Thursday, September 24, 2009

Nine out of Ten Afghan Women Suffer from Domestic Abuse

The United Nations Development Fund for Women reports that nearly 90 percent of Afghan women suffer from domestic abuse. Sadly, there's rarely anyone for them to turn to. If they complain, they have disgraced their families. If they run away, they may be killed. Here's a story about some of the shelters being brought to Afghanistan by Westerners.



KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Shameen's brown eyes seem lost as she thinks about the one day she wants to forget, but it is all she can think about.

Still traumatized, she recounts the events that led her to a safe house in Kabul.

She was raped and nearly stabbed to death by her husband just seven days before we met her.

Her lips are quivering and her eyes full of fear.

"He forced himself on me," she said. "All I could do was scream."

She was married off 15 years ago when she was a teenager.

Throughout those years she was tortured and abused, suffering daily beatings with an electrical wire or the metal end of a hammer.

This was her normal life.

"He chased after me with a hammer. He said if I made any noise he would put holes through me," Shameen said.

Shameen and her husband could not conceive a child. And in Afghan society, it seems, the blame always falls on the woman.

After one severe beating, she ran from her home and to the police station. Her husband promised the police he would not attack her anymore, so she gave in and agreed to go back home with him.

Days later, Shameen's husband took her on a trip to visit her sister's grave -- a 15-year-old sister who was burned to death for displeasing her husband.

Shameen says her younger sister was 11 years old when she was forced to marry an older man. He would beat and abuse her until one day he killed her.

As Shameen walked along the graveyard with her husband he took her near a shrine where he forced her to the ground, lifted her burqa and raped her. He then threatened her with a knife and asked her who was going to help her now. She was screaming as he slashed her throat and body.

A passerby saved her.

Now, she has no one to turn to -- not even her own parents. In their eyes, she has brought them shame, an offense punishable by death. Read More.

For more on wife-beating in Islam, please read "Islam and Wife-Beating: Muslim Scholars Speak."

31 comments:

Yahya Snow said...

Again another depressingly sad story being utilized for an anti-muslim agenda by the author of the site.

Sad.

This is one of the reasons why have decreased participation on this site...it is insincere and ultimately reflects poorly upon the site owners and the way they practice their faith.

Peace

David Wood said...

FACT #1: Muhammad allowed his followers to beat their wives into submission.

FACT #2: In Afghanistan, 90% of Muslims beat their wives into submission.

YAHYA'S RESPONSE: "How dare you suggest that Fact #1 and Fact #2 are related? Only bad Christians and a bad website would make such an absurd connection!"

Bartimaeus said...

David

You are doing a great work posting these reports. Musilms are in total denial by pretending this is not the norm in Muslim countries. But lets face it Muslims are told that Mohammed is the best of examples and the "best of examples" beat the hell out of Aisha. What I don't know is the beating happen before or after the rape. Maybe our good buddy Osama has the answer.

Ryan S said...

I feel sad for the Muslim apologiests..quite a few postions to have to defend repeatedly

1. Wife Beating

2. Underage girls getting pregnent by men more then 2 times or 3 times their ages

3. Killing in the name of Allah

4. Killing of those that leave Islam

5. Defening/justifying Muhammand's wretched behaviors with women as an example for "all mankind"

6. Still trying to convince the world that Islam is Peace!

Stop resisiting your conscience!
Come to the Savior Jesus Christ!

Bartimaeus said...

Osama

You dude are one sick puppy. Your racist remarks are indicatice of your racist prophet who after got tired of banging his many concubines banged little boys.

Bartimaeus said...

David

If you have time could you please comment on the "our Time Has Come" on Washington and President Obama's love fest with Islam

Fernando said...

Yes... that's the news I asked Osama to see when he inbited me to go to Apheganistan and see thate there are no porn there... this is so sad... you just can't imagine the pain I feel in my heart due to this reality... they are our sister, sisters thate iff they coulde they woulde run away from islam and bee also our sisters in Christ... so much pain... so much pain... and there are also persons arounde there pretending thate we are wrong by denouncing this atrocities... hey: let's allow them to continue... don't denounce them... keep quiet so those things can continue to happen... that's to change this sorte of things thate I beliebe thate the war in Apheganistan, against those true muslims thate are the talibans, are as iff it was in mie gardden... it can change the liffe off these our sisters in humankind thate are suffering the worst off liffes due to the barbaroic aspects off a religion founded on the personal urges off muhammad... so much pain... I'm praying for all off them not to see them to become Christians (which I, for theire beneifys, woulde love to see), rather to become a better treated human beings... Jesus, our Lord and beloved God, listen our prayers. Amen.

IslamSINS said...

Following Christ is a difficult task. His standards are so high, so pure, I can only throw myself on God's mercy and pray to become more like Him. Day after day I'm aware of, and grieved by, my sin. My Lord is patient, but relentless in His pursuit of my holiness, and His Holy Spirit is faithful to convict me of my failures because my God calls His children to be holy because He is holy.

To follow Muhammad/Allah, I would need to dump my morals and my brain into a sewer.

Choose you this day whom you will serve.

ubiquitouserendipity said...

to my dear friend islamSins: please post links to your videos re: mohammedan dance parties and the ones depicting the "marriages" of young girls to old men. also, the ones reffering to the homosexual afghani warrior sub-culture. please post on the thread dedicated to osama's contention re: hispanic girls. my computer is going down, so i may be incommunicado for awhile. G_d"s peace and blessings to you and your beloveds. thank you in advance. Peace, in His love, papajoe

Yahya Snow said...

@ DavidWood

I said no such words spo please retract your lies and stop misrepresenting me. You have a habit of this....unfortunately.

Please cease with the misrepresentation of people. It is dishonest, even for a man who claims to have a god inside him.

You have an undesirable history of imputed falsehood onto others perhaps it is high time for you to realise that your habit is dishonest and far from piety. It also repels people from your cause (whatever that might be)

Peace.

Yahya Snow said...

Not only am I surprised at Wood's continued dishonsety (for a supposedly reformed religious man) but I am surprised at the lack of admonition from Wood's supporters...

Sepher Shalom said...

Yahya,

I´m surprised at your lack of admonition directed towards your fellow Muslims on this site. You really have no room to say any of the things you have mentioned in this thread when you can´t even bring yourself to directly denounce the putrid things said by Osama recently. I suggest you clean up the mess in your own back yard before you start advising others about the condition of their´s. Until such a time as you choose to do that, I fear you remain both a hypocrit, and an overgrown whining child.

It is not David Wood´s problem that Muslims are beating the tar out of their women all over this planet - and doing so with the direct approval of the Quran and your "prophet´s" Sunah. Wake up and face reality sir.

Ali said...

There's a couple of things wrong here.
First, most likely these women were forced to married. I wonder where that hadith or quran verse is.
Two, The Quran says men must live with women in kindness and equity-4:19. And those numerouse reliable hadiths say the same.
Three, the Quran allows fearful women to divorce if men treat them harshly and with cruelty-4:128.
Four, Throughout the Quran we see hints of age and maturity:
24:59 But when the children among you come of age, let them (also) ask for permission, as do those senior to them (in age): Thus does God make clear His Signs to you: for God is full of knowledge and wisdom.

4:6 Make trial of orphans until they reach the age of marriage; if then ye find sound judgment in them, release their property to them; but consume it not wastefully, nor in haste against their growing up. If the guardian is well-off, Let him claim no remuneration, but if he is poor, let him have for himself what is just and reasonable. When ye release their property to them, take witnesses in their presence: But all-sufficient is God in taking account.

Five, read the first line of 4:34- "Men shall take FULL CARE of women..." or "Men are the PROTECTORS and MAINTAINERS of women......" Any educated person would know that women are provided for in every way. That also means women having their full 12 basic rights. That did NOT happen in Afghanistan.

//FACT #2: In Afghanistan, 90% of Muslims beat their wives into submission.//

It is a common christian tactic to relate islam to everyday muslim practices. I think CNN left the "beating to submission"
part out. Guess they didn't know David too well.

I was watching a show (called Faith Journal) and there were some interviewers in Afghanistan talking to NEW, EDUCATED religious leaders (some women). They themlseves said the treatment of women was not in accordance to islam during the taliban rule (strange David, that pretty much every islamic scholor, female ones too, condemned the taliban's actions).

Most likely, David cannot produce any hadiths or verses that support the "burning" or "stabbing" of young wives, or any muslim in general.

Picking on a poor country, with little literacy rates, with great amounts of famine, with little life expectancy rates, inadequate health care, with many afghani's fearing for their lives, with many afghani's constantly running to protect themselves, with parents having to burry their children with their own hands in the scortching heat in the desserts, to go along with missiles being fired over heads of civilians and great political instability issues, shows the holy spirit in you, guiding you to truth.

Fernando said...

Hi Ali...

Sepher Shalom said...

Ali,

Before anyone begins to interact with the issues you have brought up, I would like to know your position on Surah 4:34.

Are you prepared to deny that this verse gives Muslim men permission to beat their wives, or do you acknowledge that it gives men permission to use physical violence on their wives?

I´m curious. Please reply in a clear manner. Thanks.

WomanForTruth101 said...

Oh fernando, it wasn't that long ago women were opressed and did not even have the rights of women in the taliban rule. The medevil and elizabethan era were strongly christian based. I feel for those women who suffered in the name of Paul.
Women under the taliban rule will be the FIRST ones to tell that the type of government they had was unislamic. And the same goes for Saudi today, though with the help of muslim activists who use only the quran, the society is coming back to the islmaic one, all thanks to God.

minoria said...

Just read what Ali wrote but the problem is more complicated than that.

But let's us go to the good verses:

a)4:19,treat women with kindness and equity.
b)4:128:woman can divorce cruel husband.
c)4:34:men to take full care of women.


Also that new,religious leaders in Afghanistan,some of them women,condemn the Taliban way of treating women.

Al-AZHAR

Recently a Muslim in Germany asked the MAINSTREAM and most prestigious Islamic university of Al-Azhar if it was ok to kill an apostate in GERMANY,a NON-MUSLIM land.In Germany THAT is illegal.

ANSWER:

They said it was ok,you can see the original document in atlasshrugs.com.

RIPPLES

Muslim apologists often say that:

1.No Muslim can take the law into his hands and kill an apostate,an ISLAMIC COURT has to do it...no vigilante justice allowed.

2.Also that Muslims in NON-MUSLIM countries have to obey the laws of NON-MUSLIM countries(except if they go against Islam,and supposedly killing apostates goes against "no compulsion in religion"in the Koran).

Yet here Al-Azhar says the contrary.Are they not the EXPERTS on such a delicate matter.

minoria said...

SO?

Let us take Turkey,a better place than Afghanistan.Supposed 100,000 WOMEN there become BUDDHIST and publicly announce it and try to convert others to Buddhism.

But the way things are in Turkey they would be harassed and persecuted by the authorities,even imprisoned.And then there is the permission by Al-Azhar to kill any apostate,even though apostasy in Turkey is not punished by death.

So this violation of human rights of WOMEN would be justified even in a more advanced place like Turkey.It would be less bloody,brutal but it would still be there,the same TYPE of intolerance only the DEGREE would vary.And the religious leaders would see no contradiction with 4:19 that says to treat women with KINDNESS and EQUITY.

CONDITIONAL KINDNESS AND EQUITY

It is conditional then,that means it can be suspended.Killing a female apostate goes AGAINST 4:19 UNLESS you understand 4:19's kindness and equity as CONDITIONAL.

ANOTHER CONDITIONAL

Like the part in the Koran that says the he who kills somebody has killed all humanity...and then adds words that make it CONDITIONAL(unless he has brought evil)and then states some punishments(one of them being DEATH,in this case by crucifixion).

And if leading others out of Islam(100,000 women converting others to Buddhism)and assuring them hell after death is EVIL,then even killing them can be justified,so that also serves to make 4:19 very conditional.

Fernando said...

WomanForTruth101 saide: «Oh fernando, it wasn't that long ago women were opressed and did not even have the rights of women in the taliban rule»... yes thates true... there were muslims societies thate threated women eben worse then whate the Taliban did... whate happened in northe Africa since 700 to 1400 is just one small example: putted in harem, mass raped, killed, beaten, used as breading machines, declared mentaly handicaped just according to true islamic sources (the quran and the hadiths)... thakes to remember us thate.. we see thate your name is absolutelly correct...

you also saide: «The medevil and elizabethan era were strongly christian based»... thakes to remember us thate.. we see thate your name is absolutelly correct... butt does this sentence has anything to do withe your previous one thate I commented? if so then I have to say thate nowhere, and never were women in Christian societies suffering more than the equivalent women in islamic countries at the same time... and whate coulde you reffer about women suffering in Christian societies according to Christian sources (the Bible)? can you elaborate on thate? thankes...

you also saide: «I feel for those women who suffered in the name of Paul»... can you say on whate verses ore textes do you think women in medieval and elizabethan era made women suffer? thankes...

p.s.: the taliban remige is a triue muslim regimen... no muslim fatwa was declared agains them; they can go do the hadj and so one...

minoria said...

Regarding the comment of WomanforTruth about Christianity and medieval times and women.

1.Then women had less property rights than now:true,but where in the whole NT is there anything about that?It was purely cultural,and in fact it went against the Law of Jesus:the Golden Rule.So since it was anti-Jesus how could it have been "based on the Messiah"(Christian-based)?

2.Then women could not become priests.Today it is still the case in the Catholic Church.However a good analysis(and believe me,it is a convincing one)shows the NT is not against it.WomanforTruth,you are then IN FAVOR of women being priests-ministers,I assume?

That is to say:you are in favor of women being IMAMS or heads of mosques?I think you will affirm yes,since you criticize the negation of women to become priests in the Middle Ages(I assume you were implicitely referring to that).

YES

Yes it was Christian-based,I agree,but based on a WRONG understanding of Jesus and Paul.

Ali said...

Minoria, i really have no clue what point your trying to make.
Conditional? Everything in the Quran is straight forward.
And as for the wife beating, it does not specify what type. Physical? Spiritual? Or beating as in beat it (leave or go away)?
But lets not focus on one word in an entire paragraph.

Fernando, instead on picking on WFT101, READ what i wrote. Saying taliban are muslim after their actions contradicting islam, and i PROVED to you WITH ISLAM taliban's actions were not correct.
And yes, many muslim scholors have condemned taliban's actions. Its a common christian tactic to say what you said.
And the KKK are the finest examples of christianity right?
Look back a few hundred years ago, what were women's roles who lived in europe and the West? They had no rights and it was because of the practice of christianity.

Fernando said...

Hi Ali...

your remarks do not deserve the minor attention from me att this time: they are self-deniying themselfs as others habe expressed... and I'm free to intercart with whoever I want... as I saide: your points are no points whatesoever...

good bye Ali...

minoria said...

Hello Ali:

I see you would be against violence to women.But I was referring to mainstream Islamic thinking today,in fact,mainstream for 1,400 years.

AL-AZHAR

So the Koran says to treat women with kindness and fairness.Very direct and clear.Yet the 4 Sunni law schools(supported by Al-Azhar today)plus the Shias also,say to kill apostates.Even though we have "no compulsion in religion".That means 1 of 2 things:

1.That verse has been abrogated.
2.Or it is CONDITIONAL.

SO THE SAME

Again,I am not saying YOU agree to it,only what the situation is now.So killing women apostates:

1.Contradicts being kind and equitable to women.
2.Or the verse is understood by Islamic experts to be conditional:the kindness stops if apostasy is involved.

That is the burden of today's Muslim reformers,they have the establishment against them.And do any of the NEW Afghan religious leaders 100% scrap death for apostasy?Also scrap death for blasphemy?I hope so.

minoria said...

Regarding the idea that women in the West had no rights SPECIFICALLY because of CHRISTIANITY.That is a big claim.

Again the NT says NOTHING about property rights.The property rights issue for women is a mere cultural thing in the West.In fact,unjust property rights for women 100% goes against the Golden Rule.

NO AUTHORITY OVER A MAN

It is in the NT,correct?But first,in an earlier post I had given the names and titles of no less than 3 books by scholars that tell of the undeniable existence of WOMEN PRIESTS in the first 1000 years of Christianity.So it shows it was not universally understood that PAUL was against it.

TO CONTINUE

What Muslims do NOT know is that the "no authority over man" has always been understood to mean in the RELIGIOUS SENSE(a woman can not be a priest).

WHY?

The reason is that Christian experts knew PAUL was Jewish and knew the OT.They also knew it.In the OT one of the 14 judges,or RULERS of the 12 tribes of Israel,at one time was a WOMAN:her name was DEBORAH.She was even married at the time,and she was the military leader also.She RULED over all the JEWISH MEN.

Also in the 1st century BC the Jews were ruled by a woman again,by QUEEN ALEXANDRA SALOME,a holy woman greatly esteemed by the people.

minoria said...

THAT IS WHY...

In the Middles Ages and later WOMEN in Europe did RULE over men.The churches never protested.Just by memory I remember queens Eleanor of Aquitaine,Margaret of Scotland,Christina of Sweden,Elizabeth I of England,Mary Tudor of England,Mary Stuart of Scotland,Elizabeth of Russia,Catherine I and II of Russia,Isabel of Castile.

Also women who had authority over men were Joan of Arc and St.Catherine of Siena (1300's,who died at the age of 33).

FREDERICK II

He was born in Italy,of German parents,and became ruler of the Holy Roman Empire and southern Italy.He was an intellectual.He undeniably did NOT believe in Christianity.His actions and statements show it.But his achievements were notable and he was even called Stupor Mundi(the wonder of the world).He lived in the 13th century.

UNSOLVED QUESTION

He knew Arabic and was on friendly terms with Muslims.Now he had a group of about 20 MUSLIM GIRLS and WOMEN who lived with him in his court.Offically they were merely servants,used for work in the court.But many believed that they were really his concubines,slaves fro sexual purposes.The fact that we know Frederick II was an unbeliever supports the idea.

STATUS OF WOMEN IN THE MIDDLE AGES

Whether he had a harem or not,and many historians believe it was,the point is this:even HE,the Holy Roman Emperor,could NOT publicly have a harem.It would have outraged public opinion among his subjects and the clergy.And the women were NON-CHRISTIAN.

Yet in the 900's AD Caliph ABDERAHAMN III had a harem of 6,000 Christian women in Spain.And AKBAR,the Mughal Emperor of India,in the 16th,had a harem of 5,000 HINDU women.And the last Ottoman Sultan,in the year 1920,had a harem of hundreds.See the difference.

Sepher Shalom said...

Ali said: "And as for the wife beating, it does not specify what type. Physical? Spiritual? Or beating as in beat it (leave or go away)? But lets not focus on one word in an entire paragraph."

Please explain to us all what a "Spiritual beating" is Ali. I can´t quite figure it out. How does one beat their wife spiritually?

Also, how on earth can you even begin to suggest that when the Quran (written in Arabic) says "beat", it can mean "beat it" (as in "leave") since this is an idiomatic phrase that only exists in English?

I don´t blame you for wanting to run away from the obvious in this immoral and repulsive verse, but I think you are just being ridiculous at this point.

ubiquitouserendipity said...

Ali said...

(deleted text...)

Everything in the Quran is straight forward.
And as for the wife beating, it does not specify what type. Physical? Spiritual? Or beating as in beat it (leave or go away)?
But lets not focus on one word in an entire paragraph.

deleted text...

September 28, 2009 6:20 PM

ubiquitouserendipity says: anyone notice the contradiction? first ali states that the koran is straight-forward,,, then in the very next statement ali says that the koran is not specific. that violates the logical law of non-contradiction. but the funnier note to this has been responded to by brother sepher shalom:

Sepher Shalom said...

(deleted text...)

Also, how on earth can you even begin to suggest that when the Quran (written in Arabic) says "beat", it can mean "beat it" (as in "leave") since this is an idiomatic phrase that only exists in English?

(deleted text...)

September 30, 2009 6:11 PM

ubiquitouserendipity says: can all see the ridiculous nature of ali's assertion? when i read it i almost fell outta' my chair,,, hilarious, and desperate on so many levels.

and finally, to brother sepher shalom:

Sepher Shalom said...

Please explain to us all what a "Spiritual beating" is Ali.

ubquitouserendipity says: hmm, hmmm,,, a spiritual beating is what happens when someone like ali, osama, ehteshaam, et al, attempt to match their insincere and vacuous apologetics against the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of G_d.

Peace, in His love, papajoe

Ali said...

//Yet the 4 Sunni law schools(supported by Al-Azhar today)plus the Shias also,say to kill apostates.Even though we have "no compulsion in religion".That means 1 of 2 things:

1.That verse has been abrogated.
2.Or it is CONDITIONAL//

I've heard from many islamic scholors theres NO death for apostates. Did you know if hadith contradicts the Quran, you take the Quran over the hadith?

There is no such thing as "conditional". Nothing has been abrogated. I can say Paul abrogated many of Jesus' laws to support himself.

//So killing women apostates:

1.Contradicts being kind and equitable to women.
2.Or the verse is understood by Islamic experts to be conditional:the kindness stops if apostasy is involved.//

Well actually the people who think apostates are given capital punishment, its only for men. Women get life-imprisonment. But i guess it can change anytime.

//And do any of the NEW Afghan religious leaders 100% scrap death for apostasy?Also scrap death for blasphemy?I hope so.//

That is most likely not on their minds at this moment. Maybe later after they get everything cleared up, with islam of course, if God wills.

//Again the NT says NOTHING about property rights.//

Oh so they cant have any property?

//What Muslims do NOT know is that the "no authority over man" has always been understood to mean in the RELIGIOUS SENSE(a woman can not be a priest).//

Might i have biblical references?
For Paul who wrote women should submit to her husbands, who have no authority over man, who are the weaker, shows me the medevil eras were the most christian ever.

//Please explain to us all what a "Spiritual beating" is Ali. I can´t quite figure it out. How does one beat their wife spiritually//

Well i guess spiritually could be more of a cultural practice (like honour killings, alcohol etc).
What i mean to say was if it was referring verbally or in any other way.

//Also, how on earth can you even begin to suggest that when the Quran (written in Arabic) says "beat", it can mean "beat it" (as in "leave") since this is an idiomatic phrase that only exists in English?//

??? Uh okay i'll use what womenfortruth said. The word daraba is used as beat. It can also mean tap, or hit (what is more so means)-this is the often word used when specifying the word "hit" today in the arabic language.
We see in other parts of the Quran that word is used, but itsn't referred to actually beating, hitting or any type of physical acts. Rather is is used as "seperate" (i.e its used when the heavens and earths seperated).

//ubiquitouserendipity says: anyone notice the contradiction? first ali states that the koran is straight-forward,,, then in the very next statement ali says that the koran is not specific. that violates the logical law of non-contradiction. but the funnier note to this has been responded to by brother sepher shalom//

WHAT are you saying???

//ubquitouserendipity says: hmm, hmmm,,, a spiritual beating is what happens when someone like ali, osama, ehteshaam, et al, attempt to match their insincere and vacuous apologetics against the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of G_d//

Hmmm i'd hate to see a god or its spirit guiding people to run hate sites, insults constantly thrown at muslims, and calling each other "brothers" when bashing us. And not to mention calling themselves "experts" on a faith they learn from anti-islam sites only highlighting the out-of-context verses and hadiths, with no knoweledge of the history behind them.

Ali said...

Oh and i'm still waiting for David's response to me.
By the way, the US, which is 85% christian, has some christian values in their judicial and government systems, not to mention not taxing property tax for churches, has HUNDREDS of women who DIE of domestic abuse. Oh whats the percentage of women in the West being raped, assaulted, and have had their husbands/boyfriends act violently against them? Is the holy spirit sleeping?

ubiquitouserendipity said...

Ali said...

(deleted text...)

//ubiquitouserendipity says: anyone notice the contradiction? first ali states that the koran is straight-forward,,, then in the very next statement ali says that the koran is not specific. that violates the logical law of non-contradiction. but the funnier note to this has been responded to by brother sepher shalom//

WHAT are you saying???

//ubquitouserendipity says: hmm, hmmm,,, a spiritual beating is what happens when someone like ali, osama, ehteshaam, et al, attempt to match their insincere and vacuous apologetics against the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of G_d//

Hmmm i'd hate to see a god or its spirit guiding people to run hate sites, insults constantly thrown at muslims, and calling each other "brothers" when bashing us. And not to mention calling themselves "experts" on a faith they learn from anti-islam sites only highlighting the out-of-context verses and hadiths, with no knoweledge of the history behind them.
October 3, 2009 3:19 PM

ubiquitouserendipity says...
regarding "what are you saying???" you offered two conflicting statements in succeeding sentences, the second which contradicts the first. notice:
1) "Everything in the Quran is straight forward."
2)And as for the wife beating, it does not specify what type

you claim that the koran is straight-forward, implying clarity, coherency, specificity. and then you state that the koran is unclear, e.g., "does not specify..."

nonsense, ali. you don't even understand the words you are using, or you are being obtuse and misleading.

as for your "i'd hate to see a G_d..." nonsense,,, i'd hate a G_d who was essentially a cosmic pimp for his prophet, read: allah for mohammed. as for your claims at victimization,,, you poor dear. may i get you a tissue? and as for me, i would never make a claim at expertise regarding mohammedanism. i read your koran, and i am revolted, stupified by its inconsistencies and lies regarding what Christianity and judaism teach, and brought to guffaws by the claims of mohammedans such as yourself that there is anything of redeeming quality in that disjointed, a-contextual, and heretical satanic screed. wipe your eyes and nose, and get over your learned helplessness. it is not becoming of a man to whine like a child.

those here who do respond to mohammedan claims are experts in your books, and history. actually, they generally seem to know worlds more about your fake religion and beastly history of said religion than do most of you dilettantish "apologists."

some of your other posts on this thread are so full of fallacious argumentation that i wonder sometimes if you guys are joking when you post your blather,,, but no, you actually seem to think that you are being "intellectual."

carry on ali. Peace, in His love, papajoe

minoria said...

To Ali:

Just read your comments on my comments.So I take it you are for full religious freedom.That is the way to go.

You said about that wives have to submit to husbands(Ephesians 5:22).But at the same time Paul said to mutually submit to one another (the preceding verse,Eph.5:21).So it is reciprocal.

The Middle Ages were in some ways very Christian and in some ways not.A large proportion of the population did not have Jesus in their hearts,of those who called themselves Christian.I say that GUATEMALA right now,where about 50% is born-again,is way more Christian than,say France in 1000 AD.Because a larger proportion of people really read the Bible,try to put into practice what Jesus said.God does not judge by appearences but by what is really inside.

DO A TEST

You might say,France in 1000 AD was the more Christian place.If you went there and burned a Bible and destroyed a statue of Jesus,chances are considerable you would be beaten up or killed by angry peasents who knew only the essentials of the religion.

Since it is impossible to go back in time,then you can go to Guatemala and do the same there in an area where the people are Evangelical and see if you get killed or not.You would not because the people there are familiar with "love your enemy" and "God forgive them for they don't know what they do."

A WAY OF LIFE

They read the NT alot.That is what a Christian is supposed to do.Being Christian is a way of life.Of course an atheist or Buddhist can be just as kind.But they have not put their faith in he who saves,Jesus.Because a person is not Christian does not mean he is bad,only he/she has chosen a way different from God.