Post #270,316
10/14/06 3:41:08 PM
|
Islam is tied into the caste system
In India, Islam is tied into the caste system, so converting to Islam wouldn't get a Dalit much if anything at all.
While there have been Christians in India for a long time, the current way of conversion is driving by non-Indian groups and they reject the Indian caste system. Buddhism was founded in India, but almost entirly destroyed over the years. The current growth is a reimport from China, and generally is unconcerned with caste. And both Jainism and Sikhism reject the caste system on religious principle (but only recently would accept low caste converts).
Jay
|
Post #270,317
10/14/06 5:03:52 PM
|
would you have a link? Im interested
The many muslims I have spoken with have extolled the fact that all are equal under Allah, color or birth clan doesnt matter.
thanx,
bill
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
|
Post #270,318
10/14/06 5:56:52 PM
|
Does gender enter the equation?
|
Post #270,319
10/14/06 6:42:10 PM
|
nope, all equal, just the rules are different
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
|
Post #270,324
10/14/06 8:22:59 PM
|
Some more equal than others?
|
Post #270,329
10/14/06 8:53:08 PM
|
takes 4 women to equal one man
4 men need to testify to a rape or its consensual sex and off with her head.
4 wives for one man, 1 pregnant, one housekeeper, one employed so the man doesnt have to work and a sex toy.
takes 3 times saying I divorce you (same as jews) for a man to divorce a woman but it takes 3 courts to allow a woman to divorce a man.
It takes one berber or afghani woman with a knife to scare the shit out of 4 captured men.
etc
thanx,
bill
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
|
Post #271,845
11/2/06 6:09:04 AM
|
Re: takes 4 women to equal one man
Its all wrong, I wonder where you get your info about Islam.
Anyway, lets correct
>>4 men need to testify to a rape or its consensual sex and off with her head.
Wrong 4 men need to testify on adultry, not rape, I dont know whats the rape punishement is.
Requiring 4 men to prove 2 ppl commited adultry is usually taken as way to make it so hard to proove that anyone commited adultry.
Rape is not adultry.
Also the head-off part is wrong.
Adultry in islam, had 2 punishements a certain number of lashes, or to be stoned if you are married and cheated of your wife (some of the women like this), also if you are married the witneses rule is changed I dont know the exact details of it, so I wont try to guess it, anyway the stoning punishement is not mentioned in the Koran, but only in hadith, some muslim argue that the stoning is not an true rule of islam! i.e. the stoning is debated amongst muslims
>>4 wives for one man, 1 pregnant, one housekeeper, one employed so the man doesnt have to work and a sex toy.
First your are sooooooooooo rude and insulting be polite to other ppl faith
Men in islam are allowed to have 4 wives, and islam recommend just one (but again allow up to 4), considering the time, 4 is probably a lot less, that what ppl were used to. Anyway, you are allowed 4, doesnt mean you have to.
And be polite
>>takes 3 times saying I divorce you (same as jews) for a man to divorce a woman but it takes 3 courts to allow a woman to divorce a man.
WRONG. A man is allowed takes 1 time to be divorced. If you divorce your wife 3 times, you are not allowed to remarry her, unless, she got marry a different person first, and then marry you, of course some ppl abuse this rule, and after the 3rd divorce , if they want to remarry, arrange a fake marriage to another person. But this is not the issue, those are technical details.
A woman can divorce herself from man, but, she have to return his gifts (wedding ring, appartement, car, money, ...). We call this type of divorce \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd
which translate to something in the line of:
excise , uproot, extract , root up , tear out , root out
Please check your facts, you are seriously incompetent. I hope you dont show this level of incompetence in the rest of your life!
I, being, poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W. B. Yeats, He Wishes for the Cloths of Heaven
|
Post #271,849
11/2/06 7:37:27 AM
|
Thanks for posting. Please come back more often.
|
Post #271,853
11/2/06 8:08:07 AM
|
Re: Thanks for posting. Please come back more often.
I would like to add few things
I accused boxley of being incompetent and impolite, I really didnt wonna use this word, I hate to insult ppl like this. In a way, it were meant in self defense not as an attack. And anyway, sorry.
But really guys, do some effort when you learn about islam,
only rely on trusted unbiased source and
try to show even the tiniest good will!
I understand the excuse, if many muslims are misinformed about islam, why would the non-muslim be better, i understand
But those mis-informed, are usually, poor, non-educated, ignorant etc ...
So its not really a question of your religion, but your level of education and such ...
I expect more from you guys
I, being, poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W. B. Yeats, He Wishes for the Cloths of Heaven
|
Post #271,912
11/2/06 7:17:11 PM
|
Don't take it personally.
We quite often have heated arguments here, even when we're good friends. Don't take it personally.
Speaking for myself, I have problems with many religions. And I'm able to separate the ideals of a religion from the way it is practiced. But, ultimately, just as a language is defined by how people use it (not by dictionaries and committees - except, perhaps, in France and Quebec), religion is defined by how people practice it.
Also, it would be helpful if you could give cites to illustrate misinterpretations, etc., so that we could learn more. One of the things we hear quite often in the US is that moderate Muslims do not criticize those who use Islam to justify violence against women or anyone else. If you have counter examples you can share, that would be very helpful.
For example, what do you consider a trusted source to counteract the issues raised in the original [link|http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6050408.stm|BBC Story] and the lack of Dalits converting to Islam? Please keep in mind that many of us have read at least parts of the Qur'an and interpretation of it is often not straightforward. (If it were, then mullahs probably wouldn't be needed - just as priests and ministers wouldn't be needed if the Bible were always easy to interpret.)
Thanks. :-)
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #271,913
11/2/06 7:29:01 PM
|
the reason you dont hear moderates is that the Sufi folks
are not followed in the news. That particular group of Muslims are fairly widespread and excellent people who truly understand the Koran and how to apply it to life, not just modern but life.
The western news media cant tell the difference and the arab media are owned and operated by gulf arabs and hardline states. They dont belong so therefore dont report on Sufi discussions.
thanx,
bill
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
|
Post #273,208
11/13/06 9:59:36 PM
|
:-)
- missed this gem, a nicely conciliatory response which also happens to be rich in truthiness.. not bad.
Indeed, it may even be so.. that JC et al copped much of their best material from Sufi lore - direct, or as transmogrified into various offshoots, in India.
As they neither operate press agencies nor generate political-flacks - it's unsurprising that 1:1000? Muricans might ever have heard the name. What goes around (comes around only if you're on the right Great-circle-route.)
Row Row Row Your Boat? - a Sufi parable.
|
Post #273,214
11/13/06 10:27:12 PM
|
um err, muslim sufi sect was 700+ After JC (didnja know)
and they came out of north afrique? Perhaps you are confusing them with someone else.
thanx,
bill
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
|
Post #273,237
11/13/06 11:50:44 PM
|
Actually later than that, IIRC - using the name 'Sufi'
But their esoteric beginnings/sources (I wasn't there) are alleged to be quite older than JC, intertwined with Moors generally (After all, there's nothing New under the local sun.) Believe 'the Order' didn't get the name 'Sufi' until 1200+
I was more interested in a sense of the origins of the ideas they expressed - than any attempt to follow all the cross-pollenations. Now of course, that's all much easier, once you know enough to vet the veracity of a plethora of 'authoritative' sources with websites.
Their superior storytelling abilities appear to have eclipsed the ancient sources; after-all, putting all the aphorisms together needs a different talent than just being Brilliant. (Though not even 'Brilliance' likely compares with being fully Awake, whatever the date.)
Indries Shaw has put many of these stories into pretty good Engrish.
|
Post #271,852
11/2/06 8:06:04 AM
|
My dear systems, I was not indulging in rudeness
nor attacking Islam as a religion but pointing out what some practisioners assert of the religion. Let me go thru my points one by one. "4 men need to testify to a rape or its consensual sex and off with her head" Priya named her attacker but had no proof of rape other than the medical examination. According to Zina laws, her own testimony is not admissible as evidence. Rape must be proved either by the perpetrator's confession or by the testimony of four men. source [link|http://web.amnesty.org/wire/July2004/Pakistan|http://web.amnesty.o...July2004/Pakistan] this law is a man made law by men who interpret the koran in this fashion >>4 wives for one man, 1 pregnant, one housekeeper, one employed so the man doesnt have to work and a sex toy. I was not being rude, I was being envious that the above could be achieved elswhere, I am actually very aware of the rules and requirements of the koran for more than one wife and the above isnt why. I am not aware of the laws concerning divorce in egypt, but in Pakistan a woman will usually be killed before a divorce is allowed to happen, this is not religion but fact that has to do with the nature of Pashtun's whose religion is Islam. Systems, please feel free to correct me at any time, I value your input. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
|
Post #270,327
10/14/06 8:49:39 PM
|
It's an old problem.
I think most of us would regard gender equality as a joke in [link|http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/5346968.stm|Pakistan] after reading things like this: In Pakistan, rape is dealt with under Islamic laws known as the Hudood Ordinances. These criminalise all sex outside marriage.
So, under Hudood, if a rape victim fails to present four male witnesses to the crime, she herself could face punishment.
This has made it almost impossible to prosecute rape cases.
According to the country's independent Human Rights Commission, a woman is raped every two hours and gang-raped every eight hours in Pakistan.
These figures are probably an under-estimation as many rapes are not reported. Emphasis added. Typically, these apparent contradictions are addressed by saying "don't confuse Islam with a particular policy of a government" or some such. That assumes the problem is separable, and usually it isn't. IMO, if one doesn't have a consensus definition of words like "equality" then there's little hope of meaningful cross-cultural conversations on whether Islam or Protestantism or whatever treat their people better. My $0.02. Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #270,477
10/16/06 8:30:24 PM
|
Heh
It is a given that when talking about equality among muslims you are talking about equality among male muslims. Islamic ideas of equality between the sexes makes fundamentalist christians look good.
Jay
|
Post #270,500
10/16/06 10:50:06 PM
|
Most unfortunate, too - for underscoring so much else
- that is non-negotiable.
Because in the Lands of shoot-from-the-hip, such an obdurate position makes it so much easier to tag 'em all with one of our typically infrahuman nicks, like ragheads.
And, after the first successful next massacree, nearby - those Lands are apt to Not-ask, "How many legions have the ragheads?" -- instead, just call in the Bag Man. We could be closer to that scenario than ever before...
Recall the colorful adjectives attached to -Kulaks, here, in the days of Fail Safe, Dr. Strangelove and Gen. Curtis LeMay? But a lot of them Russkis were..umm er Aryan-type + even a few discernible WASPs -- so.. we.. stifled ourselves from experiencing that Victory Rush felt just-before-Launch.
[Also - we Knew Our Turn would happen next. So not much credit accrues re that particular stifling, now does it?]
Now: no balance-of-Power counters Our Bag Man, unless the Soviet State of Putin were to toss in his Entire Lot with the nonproductive masses of duelling-ragheads [???]
I see.. I see damn Few details over which a compromise is possible amidst these folks: perpetually afflicted with a clan-wide Certainty-fetish just like Our Fundies, constantly at each others' throats for centuries -- and despising US now even more than Them.
{sigh}
|
Post #270,476
10/16/06 8:28:48 PM
|
Re: would you have a link? Im interested
[link|http://www.countercurrents.org/sikand150204.htm|Counter Currents] Although the Qur'an insists on the radical equality of all Muslims, caste (zat, jati, biraderi) remains a defining feature of Indian Muslim society, with significant regional variations. While the severity of caste among the Indian Muslims is hardly as acute as among the Hindus, with the practice of untouchability being virtually absent, caste and associated notions of caste-based superiority and inferiority still do play an important role in Indian Muslim society. In most parts of India, Muslim society is based on the existence of numerous endogamous and generally occupationally specific caste groups, that have their own caste appellations. This disjunction between Qur'anic egalitarianism and Indian Muslim social practice has been theorized by Muslim scholars in different ways. While some have sought to reconcile the two by interpreting the scripturalist sources of Islam to support social hierarchy, others have pointed out that the continued existence of caste-like features in Indian Muslim society is a flagrant violation of the Qur'anic worldview. Here is a long article that seems to cover the matter in detail. The only thing I would add is that the article is written from a modern muslim perspective and claims to more equality among muslims then actually exists. India is worse then the rest of the muslim world, but most muslims countries have some sort of caste/ race/ tribe/ class stratification. Most of them are based on tribal / racial lines, with groups that have more historical power and groups that converted earlier being higher. Muslims talk about all being equal before Allah, but in reality it sits beside the idea that being saved in an evangelical church makes you a better person. They talk about it a lot, but objectivly it doesn't hold any water. Jay
|
