina from the sides, the rear was still exposed. To remedy this situation, Prophet Muhammad forged a treaty alliance with the Banu Qurayzah to guard the back of the city. However, once the battle commenced, the Banu Qurayzah secretly sided with the enemy army. Essentially, the Muslims were now responsible for two fronts with an army less than 1/15th the size of their opponents. The Holy Qur’an makes reference to this event in Chapter 33:11-14.

    For the sake of brevity we cannot entertain all the details of the battle. With God’s grace the Muslim army still prevailed victorious, despite the overwhelming odds and despite Banu Qurayzah’s treason. However, due to their open treason, justice demanded they be held accountable. When asked of their actions, the Banu Qurayzah showed no signs of remorse, nor did they ask for clemency, and instead engaged the Muslims in battle.

    Soon the Banu Qurayzah stopped fighting and asked for negotiations. It is of note that this was the second time the Banu Qurayzah broke a pact with the Muslims. Upon their first act of treason years earlier, Prophet Muhammad exiled them from Medina as their punishment. Eventually he allowed them to return. Therefore, stare decisis, or historical precedent held that Prophet Muhammad would simply have exiled them once again. As further evidence, a Jewish leader named Amr bin Ma’di rebuked his people for going back on their word. He showed remorse for his actions of treason, asked forgiveness, and was released. The Prophet, upon learning Amr bin Ma’di had been released, decisively approved.

    However, the Banu Qurayzah neither asked for forgivness, nor did they let the Prophet enter his judgment during the negotiation. Instead of the Prophet’s judgment, they said they would accept the judgment of Sa‘d bin Mu‘adh, chief of their allies, the Aus. They would agree to any punishment he proposed. This is recorded in Bukhari, Tabari, and Khamis. Sa’d bin Mu’adh first asked and received personal confirmation from the Prophet Muhammad that he would bind himself and the Muslims to whatever decision he, Sa’d, delivered. The Prophet agreed. Sa’d asked for the same confirmation from the Banu Qurayzah. They agreed. Upon receiving this confirmation, Sa’d bin Mu’adh recited the following verses of the Holy Bible.

    When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it. And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee. And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it: And when the Lord thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the Lord thy God hath given thee. Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amoiites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee: That they teach you not to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods; so should ye sin against the Lord your God (Deut. 20: 10-18).

    Any person can see that Prophet Muhammad has absolutely nothing to do with Sa’d bin Mu’adh’s decision. The Prophet was bound to Sa’d’s decision as the arbitrator the Banu Qurayzah themselves chose. Prophet Muhammad still forgave those who repented and asked for forgiveness. Under what rationale then, can the blame for such a punishment be placed on a man who had nothing to do with said punishment? Justice was meted, not by the hands of Muhammad or Islam. Rather, by the hands of Mosaic and Biblical law. The Banu Qurayzah sealed their fate with their own hands and their own law.

    So let us quickly recap this crucial series of events. The Banu Qurayzah signed a treaty alliance and then committed treason. Rather than asking for forgiveness and admitting their error, they continued to oppose the Muslims. Then, rather than accepting Prophet Muhammad’s lighter sentence, they chose an arbitrator, Sa’d bin Mu’adh, who was the chief of their allies. Sa’d bin Mu’adh then chose to deliver a punishment not in accordance with Islamic law, but in accordance with Jewish Law as written in the Holy Bible. That Jewish law required that the Jews who committed treason be put to death. Therefore, any objective mind can clearly see that Prophet Muhammad is entirely innocent of any wrong doing, and he most certainly did not kill 900 Jews.

    Paste copy is not encouraged on this forum. Paste copy in such very large quantities is definitely against the blog rules.
    If you post such large pieces of paste copy again your comment will be edited or deleted
    Moderator

  260. Mrs. B:

    I need sleep. I will look at all that later. Moq……Good luck is all I can say.

    Just remember I warn you early on ……….here is wall……..here is head………here is head hitting wall.

    However, I have more faith that some reader might get it.

    😀

    Good night.

  261. Surat al Ahzab does not contradict the slavery nor killing of the captives of bani Qurezah. Tell me exactly how it does?

    Your link argues against Ibn Ishag. I found the link weak in its analysis, but that is not the point. The Hadith I quoted is from Bukhari.

    Your comment is a classic strawman.

    I will wait for your comment to be let out of jail, but if the argument is like the above, I will be very disappointed 🙂

    Really MrsB, you do not have to back up your arguments. Just admit to yourself that you have been arguing from ignorance and stop arguing. I suspect that you have never heard of Banu Qurezah nor about enslavement of captured women, when you got into this debate. You just keep arguing instead of learning from your mistake of making wild claims before studying your own religion.

    I will drop this if you just bow out gracefully, but if you do not I will insists that you will be specific, not just give me an entire surah and say that is your proof.

  262. Good night Bigstick. I need to get going too. Hoping my comments come out soon. Do not bang your head too hard, You could hurt yourself.

  263. I will drop this if you just bow out gracefully, but if you do not I will insists that you will be specific, not just give me an entire surah and say that is your proof.

    Ok sir.

  264. I just saw your long copy and paste comment, your cope paste is faster than I can type of course.

    The writer is playing tricks on you.

    1st. Surat Al Ahzab 11-14 does not contradict the events of killing the fighters. It just talk about how others presumably Banu Qurezah were deceivers (munafigeen) and expelling them, etc.

    Then the articles goes into apologetic about how they were given choices to be expelled from their homes or have an arbitrator. Nothing from Hadith or Quraan to support his claim. Which by the way is in contradiction with all the other scholars.

    Looks like you found a modern day article written to defend against English writers who raise the issue, but has no support in classic Islamic writing. A good hint at that is the sighting of the story in the bible to justify to Christians using blood shed in the bible as a comparison. Like saying see when the Kings of Israel invaded they also killed the men and enslaved the women and children, so it is OK. Really we’re just the same, we all kill let it pass please 🙂

  265. bigstick1,
    You cannot prove a nothing. Quite frankly, it should be you who have to prove that the nothing is a creator. Oh, and a book written by men doesn’t cut it. I just wrote a book that states the creator is an twirling eggplant.
    Can you prove me wrong?

    You not only wrote a book about it you pasted it online. Establishing that you wrote something is one thing, proving because you wrote it is something else, and then the actual content is altogether something else.

    It is best to stick with reality in these things. For instance do you agree that people are born and then they die?

  266. MoQ,
    “Prove that the human is better than the creator at deciding what is right or wrong and I promise you,”

    What a ridiculous question to ask to an atheist. We do not believe Allah exists, your question is moot.
    (Since you do not believe that there is a creator, then why are you arguing over what He says?)
    Why don’t you give this a try, since you claim she exists, prove it!!!
    I really want to see you try.
    I know there is a creator, you keep saying there isn’t a creator, so how did you move from there being no creator to the human being is capable of knowing what is right and wrong? Since you are saying ‘this is ‘bad, crazy, wrong, insane’ you are judging. So what is it that you know which allowed you to say this?
    Suppose I do prove to you conclusively there is a creator, why should you accept my argument?
    Suppose you do prove to me conclusively there isn’t a creator or in the words of bigS, the creator is an eggplant, why should I accept your argument?
    Without the tools for discussion laid out on the table, the cowardly approach would be let’s agree to disagree:)
    My stance is this, you think Islam is wrong. That’s fine. What is it that you hold onto so dearly that makes your base sound? Saying and quoting what is in books in one thing, establishing the thinking behind it is another.
    It is about the tools for discussion which do not give any doubtful answers I am on about.

  267. Moq, Epic comment to OBE.
    Again.

    *For them that is a trade advantage against all of other houses of worship scattered across Arabia (yes there were more than one Kaaba, including the one Mohammad sent his army to destroy in Yemen). Adding the god of Islam to the collection would not have been an issue. But the prophet would not have any of that, he wanted all other Gods removed.*

    *how come people always see the light in a sudden flash after they get run down by Muslims armies.*

  268. Why is it when a writer argues an Islamic perspective of the events you immediately brand him as an apologist? Why do you enjoy that word so much.

    ” hen the articles goes into apologetic about how they were given choices to be expelled from their homes or have an arbitrator. Nothing from Hadith or Quraan to support his claim. Which by the way is in contradiction with all the other scholars.” – Moq

    But Moq it was confirmed in the hdiths Bukhari, Tabari that the Banu Qayraza didn’t want the prophet to make judgement and the rest of the story. Look it up as you’re good at that. You just can’t accept the fact that the Prophet was merciful and well prophetic. I need to pick up my husband from the airport now so gotta go.

  269. @Ibrahim,

    “Suppose I do prove to you conclusively there is a creator, why should you accept my argument?”

    That is what I asked. If it is conclusive then it does not matter who it came from, I may just see the light. Are you going to or won’t you prove your point. Conclusively that is!!!

  270. @mrsB,

    I debunked that argument many times. I will do it again.

    Any leader that has people killed under his command is responsible. Saying it is the judgement of someone else who has so little power, he comes riding on a donkey is not an excuse.

    Your prophet held the prisoners. His army executed him, he had the power over them. Everything that happens in that situation is his responsibility.

    Think about this, if a commander of the US army today asks a wise man riding on a donkey if he should kill his Muslim prisoners and he receives an affirmative. Then he sends a telegram to the president of the US asking for his approval to execute them. If Obama goes, of course the man on the donkey spoke and I agree with him. Would you say great Obama is not responsible. Think before you answer.

    I also explained the word apologist (read it at your nearest dictionary). You should actually be proud to be one because it means a defender of a faith. So are you not a defender of Islam? If yes then I am using the word correctly.

  271. Ibrahim:

    “You not only wrote a book about it you pasted it online. Establishing that you wrote something is one thing, proving because you wrote it is something else, and then the actual content is altogether something else.”

    Well, the hope is that you get the sarcasm on the book writing but your analysis definitely fits the issue of all alleged holy books (Quran, Torah, Bible). Now apply your reasoning to these books then you get it.

    “It is best to stick with reality in these things”

    I agree whole heartly with the statement.

    “For instance do you agree that people are born and then they die?”

    I can say that there is tangible evidence that this does in fact occur. However this proves nothing on the creator issue.

    Next I will weigh in on some of MoQ stuff you sent to him:

    “Prove that the human is better than the creator at deciding what is right or wrong and I promise you,”

    As there is no creator as the concept refers to a nothing then (on to the next phase)

    “Are you saying that human beings are better than Allah?”

    Since the concept of Allah is nothing ……..and humans are a something then the answer is………YES……Human are better than rthe nothing.

    Now I think I will add in a bonus for you:

    “so how did you move from there being no creator to the human being is capable of knowing what is right and wrong”

    Trial and error applied to circumstances and applied to ourselves. Example, I dont’ like it when someone hits me so I doubt the someone will not like it either. I understand that if someone is killed that I will never see them again and i don’t like that outcome so I will not kill someone as I deem that to be wrong.’

    Next you build on your brain’s ability to store, conceptualize, and process this informaiton which then gives you a range of right and wrong based on what you dont’ want done. Your brain has the ability to process the severity of the wrong……….example “dead” means permanent wrong so it is really really bad……getting hit can heal……but still it not good because it could lead to “dead” so it is a lesser bad but still a bad.

    Hope that sheds any amount of light on the matter for you.It actually isn’t very hard even kids can figure it out.

  272. Hi Bigstick,
    Been busy. I like your response especially about the kids bit. They are honest and sincere about reality. I Read your link btw.
    Nothing new only an explanation of what is in a book. The book traces historical evidences and lists the researchers. Typical stuff for your average atheist. But I digress.
    The reality we agree on is the starting point. If we can agree on the starting point then the discussion should centre on why we agree then start to build on that. You follow?
    People are born then they die is indisputable because we sense that reality and like you said intuitively we know what brings people into the world must be through birth. The same with exits. We leave only through death. Like you rightly pointed out even a child knows that death is the end. Life is built on the answer to the question of where we all come from. What are your thought on what I’ve said so far? I notice when a lot is said we tend to lose track. If I don’t reply I’ll get back to you tomorrow. Ciao

  273. We have a platform, although I will go back to the book. 🙂 I will not let you off that easily. 😀

    Adios

  274. Ibrahim, you do know that there has been a more recent revelation of who actually created the universe?
    You can buy the Gospel of the FSM and find out who/what really created the universe, as the book proves.

    http://www.amazon.com/Gospel-Flying-Spaghetti-Monster/dp/0812976568

  275. Actually, everybody on this thread should go and buy the book and read the revelations which were given to us from up high via the one true prophet, Bobby (pbuhp*).

    Using ”facts” and ”science” Bobby (pbuhp) proves why and how the universe was created, and this final revelation is the only divine revelation which explains why everything is such a mess, and therefore we know we finally got the truth straight from our Maker.
    Bless Bobby (pbuhp) for bringing the light in a darkened world.
    Praise be to the FSM!
    R’Amen!

    *Pasta Be Upon His Plate

  276. AA:

    Yes this is a good book to read. 😀

    Ibrahim:

    I would also like to see if you can separate the concepts of a Creator from religion as well as faith from the other two. Can you compartmentalize this concepts as having meaning which is distinctive to the verbiage to which has no direct play on the other.

    Again a stand-alone concept with a stand-alone meaning, can you do that?

  277. OB Eyes:

    Here is another assessment on the Golden Age. You might find it expands on the overall situation. It is a pdf file and about 23 pages in length. No, it is not a bashing site but a historical view.

    http://www.thenewatlantis.com/docLib/20110605_TNA30Ofek.pdf

  278. bigstick, that is a very interesting paper. Unbiased view. Thanks for sharing.

  279. Oh My God, people never stops…Is there a button to unsubscribe this topic?… manual deletion of email alert is tiresome.. 🙂

  280. @Ali, Way to go. Now you added another email notification from your message and this one to reply to you. Plus all the others who will reply to me replying to you 🙂

  281. 😦

  282. Moq, don’t mock Ali, now he has to suffer more notifications from a discussion where he has not contributed anything constructive….

  283. @AA, So, shud I start contributing and continue discussion? 🙂

  284. jump right in, Azad!

    On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 5:00 PM, American Bedu

  285. In a constructive way Azad 😉

  286. @AA, OMG, u are not tired… I was just kidding.. even deleting notifications has become quite heavy now for me.. 🙂

  287. @Ali, you gave this dead thread new life. What a wonderful fellow you’re 😉

  288. MoQ, we are helping each other to give life to this thread hahah 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: