Firstly, If you had actually read my post, you would have noticed that nowhere did I claim that your “mode of clothing is what defines my thought process, belief system, sexuality or fostering of a rabid desire to murder by suicide bombing”.
There’s no need to recoil in defensive posturing. Read and understand what I wrote.
It’s a rational argument to make that the black sack can be considered a symbol of gender apartheid and oppression.
Again the black sack ... I shall treat that in the same way I treated Bobx's referal to me as a "lump in a bag" with utter disdain. It is designed to be offensive so don't be surprised when I am offended by it.
A black sack is something designed to put garbage into, I may be many dreadful things but rubbish is not one of them.
Oh dear I am oppressed again
Visit the KSA and demand your right to walk down the street without your “protective outerwear”.
I have no right to demand any such thing for two reasons:
1) I am visiting a foreign land and in such it is only polite and proper to follow the old saying when in rome do as the romans do. My alternative choice is not to visit there. If I smuggle drugs to Thailand I should expect to be shot and if I walk in the streets of KSA half naked I should expect to be removed from the public domain.
2) My faith requires me to dress as I do, I therefore have no right or desire to demand to dress otherwise.
Now go there and sit with Muslim women and tell them they have the right to remove their outer clothing .. see how long it takes them to tell you where to go with your daft western ideas.
This is one problem with western beliefs about Islamic society, people in the west believe Muslim women are forced to dress that way by men and are secretly just dying to rip off their clothes, don a bikini, let their hair flow in the breeze and get a sun tan .... sorry to be the bearer of bad news but they are not and no amount of western posturing about "womens lib" is going to change that.
Further, I’ll be glad to comment on the Western propaganda you may be misinformed regarding.
Oh please do, I am all ears (well eyes in this case).
Declaring that one is explicitly free to make personal decisions about the religious faith they embrace is a hallmark of Western liberal democracy.
Ah yes, western liberal democracy .. leading the UK to recently outlaw Catholic adoption agencies refusing homosexual couples adoption of Catholic children. We also now see in the UK convicted criminals suing their victims and winning. Brilliant idea, be so liberal that your moral standards or beliefs and personal safety have to be compromised and your so called freedom suddenly doesn't include freedom of choice, thought or act.
Is this also the western liberal democracy that is banning in many countries the wearing of a strip of cloth on a womans head .. in a democratic society should we not have the right to dress as we please?
It was also liberal western democracy that decided to import Islamic extremism into the UK. In the early 80's Arab countries were rounding up radicals when in galloped the fluffy UK to protect their human rights and offer them safe haven and a place to teach their vile hatred. I often wonder how many deaths could have been prevented if the UK had just minded it's own business and the US in it's greed for oil removed it's support for the Saudi regime that breeds this radical extremism. I think you can keep liberal western democracy thanks all the same.
In the free world, we often call forced religion eccentric or hateful or even totalitarian.
And I would agree with you entirely (although my above comments make me wonder why you refer to it as the free world), there is no compulsion in religion according to the Quran. The idea of killing an apostate would never cross my mind and my belief is that the Prophet Mohamad (pbuh) only killed aspostates where treason against the Ummah was involved.
Unfortunately some things are hard to move on from, like the slave trade and racial segregation that went on in the US. How many years did the general population accept it's wrongs and yet your laws stood firm? We have the same issue here and most Muslim countries deal with it by simply declaring the apostate insane, therefore no punishment is required.
There are voices within Islamic scholarship that over the centuries have tried to challenge this belief, the Sheikh Ali Gomaa, Grand Mufti at Al Azhar Cairo, has said apostasy should be legal, leaving punishment to Allah in the aterlife.
As yet these voices have not won the day but I am hopeful they will one day.
Apostacy is mentioned in the Quran 20 times and not one time is the death penalty called for .. Inshallah one day we will catch up.
I have not lived in any Middle Eastern nation. I have spent time in two Middle Eastern nations during the Gulf War, one of those places being the KSA. The place is a hell hole.
Certainly not a place I would like to go to other than for Hajj as most Muslim nations people just shake their heads when they read about the crazy goings on there.
It goes a long way to explaining your beliefs about Muslims though, particularly about women.
I will certainly hold your politico-religious ideology accountable for the terrorists it spawns. That’s not unfair.
Of course it is unfair. Most of the current attacks are Muslims attacking other Muslims, so how can the teachings of the faith be blamed for that when it is strictly forbidden to kill another Muslim?
Consider the Friday hate fests authored by Islam’s sheiks in the KSA, for one example, their enablers and supporters, and their inspirational messages of infidel hating,
I listen to the Friday teachings from the local mosque ever week. Last week was about treating your wife kindly, there has also been treating your mother kindly, your husband, poor people, etc. The only time I have heard vitriolic hatred was during the mass murder of civilians committed in Lebanon and then Gaza .. I can hardly blame them for that.
“Captain Hook” in the UK and his lovely, endearing messages,
If I have a rabid dog I want to kill and the liberal west steps in as an animal loving nation to save him, is it my fault or the fault of my faith when he bites you?
As I said above had the Arab nations been left to deal with him and his minions the world would never have heard about him, let alone been victim to or infected by his hatred. The liberal west may see it as a human rights issue, we see it as you wanted him and by god you got him so don't complain to us now.
From the nearly daily occurrences of Islamic terrorism we can derive patterns of behavior.
Can you tell me where these near daily occurrences are and don't mention Pakistan, Afghanistan or Wahabbists because they are targeting other Muslims in general.
The sheiks, muftis, clerics, mosque leaders in the West who exploit our Western freedoms to spread their message of hate for the infidel derive their hate from somewhere. Where do you think that somewhere is?
In large part it comes from the ultra conservative Wahhabi sect (based in the Arabian peninsula) .. pretty much the equivalent to the ultra right zionists that believe everyone but their gang is scum. They fund Osama and his cronies, fund the radical clerics that go to the west, the 9/11 attackers were largely Wahhabi, they controlled the Taliban take over of Afghanistan and their leaders are by and large a bunch of nutters.
Let us take the current terrorist attacks on Muslims by Wahabbi Muslims. Islam expressly forbids the taking of a Muslims life other than as state punishment for serious crimes. We are also not allowed to judge the level of another Muslims faith. However the Wahabbi say that everyone not a Wahabbi has stepped outside of Islam, is therefore an apostate and fair game.
Islam also permits Muslim men to marry Christian and Jewish women but in Wahabbi funded schools children are taught they cannot even be friends with a Jew, they are infidels and the main enemy of Islam.
From 1801-1804 they massacred both Sunni and Shia Muslims in various countries in the ME, then captured Mecca, where they destroyed many religious monuments .. it is said they intended to destroy the grave of the Prophet Mohamad (pbuh) himself.
How did they get such a toe hold in the west since 1975 ... oil wealth, that enables them to fund their 'ideals'.
If my husband and I went to KSA we would be treated with as much distain as you would be, we are Sunni, from Egypt (therefore not of tribal blood) and are classed as apostates because we are not Wahabbi.
Now in saying all of that there are conflicting ideologies and theologies within
the Wahhabi sect. To say they are all bad is like saying all Muslims believe the same thing or act the same way or that all Americans do.
Their main beliefs are that Islam 300 years after the death of the Prophet became infected with pre-Islamic ideas (worshiping saints, praying at graves, ritual animal slaughter, not caring for widows and orphans etc) and to a large extent I can agree with them but unfortunately there is a dark element within the sect that must be defeated .. not by force but by dialogue and education.
It has everything to do with ENFORCING culture and opinions and calling it Islam. Therefore, is Islam to blame for this?. Should Islam carry the burden of its supposed 'adherents'? Yes, of course.
How can you accept that it is everything to do with enforcing culture and opinions and calling it Islam and then say Islam is to blame for this?
Eyptians still practice the revolting mulitlation of girls genitals (FGM) which has been performed here since pharaonic times, there are religious men here that use one single hadith to support it as an Islamic necessity. It is now illegal unless it is a medical necessity and yet it still goes on ... however it is the only ME country that performs this barbarity .. not even the oppressive Wahabbi's do it and they think of women as little more than property. So does that make it Islamic, is Islam to blame for that too?
