Sassun Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 Sassun, how often is a wife beaten or raped by her husband in Iran? Do you know? Are those kinds of statistics even available? Sip , here's the difference, i am not saying that these things do not happen in Muslim societies , but they are not a function of Islam. If they were a function of Islam , then what explains that this is a widespread phenomenon ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 Sip , here's the difference, i am not saying that these things do not happen in Muslim societies , but they are not a function of Islam. If they were a function of Islam , then what explains that this is a widespread phenomenon ? It shows that religion has failed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sassun Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 It shows that religion has failed. So now rape is a function of religion ? I dare say the most notorious rapists have been anything but religious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 Sip , here's the difference, i am not saying that these things do not happen in Muslim societies , but they are not a function of Islam. If they were a function of Islam , then what explains that this is a widespread phenomenon ? It is neither the function of any civilised society. Rape is a criminal offense in all secularistic nations in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymouse Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 An interesting quote from Winston Churchill: How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinment; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of Ancient Rome. We can further add to the stunted growth of Islam in its lack of exploration in the sciences. Oh yea sure, we have always heard how Muslims established the first pharmacies, or establish the first hospital in Baghdad, or recorded alot of the science and philosophy of the Greeks and passed it on, but that is beside the point. Yet amid all this, the one person who could be said to have paved the greatest headway in terms of modern medical advancement was a Belgian physician named Andreas Vesalius by publishing the first accurate description of the internal organs inside the human body, in De Humani Corporis Fabrica in 1543. The reason for this is because he was able to dissect the human body and study inside, while this was a forbbiden practice in Islam. The book was also filled with detailed drawings of the human anatomy, strangely enough, another forbidden thing in Islam to represent the human body artistically. What apology do you have for this Sassun? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 So now rape is a function of religion ? I dare say the most notorious rapists have been anything but religious. It's not a function of religion. Don't act like a two-year-old and pretend that you don't understand something when it doesn't suit you. Your behavior in this forum is pretty obvious The function of religion is to guide the masses about how to behave and live their life. It sets forth specific rules that one has to follow in their life. Religion has failed. It never worked and it never will work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 So now rape is a function of religion ? It is when the ruling body of a country interprets the religion to that end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 Sassun, I am not saying the US doesn't have problems. It does. But at least its system is designed to protect it's members. If a woman is beaten by anyone, including her husband, she can get a lawyer and sue. She can get a police order to keep the abuser away. Does abuse still go on? Sure. But it is not "allowed" under the system. Of course I will be the first to admit the system in the us is not perfect. But comared to the system in Iran, it is better. According to whom? According to me. I can't speak for anyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 Read this and tell me where you disagree. http://www.maryamnamazie.com/articles/on_b...mbols_veil.html BTW Sassun, I think everyone wants you to answer Yervant question. I don't have time to go into this in detail, but from a quick look all I find are gross generalizations and utter naivety. No, it does not convince me at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sassun Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 An interesting quote from Winston Churchill: How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinment; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of Ancient Rome. We can further add to the stunted growth of Islam in its lack of exploration in the sciences. Oh yea sure, we have always heard how Muslims established the first pharmacies, or establish the first hospital in Baghdad, or recorded alot of the science and philosophy of the Greeks and passed it on, but that is beside the point. Yet amid all this, the one person who could be said to have paved the greatest headway in terms of modern medical advancement was a Belgian physician named Andreas Vesalius by publishing the first accurate description of the internal organs inside the human body, in De Humani Corporis Fabrica in 1543. The reason for this is because he was able to dissect the human body and study inside, while this was a forbbiden practice in Islam. The book was also filled with detailed drawings of the human anatomy, strangely enough, another forbidden thing in Islam to represent the human body artistically. What apology do you have for this Sassun? Anonymouse, you seem more like an idol-worshipper. "Apology"? get real . And you are mistaken about your arguments about Muslims' scientific contributions, and also about the drawing of human body . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymouse Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 (edited) Sassun, I am not saying the US doesn't have problems. It does. But at least its system is designed to protect it's members. If a woman is beaten by anyone, including her husband, she can get a lawyer and sue. She can get a police order to keep the abuser away. Does abuse still go on? Sure. But it is not "allowed" under the system. Of course I will be the first to admit the system in the us is not perfect. But comared to the system in Iran, it is better. According to whom? According to me. I can't speak for anyone else. Um, I think by any standards one would be foolish to think otherwise. I would much rather live in the worst part of America in the worst era, than in the best place in a Muslim country in the best era. That says everything. Edited June 13, 2007 by Anonymouse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sassun Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 It's not a function of religion. Don't act like a two-year-old and pretend that you don't understand something when it doesn't suit you. Your behavior in this forum is pretty obvious The function of religion is to guide the masses about how to behave and live their life. It sets forth specific rules that one has to follow in their life. Religion has failed. It never worked and it never will work. you are jumping from A to C , where is B? What does rape have to do with Islam ? What is the causal relationship ? And if none exists then why are you ranting about religion when I make the simple point that such societal problems - to which Anonymous referred in an attmept to badmouth Islam and hold it responsible for them - exist everywhere and there is nothing inherently or particularly "Islamic" about them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymouse Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 Anonymouse, you seem more like an idol-worshipper. "Apology"? get real . And you are mistaken about your arguments about Muslims' scientific contributions, and also about the drawing of human body . Yet more dodging the issue. Nothing new with you. The old is the new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sassun Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 (edited) Yet more dodging the issue. Nothing new with you. The old is the new. I am not dodging any issue. You presented none. You are quoting people who have no understanding of Islam. And even if they do, their word is not the word of God. At least not my God. You seem to have a great many idols. Idolatry is not what academia is all about. Who is dodging? You are dodging. Going on the offensive and accusing me of dodging issues and turning this accusation into մատի բաթոց will not change anything from the reality. Edited June 13, 2007 by Sassun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 you are jumping from A to C , where is B? What does rape have to do with Islam ? What is the causal relationship ? And if none exists then why are you ranting about religion when I make the simple point that such societal problems - to which Anonymous referred in an attmept to badmouth Islam and hold it responsible for them - exist everywhere and there is nothing inherently or particularly "Islamic" about them. Islam is a religion. I didn't single out Islam regarding rape. In the contrary, I say that religion prohibits destructive behavior in society thus also prohibits rape. But rape and other crimes persist, thus religion - including Islam - has failed. This the only point I was making. But since you've brought on the question "what does rape have to do with Islam" I'll go ahead and say that the way the religion Islam is set up it encourages men to be violent toward women because women are regarded as inferior to men. You draw the conclusion about what rape has to do with Islam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 An interesting quote from Winston Churchill: Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. I think this says enough about what Churchill valued in what he considered to be a "good" human being. As for science: if Islamic countries are so retarded, why is it that nuclear testing in Iran is causing so much disturbance to the mighty West? Not to mention Saddam's supposed weapons of mass destruction. Is that not why America decided to invade Iraq? Or how about the Anthrax scare? Were the culprits not supposedly related to Al Qaida's troupes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymouse Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 I think this says enough about what Churchill valued in what he considered to be a "good" human being. As for science: if Islamic countries are so retarded, why is it that nuclear testing in Iran is causing so much disturbance to the mighty West? Not to mention Saddam's supposed weapons of mass destruction. Is that not why America decided to invade Iraq? Or how about the Anthrax scare? Were the culprits not supposedly related to Al Qaida's troupes? The point is in the context. And I was under the impression that nuclear weapons are against Islam, or am I missing something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted June 14, 2007 Report Share Posted June 14, 2007 The point is in the context. Yes, and the context is also full of shit. And I was under the impression that nuclear weapons are against Islam, or am I missing something? There are many things that are against Islam. That doesn't mean that they don't occur in Islamic countries, such as Iran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymouse Posted June 14, 2007 Report Share Posted June 14, 2007 (edited) Yes, and the context is also full of shit. Because you personally do not like it, does not disqualify it. You don't like many things in the way the world is but that doesn't absolve anything. There are many things that are against Islam. That doesn't mean that they don't occur in Islamic countries, such as Iran. And what does comparing the present state of world - where science is generally known and shared throughout the world since it's more linked and interconnected now than ever before - to those good ole medieval times, do for your argument? Nothing. I really truly love the fact that you will always find my posts and single them out and respond to them in an attempt to discredit them because my presence really makes you irate. Few times in existence can we have such impacts on people, and I think this qualifies. Good day Dutchess from Holland. Edited June 14, 2007 by Anonymouse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted June 14, 2007 Report Share Posted June 14, 2007 Because you personally do not like it, does not disqualify it. It has nothing to do with my personal preferences, and everything with Churchill's laughable biases. And what does comparing the present state of world - where science is generally known and shared throughout the world since it's more linked and interconnected now than ever before - to those good ole medieval times, do for your argument? Nothing. What about the good old medieval times? Your ignorance of Middle Eastern history, including the Armenian one, comes from the fact that you have put your entire trust and faith in Eurocentricism. I really truly love the fact that you will always find my posts and single them out and respond to them in an attempt to discredit them because my presence really makes you irate. Few times in existence can we have such impacts on people, and I think this qualifies. Good day Dutchess from Holland. I couldn't care less about your presence. But when someone spews misinformation, I give myself the freedom to expose it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymouse Posted June 14, 2007 Report Share Posted June 14, 2007 It has nothing to do with my personal preferences, and everything with Churchill's laughable biases. What about the good old medieval times? Your ignorance of Middle Eastern history, including the Armenian one, comes from the fact that you have put your entire trust and faith in Eurocentricism. I couldn't care less about your presence. But when someone spews misinformation, I give myself the freedom to expose it. Well, it's popular in internet discussions when one person's views are so infuriating to make sweeping statements such as "I'm right, and you're wrong" or in this case, "You are ignorant". I can do the same to you, but what's the point? We both know you will not admit your ignorance and just feign innocence and shift the burden on the opposing side as you just did, and as Sassun did earlier. It's commonplace among plebian minds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted June 14, 2007 Report Share Posted June 14, 2007 Well, it's popular in internet discussions when one person's views are so infuriating to make sweeping statements such as "I'm right, and you're wrong" or in this case, "You are ignorant". You're so infuriating. I'm about to burst. All I think about day and night is how infuriating you are. Now, get off your high horse and start reading some Eastern material, instead of relying solely on Euro-American sources. Speaking of otaramolutyun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sassun Posted June 14, 2007 Report Share Posted June 14, 2007 (edited) Islam is a religion. I didn't single out Islam regarding rape. In the contrary, I say that religion prohibits destructive behavior in society thus also prohibits rape. But rape and other crimes persist, thus religion - including Islam - has failed. This the only point I was making. But since you've brought on the question "what does rape have to do with Islam" I'll go ahead and say that the way the religion Islam is set up it encourages men to be violent toward women because women are regarded as inferior to men. You draw the conclusion about what rape has to do with Islam. No, it is not a failure. Human beings are not perfect. We are fallible. Religions enable people to strive towards limiting evil and bad thoughts/actions, and doing good. Religion is not about applying something to a formula and getting some sort of expected result. It is an ongoing process, a struggle (or to use the dreaded word, "Jihad"). So every day and every single occasion is an opportunity to fight evil and struggle against temptations. That is the reality that we live in. There is undeniably evil. But that evil is not eliminated does not say anything about the "success" or "failure" of religions. For starters, such an argument cannot be made since you have other elements and factors co-existing with religion in a certain society. In other words, not every individual in a particular society is religious. So, if you want to say that religion has failed, you'd have to make sure to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the things you base your assessment of failure on , is actually not the result of non-religious currents. Unless of course your point is that religion has failed since it has not swept through societies completely and has not eliminated non-religiosity. In which case, I'll have to say, that yes, religion has not taken over completely. However, that is not the failure of religion. That "failure", if anything, is the result of the forces that are fighting religion. And so-called Western "secularism", which is not really secularism at all, is one of those forces, working in tandem with the forces that have hijacked religion and who perpetrate murder and terror in its name. Edited June 14, 2007 by Sassun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted June 14, 2007 Report Share Posted June 14, 2007 ... forces that have hijacked religion and who perpetrate murder and terror in its name. I know exactly what you mean. There are far too many people in the world today killing in the name of Allah and Jesus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sassun Posted June 14, 2007 Report Share Posted June 14, 2007 I know exactly what you mean. There are far too many people in the world today killing in the name of Allah and Jesus. Finally we agree on something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.