I take it you will be citing the correct places to find out what the average practice of Islam is based on some sort of reasonable average recommendation from sort of reasonably accepted leader?
You got a well-respected mullah who is reasonably widely followed that you would like to cite as the place to go for advice on how Islam expects women to dress?
And you are making an idiot of yourself working in your ridiculous ad hominen attack regarding my “knowledge of the africans and the genetics.” As I recall, over in that thread you also had not a shred of reasoned argumentation. Just a heap of irrelevant inanity.
Anyway, feel free to pull a mullah out of your ass, or off of internet, or wherever, that you think supports a position that Islam does not treat how women dress with a heavy, invasive hand.
Post a cite, please. Simply mocking another poster without offering alternative evidence in the hope that bluster substitutes for debate is pitiful. Vapid, even.
For pity’s sake…the fact that the Old (and to a lesser extent, the New) Testaments have idiotic, lame-ass passages supporting horrible positions has nothing to do with whether or not Islam does.
What is different, on average, is that western democratic nations have largely moved past that religious bullshit, especially when it comes to personal freedoms, and freedom for women. Islamic majority (and other developing countries with all sorts of religious mixes) have not.
Why not call it out as a socioeconomic issue than, vs blaming random mythologies. From this post you may as well be blaming the latitude a person is from as it would be a more reliable evaluation.
It is quite clear that you cannot establish a correlation or causative link between their faith and some arbitrary level of badness let alone use it to explain why Americans are so islamophobic. As according to your above post a muslim american and a mennonite american should be equal right?
With respect to the effort to coerce women’s behavior and dress, yes.
I note that in practice Mennonites more or less just kick you out or shun you; the Islamic community has been much more punitive toward rebellious women, on average.
But as far as just holding a position that bosses around women, they seem pretty equivalent to me.
While this guy is a jerk, speaking out a hole is his arse and displaying remarkable ignorance, there IS something in what he says as regards the standards expected in those countries.
I live here, I have seen it. Anecdote is not data, but I have seen Muslim workmates too scared to eat lunch during Ramadhan (during their period) because of what others would say, I have seen my colleague expect his daughters to wear a headscarf, I have spoken to the supermarket cashier who, at 7 months pregnant was trying to fast.
You simply don’t see Malay women in skimpy clothes - and what you do see between Singapore and Malaysia is markedly different. Singapore is determinedly secular while Malaysia is (unofficially but unabashedly Islamic) - other than this the cultures are very very similar, yet the clothing is noticeably different.
It’s not nearly as socioeconomic as it is religious. Western nations have moved religion to the sphere of holiday traditions and private worship. Islam-majority nations–even incredibly wealthy ones like Saudi Arabia–are oppressive because they use their religious tenets to govern society.
Like the Old Testaments Mosaic law and extension of it into daily practice, Islam sucks when it comes to allowing individual freedom of expression. It is particularly horrible to apostates seeking to escape it. There is no parallel for that in the western developed world, and the difference is not “socioeconomic.” The difference is actually putting Islam into practice versus putting the OT into a back corner bookshelf.
Huh, if only there were some clothing options between “niqab” and “thong bikini”.
Oh, wait…
Your cite was to a Saudi cleric’s Wahabbiyya website. The Saudis and other Wahabbis follow the Hanbali school, the most conservative of the four Sunni schools of law. They’re the only school which rules that women have to cover their faces. The Hanafi and Maliki schools do not (the Shafis are split).
Men in the Hanafi and Hanbali schools only have to cover between their navels and their knees, but in the Maliki school men are to cover everything but the head and their arms when in the presence of unrelated women (and the Shafis don’t allow for even that exception).
Men should cover their heads during prayer, and it is mustahabb (recommended) that men cover their heads at other times. It is forbidden for women to cover their faces and for men to cover their heads during the hajj in Mecca.
Ummm…then why have there been WAY more terrorist attacks in the US from Christian religious wackos and why do we have so many anti-science laws being passed in every state of the union.
Heck we an ongoing had an act of sedition with a threat of violence in Oregon from a bunch of Christian extremists.
Did you not watch the Republican POTUS debates? Your argument just doesn’t hold water.
First, let’s see some actual data showing that most terrorist attacks are carried out by white Christians.
Second, are you going to tell us that the percentage of terror attacks by Muslims is right around the percentage of Muslims in the US population as a whole? That would be between 1 and 2%, right?
Except nobody has made such a claim. You’re better off comparing the Christian communities in Nigeria to Muslim communities in Nigeria.
You’ll notice how lots of people think of the Episcopal Church of the US and the Anglican Church in the UK as great examples of “moderate Christianity”.
You’ll notice however that Peter Akinola, the Anglican Primate of Nigeria is hardly a moderate and has vastly more in common with his Muslim counterparts in Nigeria than he is like Justin Welby, the current Archbishop of Canterbury.
What we notice is that none of the religious leaders in the Episcopal or Anglican Church are issuing fatwas or going bat shit crazy over cartoons and movies.
And the Westboro Baptist Church or how about Larry McQuilliam’s connection to the Phineas Priesthood concept? Or are you claiming the Baitul Futuh Mosque issued a fatwas, if so please provide a cite.
A fatwah is nothing more than a legal instruction, (such as the various fatwhs issued by several thousand imams condemning Daesh, al Qaida, the Taliban and similar groups as terrorists and ordering people to not join or support them.
We do see Anglican bishops issuing instructions and the fact that they are not issued in Arabic with the label fatwah does not make them less of legal instructions.
Absolutely this,
Basically ANY mosque can issue a fatwa, and as much as any individual Iman issues stupid fatwas, we can equally find stupid priests / pastors making stupid pronouncements from the pulpit
I know that the 1990 book, Vigilantes of Christendom: The Story of the Phineas Priesthood by Richard Kelly Hoskins was a christian equivalent and has resulted in multiple bombings and the November 28, 2014 attack in Austin.
So either come back with evidence broadly implicating all muslim leaders calling for violence or have the decency to admit that it is not a problem only in Islam.
Of course what we should really be looking at are worldwide numbers for deaths and attacks, but there we have a slight problem with propaganda. Their attacks are terrorism, while ours are either “preemptive defensive strikes”, or “liberating the oppressed”, or “targeted strikes on known insurgents”, or whatever else you care to pass it off as. But if you happened to be a relative of one of the people we’ve killed out there, do you reckon you’d see that distinction as valid?
But we have to try to stick to that argument, because if we just listed actual death figures on each side, that would rather blow the “MOOZLIMS ARE T EVIL” narrative out of the water, wouldn’t it? Hell, let’s just pick one example of a country where we’ve been busy liberating: