It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Islam is Right About Women

page: 10
47
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2019 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: blueman12

IDK, compare the USA to saudi arabia and let me know. Compare israel to iran and get back to me. The evidence is there, can your eyes see it?




posted on Sep, 22 2019 @ 09:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zelun
a reply to: Nothin

If I didn't answer that question fully enough for your liking in the last two paragraphs, let me know, but please clarify your question.

My assertion is that strength is a virtue and not something to be ashamed of, not that 'might makes right.' Diplomacy doesn't work without violence, or the threat of violence, and violence isn't restricted to physical violence, it could be economic, psychological, social, etc... Violence nonetheless.


Will try to clarify: a reader of this thread may surmise that you are an advocate of violence, and therefore was asking, if you are also a believer in might is right, and most forms of rules and laws, as in "Islam" ?

In other words: Is 'Islam" right about women, because it may, or may not enforce it's rules and laws, with violence ?

Are 'authorities' always right, if they have rules that are backed-up by potential punishment ?



posted on Sep, 22 2019 @ 10:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: and14263

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: stosh64

Are Muslim women right about Islam?

That’s a good question.

Although maybe more realistic would be:

“Do Muslim women have as much choice as non-Muslim women” or maybe change “choice” for “rights”.

I find this point really interesting because one could easily use the argument that they are brainwashed into wanting to follow the masculine rule. But if you ask them they deny this... but if they’re brainwashed it cannot be proven from their answer alone.


Is Islam, their religion, then masculine rule?



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 12:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: Zelun
a reply to: Nothin

If I didn't answer that question fully enough for your liking in the last two paragraphs, let me know, but please clarify your question.

My assertion is that strength is a virtue and not something to be ashamed of, not that 'might makes right.' Diplomacy doesn't work without violence, or the threat of violence, and violence isn't restricted to physical violence, it could be economic, psychological, social, etc... Violence nonetheless.


Will try to clarify: a reader of this thread may surmise that you are an advocate of violence, and therefore was asking, if you are also a believer in might is right, and most forms of rules and laws, as in "Islam" ?

In other words: Is 'Islam" right about women, because it may, or may not enforce it's rules and laws, with violence ?

Are 'authorities' always right, if they have rules that are backed-up by potential punishment ?


What an awesome post. These are the sort of questions I was hoping the poster I was jousting with would ask.

Islam is wrong about women. However, at the time of its inception, it was right about women. Apologists often point out how Islam guaranteed freedoms not afforded to women at the time. This is true.

The problem with Islam is in its infallibility, at least in the eyes of some of its adherents. The words of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be unto him, are regarded as perfect and immutable. I won't quantify that, any amount of that rhetoric is enough to call bull#. The strength of our Constitution(the US constitution I refer to specifically, but many others as well) is that it is a living document. It can change, and it is supposed to change. Literally, nothing is sacred when it comes to government. A system of governance which cannot change is fundamentally flawed. As a faith I have no problem with Islam. As a government, it fncking sucks.

One could consider me an advocate for violence, insomuch as I believe most if not every action taken is a form of violence. An action in and of itself is a disruption of the existing order, and when done willfully it fully constitutes violence. Chopping down a tree is a very violent act. Killing a chicken is a violent act. I won't go on, you get my point.

So what is with this animosity toward violence? And, remember, violence is not restricted to physical violence. I pointed out previously that there's psychological violence, social violence, economic violence, all sorts of violence, and ALL of it gets results. As a matter of fact it's the ONLY way to get results. Violence solves everything, unless, as the good doctor pointed out, it is perfectly symmetrical.

ETA: I'm sorry, I forgot to address your final question. No, I don't believe authorities are always right. You are right, though, that authorities use violence and the threat of violence to enforce their will, which is why violence, in whatever form it takes, is required as a defense.
edit on 23-9-2019 by Zelun because: final point, and my forgetting butt



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 12:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Zelun

No..It really is as it seems. My middle name is Charles (Chucker) and I am a Sabres fan. Pretty simple to most. Not good enough for the Liberal Bitches yelling " MOM THE MEATLOAF!!" from the basement though.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 01:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sabrechucker
a reply to: Zelun

No..It really is as it seems. My middle name is Charles (Chucker) and I am a Sabres fan. Pretty simple to most. Not good enough for the Liberal Bitches yelling " MOM THE MEATLOAF!!" from the basement though.



I have NEVER heard of anyone named Charles be given the nickname "Chucker." Your account isn't that old. You might consider changing that, now that I've informed you of it's implications.

For what it's worth, I am sorry that I assumed things about you.

Even SabreChuck would be better. Was that one taken?



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 01:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Zelun

I'll accept the apology on my user name assumption but, why does my username bother you so much??

It's not racially motivated in anyway. If you must know, I am a Fire Fighter and they call me Chucker because I am the Ax man and It correlates to my name . So I went with my team and my nickname combined..


edit on 23-9-2019 by Sabrechucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 02:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Sabrechucker

Have you ever seen the movie M.A.S.H.? Not the TV show, the movie with Donald Sutherland and Elliott Gould. Are you aware of the racial epithet to which I refer? It's not a good look.

If you haven't, you should, it's an awesome movie. But trust me when I say you don't want to prepend any weapon to the agent noun chucker. It is an inevitable callback to really awful things in our history.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 03:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zelun

originally posted by: Sabrechucker
a reply to: Zelun

No..It really is as it seems. My middle name is Charles (Chucker) and I am a Sabres fan. Pretty simple to most. Not good enough for the Liberal Bitches yelling " MOM THE MEATLOAF!!" from the basement though.



I have NEVER heard of anyone named Charles be given the nickname "Chucker." Your account isn't that old. You might consider changing that, now that I've informed you of it's implications.

For what it's worth, I am sorry that I assumed things about you.

Even SabreChuck would be better. Was that one taken?




C'mon your intelligent enough to understand your personal views do not make them someone else's reality.

He's explained the hows and why's that should be enough. Perhaps chucker does mean something insidious to somone that doesn't mean we should add it to the list of politically correct terms we can no longer use because some numpty got offended.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 04:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

is Islam wrong about women?


You'd probably be better off asking an Islamic women, they'd probably be able to give you a far more informed opinion than I can.

Personally, I think religion in general is cultist nonsense. But then again, its not my cross to bear... So I'm not about to start dictating to people whats best for them.



I agree. And the worst batch of religious cultists at the moment are the members of the Climate Church.

You know, the "drink with a metal straw or we will all welcome hell on Earth" crowd...

But then again, it's not my emission to bear...

So I too am not about to start dictating to people whats best for them; though I'm sure that cult will continue to do so...



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 04:49 AM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Yeah, I guess I'm just jealous that in the past 12 months he's gotten almost 30,000 stars by posting nine comments to every one of mine over the past decade, while posting nine times as often as I. I'm frankly surprised nobody has called him out sooner. I guess I'm just a wreck, a relic, derelict in my ways. Care to delve?



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 05:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zelun
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Yeah, I guess I'm just jealous that in the past 12 months he's gotten almost 30,000 stars by posting nine comments to every one of mine over the past decade, while posting nine times as often as I. I'm frankly surprised nobody has called him out sooner. I guess I'm just a wreck, a relic, derelict in my ways. Care to delve?




Don't think that stars garnered on this site mean a great deal, if you want stars all you need to do is jump on the trump train. Now that might involve selling your soul to the devil but hey whatever it takes right?



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 05:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Zelun

Internet points are worth exactly zero. I wouldn't get too worked up about them.
edit on 23-9-2019 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 06:40 AM
link   
I wish more comedy and comedians in general weren't afraid to use this stuff as material.

The politically correct liberal left are a laughing stock and full of comedy gold.

So many double standards and lack of common sense there is so much material...

Hollyweird casts out any of that...



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Zelun

being an incessant control freak isn't a good look, either. how about being more appreciative after what he just shared with you --maybe thank him for his service or at the very least, admit you were wrong in your assumption and let it go?

Also...Islam isn't right about women. Muslims are very deeply indoctrinated and brainwashed. As most religious people are..



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zelun

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: Zelun
a reply to: Nothin

If I didn't answer that question fully enough for your liking in the last two paragraphs, let me know, but please clarify your question.

My assertion is that strength is a virtue and not something to be ashamed of, not that 'might makes right.' Diplomacy doesn't work without violence, or the threat of violence, and violence isn't restricted to physical violence, it could be economic, psychological, social, etc... Violence nonetheless.


Will try to clarify: a reader of this thread may surmise that you are an advocate of violence, and therefore was asking, if you are also a believer in might is right, and most forms of rules and laws, as in "Islam" ?

In other words: Is 'Islam" right about women, because it may, or may not enforce it's rules and laws, with violence ?

Are 'authorities' always right, if they have rules that are backed-up by potential punishment ?


What an awesome post. These are the sort of questions I was hoping the poster I was jousting with would ask.

Islam is wrong about women. However, at the time of its inception, it was right about women. Apologists often point out how Islam guaranteed freedoms not afforded to women at the time. This is true.

The problem with Islam is in its infallibility, at least in the eyes of some of its adherents. The words of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be unto him, are regarded as perfect and immutable. I won't quantify that, any amount of that rhetoric is enough to call bull#. The strength of our Constitution(the US constitution I refer to specifically, but many others as well) is that it is a living document. It can change, and it is supposed to change. Literally, nothing is sacred when it comes to government. A system of governance which cannot change is fundamentally flawed. As a faith I have no problem with Islam. As a government, it fncking sucks.

One could consider me an advocate for violence, insomuch as I believe most if not every action taken is a form of violence. An action in and of itself is a disruption of the existing order, and when done willfully it fully constitutes violence. Chopping down a tree is a very violent act. Killing a chicken is a violent act. I won't go on, you get my point.

So what is with this animosity toward violence? And, remember, violence is not restricted to physical violence. I pointed out previously that there's psychological violence, social violence, economic violence, all sorts of violence, and ALL of it gets results. As a matter of fact it's the ONLY way to get results. Violence solves everything, unless, as the good doctor pointed out, it is perfectly symmetrical.

ETA: I'm sorry, I forgot to address your final question. No, I don't believe authorities are always right. You are right, though, that authorities use violence and the threat of violence to enforce their will, which is why violence, in whatever form it takes, is required as a defense.


Thanks. Too much... LoL !

"Islam is wrong about women".
"Islam is right about women".
"Islam is sometimes right, and sometimes wrong about women".
"Islam is not-so-sure-anymore about women".
"Islam is doubtful and cautious about women".

What do these statements mean ?
Are we attempting to make a grand sweeping statement, that covers everything Islam has ever done, not done, written, not written, preached, not preached, whatever, about women, since the beginning of Islam ?

How could any of us armchair warriors possibly grasp a concept so large, wide, deep, and complex as that ?

Well, for me: all concepts are BS anyways.
Well: except for my own personal beliefs and opinions, of course !
Are not all concepts, and constructs: infallible, according to 'believers' ?
( As an aside: it's an interesting thought-exercise, to observe how those match-up, time-after-time. )


..."...An action in and of itself is a disruption of the existing order, and when done willfully it fully constitutes violence..."...
Have contemplated similar ideas, but from different angles.
Like wondering what possibly could be done, that was not in resistance to 'this that is' universe, and caused no harm, to any critter or life-form, at all.

How many tiny, unseen lives are squashed by taking a walk in the park ?
How many tiny, unseen lives are ended by taking antibiotics ?
How many tiny, unseen lives are squashed by wiping the screen of a smartphone, just to accept a phone-call ?
Is swiping the screen of a smartphone, a violent act ?
It it our trying to be 'Human-doings', instead of 'Human-beings', where we get it wrong ?
Is loving another, an act of violence upon the self ?
Is the physical universe, a violent universe ? ( Contains 'will' . )

( Perhaps you may wish to create a new thread to discuss your ideas on what a Human in action means. )

The problem with using violence, to fight violence is: ... Well: too numerous to mention.
But it seems to me, the first to use it, is playing an agressive card in a card-game.
Are they in a position of authority, holding a proverbial sword above your neck ?
How to reply ?

If you're an employee: they might fire, or suspend you.
If you're a citizen: they'll 'rehabilitate' ya, or 'throw the book' at ya.

So we all just cower, and obey all of the laws; like sitting idling at a red-light in the middle of the night, when the coast is obviously clear.
Are we any better, than an Islamic woman, whom capitulates to the rules and laws of Islam, their families and societies ?



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Well, if you like stoning, whipping, beheading, and acid attacking women for not wearing their tents, like they do in terror-state Saudi Arabia, I guess Islam is right.



posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 03:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: stosh64
Does that mean Christianity is also right about women?

The bible has similar ideologies regarding the female gender.

lutheran reformation made women second class citizens !

they weren't allowed to speak unless spoken to , didn't get a vote , etc etc

and low and behold a male supreme deity , once again placing women at the bottom
despite our global history of female goddesses and the worship of the divine feminine



posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 03:56 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

Yes the Lutherans did that but in their defence they came from Catholicism so they did try, Presbyterian churches as well but Jesus taught equality
Men get it wrong no one denies that
do they?



posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 06:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: sapien82

Yes the Lutherans did that but in their defence they came from Catholicism so they did try, Presbyterian churches as well but Jesus taught equality
Men get it wrong no one denies that
do they?


In their defense hahhaahhahahah

aye ok mate , just blame it on the catholics ,who the lutherans murdered in their millions so they could be holy and just and enslave women and continue getting it wrong !



new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join