The Majority Of Brexit's Impact On...
News0 min ago
Go Muslims!
65 Answers
Islam encourages righteousness and opposes evil. It supports traditional family values and stands against promiscuity and immorality. We need something to fill the spiritual and moral void here, so I respect Islam. Do I have a point?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by JockSporran. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Adulterer is usually a person who has sexual relations with another person without getting married. Sex with your wife is not known as adultery. It is a primary school thing. But there is an old saying where I am from.
Clever crow always lands in the ****
In simple words, people who think they are so knowledgeable and know everything, in fact they know nothing.
Sex with slave, OK read this with open mind if you do have one.
http://www.readingislam.com/servlet/Satellite? pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskA boutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE&cid=1156077761245
About Muhammed (pbuh) marriage with Ayesha (pbuh). First of all she was not the first and that last at that time who were married at that age. So many reasons and so many time have been explained. Ayesha was already engaged to someone else before that. Then is simple words Islam does not believe in digits Fro British 13 is illegal but ask the Spanish they would laugh as their legal age is 13. Who is right. Within Britain I thing age of consent is different in England and Scotland, So who is right?
And finally you read this.
http://www.ilaam.net/Articles/Ayesha.html
And I would be away for a week or so. If you get it your way then do not consider it your victory.
Clever crow always lands in the ****
In simple words, people who think they are so knowledgeable and know everything, in fact they know nothing.
Sex with slave, OK read this with open mind if you do have one.
http://www.readingislam.com/servlet/Satellite? pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskA boutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE&cid=1156077761245
About Muhammed (pbuh) marriage with Ayesha (pbuh). First of all she was not the first and that last at that time who were married at that age. So many reasons and so many time have been explained. Ayesha was already engaged to someone else before that. Then is simple words Islam does not believe in digits Fro British 13 is illegal but ask the Spanish they would laugh as their legal age is 13. Who is right. Within Britain I thing age of consent is different in England and Scotland, So who is right?
And finally you read this.
http://www.ilaam.net/Articles/Ayesha.html
And I would be away for a week or so. If you get it your way then do not consider it your victory.
A fundamentalist belief in religion is, with few honourable exceptions over the years, the enemy of reason and scientific inquiry.
Only a religion of the fearful would treat Galileo the way they did - Ignore the science when it contradicts the belief, and punish anyone who thinks differently.
Only a religion of frightened misogynists would commit burnings at the stake, or the crass hysteria of the Salem Witch trials.
Only a religion of cowards would proclaim that apostasy warrants a death sentence.
Only a religion of the craven would pronounce a fatwah on an author of fiction because it is - boohoo! - blasphemous to the prophet.
Only a religion of gutless men would continue to relegate women to a subservient role.
Only a religion of the faint-hearted would sacrifice its own young in order to kill or maim non believers.
Are your respective gods so weak, feeble and inconsequential that the only way they can cope with criticism or non belief is to encourage their followers to destroy and suppress?
Only fundamentalist religious believers want to censor educational curricula to ensure their stoneage belief structure is passed through to the next generation unchallenged.
Religions always exhibit a wilful disregard of fact s when they conflict with their faith. Its taken until the 21st century for the Pope to finally issue a weaselly worded statement saying that the theory of evolution is "compatible with faith!" 200 years of denial and obfuscation. I wonder how long it will take before they finally admit that condoms can play a part in restricting the spread of sexually transmissable diseases?
-ctd-
Only a religion of the fearful would treat Galileo the way they did - Ignore the science when it contradicts the belief, and punish anyone who thinks differently.
Only a religion of frightened misogynists would commit burnings at the stake, or the crass hysteria of the Salem Witch trials.
Only a religion of cowards would proclaim that apostasy warrants a death sentence.
Only a religion of the craven would pronounce a fatwah on an author of fiction because it is - boohoo! - blasphemous to the prophet.
Only a religion of gutless men would continue to relegate women to a subservient role.
Only a religion of the faint-hearted would sacrifice its own young in order to kill or maim non believers.
Are your respective gods so weak, feeble and inconsequential that the only way they can cope with criticism or non belief is to encourage their followers to destroy and suppress?
Only fundamentalist religious believers want to censor educational curricula to ensure their stoneage belief structure is passed through to the next generation unchallenged.
Religions always exhibit a wilful disregard of fact s when they conflict with their faith. Its taken until the 21st century for the Pope to finally issue a weaselly worded statement saying that the theory of evolution is "compatible with faith!" 200 years of denial and obfuscation. I wonder how long it will take before they finally admit that condoms can play a part in restricting the spread of sexually transmissable diseases?
-ctd-
-ctd-
As for morality? Much alleged immorality is only immoral in the eyes of the religious - but to suggest that all humanity would be running around murdering , pillaging and raping if it wasn't for the restraining influence of god is absurd, and shows how little faith the religious have in humanity.
Religion is a developmental shackle, and the sooner this childish belief in the supernatural fizzles out the better, as I am sure those London commuters on 7/7 or the WTC office workers on 9/11 would agree.
As for morality? Much alleged immorality is only immoral in the eyes of the religious - but to suggest that all humanity would be running around murdering , pillaging and raping if it wasn't for the restraining influence of god is absurd, and shows how little faith the religious have in humanity.
Religion is a developmental shackle, and the sooner this childish belief in the supernatural fizzles out the better, as I am sure those London commuters on 7/7 or the WTC office workers on 9/11 would agree.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Keyplus Adulterer is usually a person who has sexual relations with another person without getting married. Sex with your wife is not known as adultery.
Just an afterthought. It seems you haven't understood the first part of my post concerning the supposedly exemplary life of Mohammed. Although married to many wives, Mohammed also had several concubines, and he had sex with his slaves. That makes him an adulterer. Is that clearer?
Just an afterthought. It seems you haven't understood the first part of my post concerning the supposedly exemplary life of Mohammed. Although married to many wives, Mohammed also had several concubines, and he had sex with his slaves. That makes him an adulterer. Is that clearer?
JockSporran.....which 'civilisation' would that be, then? The one which has drive-by shootings, pimps, gangsters, robberies for drug money, alcohol-related deaths, sexually transmitted diseases, teenage pregnancies and children subjected to sex, violence and filthy language on TV?
All the above apply equally to muslims. Alson, add public hanging/torture/flogging/suicide-bombings to muslim felonies.
All the above apply equally to muslims. Alson, add public hanging/torture/flogging/suicide-bombings to muslim felonies.
No Naomi. Mohammed wasn't an adulterer. Slaves are not real people but objects in a man's possession.
If the woman slave slept with another man that would be adultury. She would be stoned to death and the owner of the slave would apologise to the man for the transgression committted upon him by the slave. Even if he raped her. She should not have provoked him by being alone.
If the woman slave slept with another man that would be adultury. She would be stoned to death and the owner of the slave would apologise to the man for the transgression committted upon him by the slave. Even if he raped her. She should not have provoked him by being alone.
Naomi- Mohammed never had any concubines or slaves. However may be I am not aware of that so if you believe he had then please give me any reputable reference from the history. Did you read that link about sex with slave? If you haven't then go and read history again and see that Muslims eradicated slavery from the society long before any other parts of the world. And that was due to the rights given to slave women and their children. Otherwise I am sure people used to have sex with slaves before and even after that.
My little birdie- OK forget about that link I gave as you do not like logical reasons as your little brain is just stuck on few things. So for argument sake I will agree with your pint about her age. Can you give any reference where anyone objected at that time about Muhammad�s marriage to Ayesha (pbuh) and if he was the first and the last to have done that. After all if someone has done something unusual in any society then obviously few people must have spoken about that. Otherwise perhaps you need to read a bit more history. Here is the list of Muhammad (pbuh) wives. Most of them were widows or had been married to someone before. Let me know how many of them would fit in the category you described?
http://www.answering-christianity.com/wives.ht m
In the end I am not worried if none of this would make any difference for you two as my answers to your questions are more for the others than you. It is known as rebuttal in simple words.
My little birdie- OK forget about that link I gave as you do not like logical reasons as your little brain is just stuck on few things. So for argument sake I will agree with your pint about her age. Can you give any reference where anyone objected at that time about Muhammad�s marriage to Ayesha (pbuh) and if he was the first and the last to have done that. After all if someone has done something unusual in any society then obviously few people must have spoken about that. Otherwise perhaps you need to read a bit more history. Here is the list of Muhammad (pbuh) wives. Most of them were widows or had been married to someone before. Let me know how many of them would fit in the category you described?
http://www.answering-christianity.com/wives.ht m
In the end I am not worried if none of this would make any difference for you two as my answers to your questions are more for the others than you. It is known as rebuttal in simple words.
Keyplus, you want reputable references? What would they be then? Anything you agree with? You were given the ultimate reputable reference when you wrongly maintained that Mohammed is mentioned in the bible - the bible itself - and yet you still insist he is.
However, since you've provided us with what you see as reputable information, albeit from an anonymous source, allow me to present an alternate view. Muslim scholar and statesman Ali Dashti gives the following list of the women in Mohammad's life:
1. Khadija
2. Sawda
3. Aesha
4.Omm Salama
5. Hafsa
6. Zaynab (of Jahsh)
7. Jowayriya
8. Omm Habiba
9. Safiya
10. Maymuna (of Hareth
11. Fatema
12. Hend
13. Asthma (of Saba)
14. Zaynab (of Khozayma
15. Habla
16. Asthma (of Noman)
17. Mary (the Christian)
18. Rayhana
19. Omm Sharik
20. Maymuna
21. Zaynab (a third one)
22. Khawla
The first 16 women were wives, numbers 17 and 18 were slaves or concubines. The last four women were neither wives or slaves but devout Muslim women who "gave" themselves to satisfy Muhammad's sexual desires.
Incidentally, Ali Dashti also argued that the Koran contains nothing new in the sense of ideas not already expressed by others, and believed that the stories in it are taken in identical or slightly modified forms from the lore of the Jews and the Christians - and I agree with him.
Don't expect he goes down too well with you though.
However, since you've provided us with what you see as reputable information, albeit from an anonymous source, allow me to present an alternate view. Muslim scholar and statesman Ali Dashti gives the following list of the women in Mohammad's life:
1. Khadija
2. Sawda
3. Aesha
4.Omm Salama
5. Hafsa
6. Zaynab (of Jahsh)
7. Jowayriya
8. Omm Habiba
9. Safiya
10. Maymuna (of Hareth
11. Fatema
12. Hend
13. Asthma (of Saba)
14. Zaynab (of Khozayma
15. Habla
16. Asthma (of Noman)
17. Mary (the Christian)
18. Rayhana
19. Omm Sharik
20. Maymuna
21. Zaynab (a third one)
22. Khawla
The first 16 women were wives, numbers 17 and 18 were slaves or concubines. The last four women were neither wives or slaves but devout Muslim women who "gave" themselves to satisfy Muhammad's sexual desires.
Incidentally, Ali Dashti also argued that the Koran contains nothing new in the sense of ideas not already expressed by others, and believed that the stories in it are taken in identical or slightly modified forms from the lore of the Jews and the Christians - and I agree with him.
Don't expect he goes down too well with you though.
Oh so as I thought. Your reputable historian is someone who was born in 1894. Only because he said things that few people like to hear so he became reputable in your eyes. In that case don't forget this one,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Rushdie
and of course Ali Sina has huge contributions to Islamic history (written a bit late),
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_Freedom_Int ernational
And I am sure there are so many in this world who do say things but have no solid historical evidence so why not add few more in the list you have given.
23. Naomi Campbell
24. Elizabeth Taylor
25. Queen Victoria
26. Diana Ross
27. Diana the princess of Wales (available to many)
After all it may deceive few as these are just names with numbers.
But finally do not forget to answer the question I asked as that is the basic principle of debate. To save you time, I will repeat it again.
What did you find logically wrong in the link I gave you about sex with slave?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Rushdie
and of course Ali Sina has huge contributions to Islamic history (written a bit late),
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_Freedom_Int ernational
And I am sure there are so many in this world who do say things but have no solid historical evidence so why not add few more in the list you have given.
23. Naomi Campbell
24. Elizabeth Taylor
25. Queen Victoria
26. Diana Ross
27. Diana the princess of Wales (available to many)
After all it may deceive few as these are just names with numbers.
But finally do not forget to answer the question I asked as that is the basic principle of debate. To save you time, I will repeat it again.
What did you find logically wrong in the link I gave you about sex with slave?
And yes one more thing. Your Ali Dashti could not understand a basic thing. Quran has few things similar to the books sent before that as it came from the same source. For example if Bible says human race started from one person known as Adam then Quran is not going to say no it evolved from monkeys. However if Quran said the same then according to your Ali Dashti Muhammed copied it. Humen before Muhammed had two legs (most of them) even after it is the same case. So God of Muhammed even copied that from the God of Jesus and Moses.
Christians do not have any satisfactory answer to this, so perhaps you should have a go Naomi. And tell me who these prophecies are about.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/ahmed_de edat_moh_in_bible.htm
Christians do not have any satisfactory answer to this, so perhaps you should have a go Naomi. And tell me who these prophecies are about.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/ahmed_de edat_moh_in_bible.htm
Hard to take, eh, Keyplus? A reputable source that you don�t agree with. Funny that. I knew you wouldn�t. Does the fact that Ali Dashti was born in 1894 make him any less reputable then? After all, the source you�re so fond of quoting was born several hundred years before him - and he wasn�t a scholar!
I read your link the first time, and it�s irrelevant. You are telling me that Mohammed didn�t have any concubines or slaves, but like it or not, he very clearly, did - and he had sex with them.
And Keyplus, your disrespectful remark about Princess Diana shows you up for what you really are. Well done.
I read your link the first time, and it�s irrelevant. You are telling me that Mohammed didn�t have any concubines or slaves, but like it or not, he very clearly, did - and he had sex with them.
And Keyplus, your disrespectful remark about Princess Diana shows you up for what you really are. Well done.
