MesMorial wrote:
Well I am glad you admit that “idhrib” has apparently two meanings.
MesMorial wrote:Your statements about the other religions are subjective, but still I would like to know why I should be a Zoroastrian.
aralmuta wrote:The challenger is an idiot. Whats wrong with beaten women who deserve it?
I am all for beating men, women and children IF they deserve it.
ixolite wrote:aralmuta wrote:The challenger is an idiot. Whats wrong with beaten women who deserve it?
I am all for beating men, women and children IF they deserve it.
Thanks for proving once more what a devastating effect Islam has.
[modnote]
Insults against other users are against the rules.
M.
[/modnote]
aralmuta wrote:The challenger is an idiot. Whats wrong with beating women who deserve it?
I am all for beating men, women and children IF they deserve it.
freelady wrote:I think you went through such a huge amount of pain and work just to explain the word "daraba" so that the Koran fits with your own values. Would you go through the same pain for every single verse that contradicts your moral values?
However it did not shock you whatsoever that the verse is a humiliation to women by men whatever the sense of the word may be.
I find this verse and some others in the Quran appalling, they only reflect one thing, the wish of men to dominate women.
I am wondering if you would be able to fully adhere to Islam if the verse was addressed to women about men.
antineoETC wrote:Hi Mesomorial, just in case you missed the thread I started over here OVER HERE if you'd care to give your 2 cents.
freelady wrote:
Another reason possibly women like Islam is that Islam encourages women to stay at home and not work, the husband has to work and spend for the household. So for women who are lazy and do not believe in themselves, this is an attractive option. This is also a good option for women who want to preserve their wealth, whatever money they make or have they can keep. These women just hope that men would behave themselves and not use their brutal islamic rights: beating, divorcing, marrying other women.
darth wrote:........
Until such a time, creative reinterpretation such as memorial's are doomed to failed.
ringmaster wrote:Surely you jest. You call Mesmorial's diatribes "creative"?????
They are nothing more than Taquiya. He knows damn well what the ugly verses mean. He is trying to be some sort of wordsmith to make them appear to be something else.
darth wrote:ringmaster wrote:Surely you jest. You call Mesmorial's diatribes "creative"?????
They are nothing more than Taquiya. He knows damn well what the ugly verses mean. He is trying to be some sort of wordsmith to make them appear to be something else.
Well, I think mess is trying to be a reformist of the irshad manji mold. And even if their methods are faulty and doomed to failure, I cannot doubt that they (the reformists) are sincere.
ringmaster wrote:I have been to one of Irshad Manji's events. Asking her the sorts of questions to make her look like the lying servant of satan that she is was child's play for me.
darth wrote:ringmaster wrote:I have been to one of Irshad Manji's events. Asking her the sorts of questions to make her look like the lying servant of satan that she is was child's play for me.
Do you have details of your encounter? What were your questions and how did she answer them? Why did you conclude that she is insincere?
ringmaster wrote:She was playing the "koran-only" game that Mesmorial likes to play. So I asked her some preliminary questions about whether she believed the koran was the final word of god, applicable to all mankind, for all time & for all places. When I stuck her on the violent medina verses she tried to argue "historical context", which point I said she was contradicting herself.
darth wrote:ringmaster wrote:She was playing the "koran-only" game that Mesmorial likes to play. So I asked her some preliminary questions about whether she believed the koran was the final word of god, applicable to all mankind, for all time & for all places. When I stuck her on the violent medina verses she tried to argue "historical context", which point I said she was contradicting herself.
I have heard her say (on T.V and youtube, never met her in person) that she does not think the quran is divinely authored, merely divinely inspired.
That leaves scope in her mind, I suppose, for reinterpretation. I have emailed her before with similar questions but have never received any response.
BTW, are you an apostate?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest