What Religion are you?

[Faris]

The Quran in Sura 4:34 says: 4:34 . . . If you fear highhandedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great.

I researched about that, because i myself was not satisfied with that (ohmy im not brainwashed).
I asked shiekhs about this, "How can Islam glorify women and rejects violence say that about treating women?" "How would the Prophet (PBUH) preach this, if he himself never ever hit a woman, or even acted agressively towards his wives?"
"his wife Khadeeja (RAA), was one of the main influences in his life, he spoke very highly of her, it doesnt make sense"

first, we should be clear that it is the last resort to things, secondly, I asked my sheikhs, because Islam has taught me question and discover everything, "whats the limit of this hitting?" "would a bat on the face do the job?"

the hitting that was allowed is like hitting her with a siwaak, a stem of a plant as big as your index finger but thinner in width. the idea behind it is not to inflict any pain, it is just to indicate the mistake she's done. and again i tell you, and this is very important, it is the absolute LAST resort, the hitting that i explained.

The Quran in Sura 65:1, 4 says: 65:1 O Prophet, when you [and the believers] divorce women, divorce them for their prescribed waiting—period and count the waiting—period accurately . . . 4 And if you are in doubt about those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, (you should know that) their waiting period is three months, and the same applies to those who have not menstruated as yet. As for pregnant women, their period ends when they have delivered their burden - Pedophilia ftw.

I dont understand how that is pedophilia

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

I hope you realize this guy is making fun of you just as much as he is of crazy religious people.

You're retarded, no it isn't. Stop trying to pretend to be above the fray.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

I researched about that, because i myself was not satisfied with that (ohmy im not brainwashed).
I asked shiekhs about this, "How can Islam glorify women and rejects violence say that about treating women?" "How would the Prophet (PBUH) preach this, if he himself never ever hit a woman, or even acted agressively towards his wives?"
"his wife Khadeeja (RAA), was one of the main influences in his life, he spoke very highly of her, it doesnt make sense"

first, we should be clear that it is the last resort to things, secondly, I asked my sheikhs, because Islam has taught me question and discover everything, "whats the limit of this hitting?" "would a bat on the face do the job?"

the hitting that was allowed is like hitting her with a siwaak, a stem of a plant as big as your index finger but thinner in width. the idea behind it is not to inflict any pain, it is just to indicate the mistake she's done. and again i tell you, and this is very important, it is the absolute LAST resort, the hitting that i explained.



I dont understand how that is pedophilia

It deeply saddens me that your race and culture was once the cradle of liberal civilization and intellectualism and it's been reduced to nothing more than religious tension and fervor.

[Skjie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a15KgyXBX24

Why didn't the thread end here? At the end of the day, who cares what magical friend, God, common sense or Golden Apple tell you to do as long as you are doing the best you can for yourself and the people around you? We could say that rather than religions are bad, that extremism is bad.

[Faris]

Sure I can:

World War I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

World War II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Al-Qaeda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Crusades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

South Africa under apartheid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Religious violence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Salem witch trials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Revolution_(1905)

French Revolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Alexander the Great - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Genghis Khan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Khmer Rouge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Roman Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Please. I dare you. I fucking double dare you to prove me wrong. Man I have some respect for you Correction on a few issues but motherfuckers need to learn to just lay down. Yeah internet ego counts for a lot but shit man is the embarrassment worth it?

I really don't think I need to go on. For every 1 person who is pious and humble enough to be content with helping people or simply going on with their daily lives there are 1,000 - and ego check here, this may include yourself - that are willing to rise to violence, deception, and hatred over a belief. More-so over the interpretation of a text that makes spiritual and metaphysical promises. I'll even use this weapon of 'improbable hyperbole' to say that this effect is amplified 1000x when it is religious promise compared to moral or political promise.

But please, go on, deny the voice in your head or any reason or logical aptitude and deny that because you've already decided to run your mouth for arguments sake. Cool bro, thanks for the update.

Its very clear that you're basing your judgment on christianity and how your culture projected religion. even the links you provided are mostly exclusively about christians
but please don't pop a vien on us, we're just sharing opinions.

[Skjie]

I hope you realize this guy is making fun of you just as much as he is of crazy religious people.

He really isn't.

[Faris]

It deeply saddens me that your race and culture was once the cradle of liberal civilization and intellectualism and it's been reduced to nothing more than religious tension and fervor.

because we are losing true Islam, we're being reduced to nothing more than religious tension and fervor.

1 man, in 23 years only made one of the greatest nations in history, and extended through asia, africa, all of the middle east and some of europe, truly a powerful history, i agree. we did it because of Islam, when your people were living in the Dark ages, we excelled in science, art, literature, civilization itself.

[Correction]

I lay the blame of war squarely at the feet of religious interpretation

Cool hypothesis, bro. Too bad it falls short of 'sure I can prove it!'

[Neosutra]

Going to have to disagree with you and also show a bit a shock at your post here. Atheist claims of "no" are just as arrogant as theist claims of "yes." Agnostic is the fairest path and a path I define myself as having.

A creative force could be as passive yet as powerful as the ocean, whether it is sentient or not this is science. There always seems to be a way for things to work, a path for nature to follow. I can't, nor can you or anyone else say for sure yes or no. That power is simply not ours.

You not only claimed that "we cannot know" which is a logical fallacy (you cant back that statement up, that the origins of the universe are forever out of our reach), you went on to suggest that our current knowledge of the universe leaves room or need for a creator. It does not.

I dont know if there is an invisible pink elephant in my living room that doesnt interact with universe, but I cant "prove" that there isnt. It is irresponsible to suggest we should hold "anything" as possible until proven true. We must then limit ourselves to keeping the possible limited to the probable, until such observation/probability changes the story.

It is unreasonable to suggest that only those that hold all postulates open as possibilities are enlightened or "correct". Part of being a rational animal is applying such standards to what we hold as true and plausible.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

You not only claimed that "we cannot know" which is a logical fallacy (you cant back that statement up, that the origins of the universe are forever out of our reach), you went on to suggest that our current knowledge of the universe leaves room or need for a creator. It does not.

I dont know if there is an invisible pink elephant in my living room that doesnt interact with universe, but I cant "prove" that there isnt. It is irresponsible to suggest we should hold "anything" as possible until proven true. We must then limit ourselves to keeping the possible limited to the probable, until such observation/probability changes the story.

It is unreasonable to suggest that only those that hold all postulates open as possibilities are enlightened or "correct". Part of being a rational animal is applying such standards to what we hold as true and plausible.

You don't know if the person in the apartment above you is watching the episode of Friends where Joey has to sleep with his agent to get the part in a soap opera. You can argue with someone all day whether they were or weren't but it would be truly arrogant to claim either side, for all you know they could have been reading a book.

You're defending your position, not logic or reason.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Cool hypothesis, bro. Too bad it falls short of 'sure I can prove it!'

A one line response in an internet debate is like peeing your pants when asked "paper or plastic." Live with that shame, bro, I'll enjoy it.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Its very clear that you're basing your judgment on christianity and how your culture projected religion. even the links you provided are mostly exclusively about christians
but please don't pop a vien on us, we're just sharing opinions.

Sorry Firas but less than 3 of those I posted were based on Christianity. I hit a range of reason from sheer political power to the depths of religious fervor. Just because someone is "white" doesn't mean they're Christian or the atrocities are based on Christian thought. Your prejudices betray you.

Islam was, and is, a culture that took by force. Persian, Arabian, and Indian culture were cultures than were bountiful in just that - culture. Islam had nothing to do with the leaps and bounds your race made in politics, poetry, art, sex, mathematics, and science. It actually has facilitated the destruction of such things by giving the ignorant the power to decide what stays and what goes.

Islamic hordes have raided treasure troves of knowledge and culture and art and destroyed them indiscriminately due to the sole purpose that they were not worthy enough of your religion and were a blight to "God's" will.

This is a shameful act upon humanity. A far greater sin in my eyes than to be shamed by what you or another would call a god or prophet.

[Plow]

He really isn't.

If he didn't do it on purpose it's an amazing side effect.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

If he didn't do it on purpose it's an amazing side effect.

You're a perfect example of people painting the world how they want to see it based on belief or ego with complete disregard for how things plainly are. Thanks for being a perfect lab rat.

[Correction]

A one line response in an internet debate is like peeing your pants when asked "paper or plastic." Live with that shame, bro, I'll enjoy it.

You claim proof by listing wikipedia links then saying 'WHAT NOW BROTHA' and you deride my debating skills. Nice.

You claim the 1000 to 1 ratio amongst the religious yet what I'm seeing in all your links is more victims than perpetrators and causes of suffering beyond 'belief' into irreligious political and economic roots. The math isn't adding up and you aren't making the slightest effort towards your proof beyond restating your initial assertion.

[Plow]

You're a perfect example of people painting the world how they want to see it based on belief or ego with complete disregard for how things plainly are. Thanks for being a perfect lab rat.

I have a really hard time believing he honestly thinks nobody in religion *ever* thought about that before. Sorry if that offends your fragile sensibilities.

[Neosutra]

You claim proof by listing wikipedia links then saying 'WHAT NOW BROTHA' and you deride my debating skills. Nice.

You claim the 1000 to 1 ratio amongst the religious yet what I'm seeing in all your links is more victims than perpetrators and causes of suffering beyond 'belief' into irreligious political and economic roots. The math isn't adding up and you aren't making the slightest effort towards your proof beyond restating your initial assertion.

Oh, back to the "religion wasnt the cause of religious wars" argument?

Even if you claim that the "root" was economic/cultural problems (all wars are more complex than single issues), you cant begin to suggest that religion didnt play a HUGE role in those atrocities.

[Ruiner]

Going to have to disagree with you and also show a bit a shock at your post here. Atheist claims of "no" are just as arrogant as theist claims of "yes." Agnostic is the fairest path and a path I define myself as having.

A creative force could be as passive yet as powerful as the ocean, whether it is sentient or not this is science. There always seems to be a way for things to work, a path for nature to follow. I can't, nor can you or anyone else say for sure yes or no. That power is simply not ours.

While I do believe it is arrogant to say conclusively that there is no God, I don't believe it's equally is ignorant to believe in God as it is not to. This goes back to the burden of proof and the unicorn/flying teacup arguments. While it's impossible to know 100% with out a shadow of a doubt that unicorns don't exist, or that there is no flying teacup somewhere in space, no rational person would believe in those things. I consider the fairest position to be agnosticism with a strong leaning towards atheism. I, personally, don't believe that God exists, but that is just an educated guess.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

You claim proof by listing wikipedia links then saying 'WHAT NOW BROTHA' and you deride my debating skills. Nice.

You claim the 1000 to 1 ratio amongst the religious yet what I'm seeing in all your links is more victims than perpetrators and causes of suffering beyond 'belief' into irreligious political and economic roots. The math isn't adding up and you aren't making the slightest effort towards your proof beyond restating your initial assertion.

Which you didn't step up to prove your point that my point can't be proven. You just made some ignorant one line post hoping to run away quietly. Do you come from a long line of pussies or are you the first?

You telling me that it doesn't take an armed force that is either too weak to stand up for what is morally and ethically right or that isn't somewhat sympathetic to the "cause" of what I mentioned not to commit those atrocities? Are you capable enough to even understand the point I'm making?

I feel like at this point while I'm asking you to grasp an understanding of the human condition that is plain enough for a 5th grader, you're arguing the taste of Oscar Meyer versus Nathan's hot dogs. What the fuck is wrong is with you?

I pity you on a Down's Syndrome level if you're having a hard time getting this but it's not that easy. You're going through the motions of being upset that you said dumb shit and you're afraid to delete it or edit it because you don't want to break the rules of a video game message board.

Fucking slick, guy. Teach me the way.

Again, please prove your point by showing ONE link to something proving that people can beat one thousandfold the atrocities of man with the humbleness and piousness of man.

Otherwise do what you'd do in person and shut your fucking mouth. Thanks.

[Neosutra]

Wow, owned.