I See No Freedom of Religion In Islam

Despite many aspects of tolerance and coexistence in the Moroccan society, Kacem calls for more freedoms, especially in terms of freedom of thought and religion.

By

Blogger , performer, author and activist. 90 comments

Sunday, November 14th, 2010


Freedom of Religion In Islam:

Islam does not accommodate for freedom of thought, and although there have been some aspects of tolerance in Islamic history it has not evolved to a level of religious freedom. The kind of freedom that accompanied the Islamic early stages was selective and relative. It was strategic and tactical in nature. It was imposed by the political, military and economic situation prevailing at the time.

Religious freedom in Islamic thought has also been a periodic phase, developed to serve totalitarian goals. That is why, once the Islamic state reached its full might, infringement on freedom of religion has become a usual occurrence. The apparent tolerance did not therefore come from a strong belief in freedom values. It was rather a political maneuver imposed by the specific conditions of the Islamic society at different stages of its history.

At the beginning, Muslims were very vulnerable hence their initial peaceful rhetoric. In order to avoid the wrath of Quraish, win over supporters and give the new religion a peaceful appearance, conversion to Islam was not initially forced on anyone. Quranic verses, which refer to the idea that there should be no compulsion in religion, or that anyone shall be entitled to his or her own religion, all appeared during the first period of Islam: i.e. the very early founding stage. But once Muslims acquired a bit more power, after the migration to Yathrib, they adopted the idea that the faith should be spread by the sword. That led them to their first military victory. They entered Mecca and started forcing people to convert to Islam and destroy their idols. This is contrary of course to the principle of freedom of religion.

Throughout Islamic history, we find that Muslims have blatantly violated religious freedoms. Many churches have been converted into mosques, among which the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus. Most of the religious symbols like crosses and statues were destroyed. One of the most serious violations is the fact that Jews and Christians were systematically categorized as Dhimmis; in other words as second-class citizens, who had to pay extra taxes. This is the treatment reserved for Jews and Christians, the People of the Book. As for those with other beliefs, they lived in a very difficult position and had either to accept the religion of Islam or be killed.

“Moroccan” but not a Muslim:

Moroccan law assumes that all Moroccans are Muslims, with the only exception of Moroccan Jews. All are subjects of King Mohammed VI, Commander of the Faithful. It doesn’t recognize other religions though such as Christianity or Buddhism -not even different Islamic doctrines such as Shiism. And the authorities are relentlessly fighting conversions to Shiism or Christianity.

For many, Moroccan is a term synonymous with Muslim, as if Islam were the sole basis for the Moroccan identity. This is misleading because there are also Atheist, Christian and Baha’i Moroccans, who are proud of their nationality and heritage. Those, unfortunately, have no legal or social protection to be able to safely practice their freedom of thought in public. Even if there were legal guarantees for religious minorities, it will be difficult to adapt the Muslim mind with the culture of coexistence and tolerance, regardless of belief. Perhaps the most important justification Muslims use to reject that kind of tolerance is the claim that non-Muslims do not respect their holy places and religious symbols. They should know that no one should confiscate other’s right for creativity, thought and expression. No one should have the right to censure criticism unless persons are targeted beyond their beliefs, convictions or opinions.

All religious minorities in the Moroccan society do not criticize or discuss the Islamic faith, and all are not even engaged in the effort of enlightening their countrymen, yet they are often mistreated by their families, friends and employers…

So I wonder what kind of religious freedom Muslims talk about exactly?

Swirly divider

Written by

Translated by Hisham from لا حرية للمعتقد في الإسلام

Posted on Sunday, November 14th, 2010

  • Share on Twitter
  • Facebook
  • E-mail
  • Google Reader
  • Permalink

90 comments on “I See No Freedom of Religion In Islam”

  1. I see no freedom of religion in most religion :) Meaning the religious texts of the 3 major religions on earth – The ones based on Abraham have no room for tolerance of different thinking individuals. How much freedom of religion is left to the individual will usually be decided by how strong religion stands in the area of the world the individual lives. History have shown repeatedly that every time religion grows strong the individual loose :)

    Well written young man. Fight for your rights!


  2. If we fail to challenge the growing threat to freedom of speech at the most fundamental level, we will lose the freedom to express our ideas—which means, we will lose our ability to live as civilized human beings. In order to disarm those who attack the right to free speech, we must identify religion—all religion—as what it is: illogical, invalid, inhuman, and immoral. Nothing less will save humanity.

    Peace Kacem.


  3. Why just freedom of speech, how about freedom to rape others and freedom to steal and rob others?

    * 1 in 6 women and 1 in 33 men will be a victim of sexual assault in their lifetime.
    * College age women are 4 times more likely to be sexually assaulted.

    Learn more victim statistics
    Sexual Assault Numbers

    * In 2007, there were 248,300 victims of sexual assault.
    * Every 2 minutes, someone in the U.S. is sexually assaulted.

    Read more sexual assault numbers
    Reporting to Police

    * 60% of sexual assaults are not reported to the police.
    * Reporting has increased by 1/3 since 1993.

    Learn more reporting statistics
    About Rapists

    * Approximately 73% of rape victims know their assailants.
    * Only 6% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail.

    http://www.rainn.org/statistics


    • @arah: Why just freedom of speech, how about freedom to rape others and freedom to steal and rob others?

      Because freedom of speech is a universally recognized essential right, while rape and plunder are universally recognized as immoral acts.

      If you need some imaginary omnipotent and omniscient entity to avoid raping and stealing, then you are a despicable human being.


    • .. and I see no thought in your post.

      Cliché sur cliché, des fantaisies d’ignorant érigées en vérités générales. Cela dit, vous récolterez probablement un sucre à si bien brosser les préjugés de vos maîtres dans le sens du poil islamophobe.

      * “Religious freedom in Islamic thought has also been a periodic phase, developed to serve totalitarian goals.”

      ???

      * “At the beginning, Muslims were very vulnerable hence their initial peaceful rhetoric.”

      At the begining of what?
      What are you talking about?
      Which period of time? Which area?

      Si c’est pour être si peu rigoureux, si imprécis et croire qu’en balançant vos préjugés en anglais vous les rendrez moins grossiers, je ne vois franchement pas en quoi la liberté de pensée pourrait vous être utile.

      Votre billet montre assez clairement que vous n’en maîtrisez pas l’usage – contrairement à celui de la brosse à reluire les discours islamophobes dominants.


    • Arah: Forget freedom of speech, you can not yet grasp what it means let alone what it stands for.
      Let us talk about FREEDOM TO RAPME, which is RAMPANT in Muslim/Islamic societies.
      But who is counting? Who is reporting rape committed by Muslims/Islamists on Muslim lands???
      Not you, I figured!
      Mind you, on the Muslim Lands; rape victims are punished for being raped by:
      – Being murdered by their family members to save the family honor!!
      – Stoned for being raped because somehow being raped and being promiscuous are the same on the Muslim Lands!
      – Whipped and physically beaten by order of a Muslim Judge on the Muslim Lands!
      So??????????????? Who is counting rape crimes on the Muslim lands? Since the victims are silenced by death or being physically abused by order of the Muslim courts? And socially shamed and shunned!
      You are throwing numbers left and right. Don’t be so hasty.
      In the West, the statistics exist because victims have a voice, which they are free to raise and protest the crime by reporting it to the authorities and by calling for justice.
      In the West, rape is a serious crime and a heinous one while in the Muslim Lands they might also force the rapist to marry the victim!
      Let us not forget the forced marriage practiced on the Muslim Lands…how about the Islamic Right of the Muslim male to rape his wife or should I say wives…. how about the horrendous misery of the child bride…that too IS RAPE! Yes, an adult having sexual intercourse with a child or a teen is nothing but RAPE! Just because Muslims call it fancy names does not take away the damage done to the child.
      But will the Muslim ever wake up to their own self created misery and decadence???
      I guess it is so much easier to point fingers to the West where people have the guts to be open and have the rights to speak up!
      Yes, the West! Where they also have enough integrity to count the crimes and make that information available for public access even to YOU! On this Western invented media called internet available for free open communications open even to You! So you can come spit on the West’s face and try to sell your outdated Islamic full of violence and decadence.


  4. Then how do you explain Muslims giving the Egyptian Christians the right to worship when they defeated the Romans compared to the oppression they were living under ? weren’t they powerful then ? and how do you explain Omar giving the Palestine Christians the right to worship and keep their property ? Wasn’t he all powerful then ?

    Many more examples are there actually, including the Jews in Andalusia as well becoming ministers and take command over Muslims. How do you explain these – systematic as they seem to me – instances ?


    • Then how do you explain Muslims giving the Egyptian Christians the right to worship when they defeated the Romans compared to the oppression they were living under ?

      It is no secret that Islam is Monotheism 3.0

      The god of Abraham is the same as Jesus’ god and is the same as the god of the Quran. A cursory glance at the Quran reveals that much.

      But it is also no secret that Islam calls for killing apostates, destroying all polytheistic idols, and violently silencing all criticism of Allah and his prophet.

      and how do you explain Omar giving the Palestine Christians the right to worship and keep their property ? Wasn’t he all powerful then ?

      See above.

      Many more examples are there actually, including the Jews in Andalusia as well becoming ministers and take command over Muslims. How do you explain these – systematic as they seem to me – instances ?

      There is nothing to explain. Religions evolve, and there’s not a shred of doubt about Islam being more accommodating and tolerant the further it got. Also, Islam, even in its most radical form, is somewhat a lesser evil than Christianity of the 1400s.

      Religion is nothing but a failed “science”. It took a shot in the dark at explaining life, the universe and failed miserably, leaving humanity with mountains of life-destroying gibberish that – frankly – is antithetical to tolerance as currently perceived. Don’t even think about selling religion (any religion!) as doing more good than evil. Nowadays, an ideology is not praised when it merely grants the right to life, property and worshiping/non-worshiping.

      I long for the day when a Muslim analogue to Monty Python’s Life of Brian gets produced…and the crew doesn’t have to walk around with bodyguards the rest of their lives. So as I often tell your couch-jihadist brethren, you’d better go argue with Muslims who treat women like second-class citizens, lock up homosexuals, threaten apostates, etc. Because Kacem, Dan, and Hisham are no threat to anyone. They just want everybody to get along, so we can turn this dark page and join the rest of humanity in the glorious quest for reason and science.

      With your invaluable help, we could maybe hope that next Ramadan some of us can finally have a bite in the street without risking to end up like a sheep. And although a bit late, Aid Moubarak to all!


    • Errata: further it got -> farther it got (i.e. the farther from its birthplace)


      • Samira,

        We can disagree without being disagreeable. At the end this is what we try to call for. Sheer ridicule perpetuates the same level of the lack of understanding on both sides of the topic. When you call some people names, you are merely wearing the same hat that you despise them for wearing.

        It will be greatly helpful to provide supporting evidence to your words when you claim a religion “kills” and “destroys”. It is not helpful to your point of view when you point out the negatives to be deeply ingrained and the positives to “some how” come about. This is a lazy way of thinking to avoid evolving your own thoughts. You might want to accredit the positives and dig deeper to find a more convincing reason.

        I’m glad you mentioned the 1400’s Christianity. It appears to me that the commonalities between it and current day practices of some Muslims are rooted in ignorance. I could safely argue that the scientific rigor to which they carried their understanding of the other at that time is equivalent to the one many Muslims have today. It is not about how far it gets, but rather how well educated its followers are at some point. I would actually say that science and religion go hand in hand. Science is not replaceable in explaining the WHAT and religion is not replaceable in explaining the WHY.

        I’m a Muslim Engineer that many of my friends are Christians, Jews, atheists and gays. I disagree with some of their stands on religion, God, sexuality, government and agree with many of their views on the same or other topics. I’m not doing this as an outlier, I’m doing it from a deep and devout understanding of my religion. What you are complaining about falls in the same bucket with the complaint of the religious guy that is indefinitely detained and intentionally forgotten in the country’s prisons of yours and mine. The same people that prosecute the non-religious do the same to the religious. It’s not Islam, it is the political wave that rides on top of it that carries what we both dislike.


      • @Mohammed

        We can disagree without being disagreeable.

        The day women can inherit as full-citizens in Morocco, I may be a little bit less strident.

        But for now, and while Muslims like you allow Islam to be used politically to suppress free speech, discriminate based on gender, and oppress sexual minorities, I will not treat you and your ideology as benign.

        When you call some people names, you are merely wearing the same hat that you despise them for wearing.

        Not at all! The people I despise, use violence and the threat of violence. Only in your twisted mind is that the same as calling religious texts “life-destroying gibberish”.

        It will be greatly helpful to provide supporting evidence to your words when you claim a religion “kills” and “destroys”.

        Is that a joke? Open a newspaper…any newspaper…any day of the year…and you’ll see ample evidence of the religiously driven madness.

        It is not helpful to your point of view when you point out the negatives to be deeply ingrained and the positives to “some how” come about.

        I may have not explained it well enough.

        The “believe what you’re told” trait in humans is useful from a survival vantage point. It’s evolutionarily favorable. It prevents children from benefiting from accumulated knowledge and “wisdom”. But with it came this tendency to believe in deities, and as far as anyone can tell, it is currently causing more harm than good. Instead of focusing on human sufferings such as diseases or poverty, we are left debating about silly issues such as the rights of gay to exist in society or the right of women to inherit in the same proportions as men.

        This is a lazy way of thinking to avoid evolving your own thoughts.

        Nonsense! You are the one after easy answer to tough questions. It’s infinitely lazier to explain the existence of the universe by resorting to religion than it is to do with naturalism and science.

        I’m glad you mentioned the 1400’s Christianity. It appears to me that the commonalities between it and current day practices of some Muslims are rooted in ignorance.

        False. It’s not ignorance. Rather, you’re the ones who cherry-pick from religion. Fundamentalists, have a way more coherent message which is in line with the so-called holy text.

        I could safely argue that the scientific rigor to which they carried their understanding of the other at that time is equivalent to the one many Muslims have today.

        “Scientific rigor”? Please…they wouldn’t know science if it bit them in the bum.

        It is not about how far it gets, but rather how well educated its followers are at some point.

        Here we go again…as if suicide bombers were somehow poor and uneducated. This story is getting quite old.

        I would actually say that science and religion go hand in hand. Science is not replaceable in explaining the WHAT and religion is not replaceable in explaining the WHY.

        Nonsense. Science is the antithesis of religion.

        I’m a Muslim Engineer that many of my friends are Christians, Jews, atheists and gays. I disagree with some of their stands on religion, God, sexuality, government and agree with many of their views on the same or other topics.

        You’re a “Muslim” by accident of birth. If your name was Shlomo, you’d be a “Jew”. And if your name was Pavana, you’d be a Hindu.

        What you are complaining about falls in the same bucket with the complaint of the religious guy that is indefinitely detained and intentionally forgotten in the country’s prisons of yours and mine.

        Oh yeah…because trying to shape society according to 7th century Arabian ideology is the same as secular humanist positions…Shame on you!

        It’s not Islam, it is the political wave that rides on top of it that carries what we both dislike.

        Islam is political. All religions are political, but Islam is currently the most political religion and the most retrograde.

        Take a long hard look in the mirror. If you were the only one believing what you believe, we’d call you crazy. But since you happen to be a large group, we’re not supposed to? Well…I call it as I see it: Collective delusion!


      • @Samira

        I can see a blind belief in your ideology behind your tone and your style as well. No better evidence than newspaper news ? You are merely sticking to your point of view and rejecting a challenge to it. This is exactly the same conversation I would be having with a super religious fellow that is blinded with his lack of understanding. I indeed was born a Muslims, but I take my belief cum grano salis and work on understanding it. I have to admit that I have the luxury to do this where I live as opposed to where you do.

        I have to say Samira that I appreciate people who fight for their rights, but smearing will make your arguments weaker. Your issue is with your paternalist culture not with religion. Women face the same issues and worse in places in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America that are less religious and less educated. Don’t be naive and take news as your compass for what’s happening in the world.

        Being a humanist doesn’t give you a superior pass either to win arguments that you provide inferior evidence. Actually being a humanist puts on you the burden to explain yourself and your stand because every humanist I met has her own opinion of what being a humanist means. Free speech is sanctioned till someone speaks something that harms the glorious troops, and minorities rights are a good message till the minority becomes the religious group that a secular government oppresses. Countries that adopt these messages stick to them when it works, which is shameful too.

        Let me say too that you might lack knowledge about inheritance law and doing some homework to educate yourself would be helpful for this conversation and latter ones of yours. I happened to have read some yesterday and would like to share. In Islam, a daughter is given half the portion of what a son takes, but there are instances to which the mother inherits and the father doesn’t or she does as a grandmother where the grandfather doesn’t. Females inheriting less is complete non-sense in The law, because it mounts to cherry-picking only the daughter instance compared to the son. Islam gives inheritance according to duties, because under it you can sue a person for not supporting his needy aunt or grandmother not uncle or grandfather. Even going back to a wikipedia page on inheritance will tell you that, so let this flawed argument lay to rest.

        One last point is about science and religion. Please stop overlooking rigorous (the funny word) philosophical search for the explanation throughout history that was pioneered by Muslims scholars and even religious renaissance philosophers. A little research might tell you that laziness is the last thing you could use to describe their search for answers though they used their religious backgrounds and understanding of God and nature in the process. Mind you all of it was based on metaphysics and logic. Scientific research is dwarfed when compared to this long history, itself exposed to blind hypotheses and leaps of faith in some theories when it comes to absolute statements like the big bang. Truncation is a human trait and believing what you are told as you said it might replace for some people the need for a continuous questioning, but it is not only a religious stand or a scientific one. You need to practice the same stereotypical truncation and believe that only some people practice it to carve yourself a place with them.


      • @Mohamed AJ

        I can see a blind belief in your ideology behind your tone and your style as well.

        Nice try…but it falls flat. My “ideology” is subjected to constant skepticism and daily critical thinking. There is nothing “blind” about it. It’s arrived at through carefully conducted rational analysis.

        Again, there’s nothing blind here. It’s rationally that I embrace my principles and not through some “faith”. I welcome and encourage criticism o my worldview and I would not in a million years get offended or riled up against it. Especially not if people around the world were oppressing, killing and maiming IN THE NAME OF secular humanism (this is the last subtle clue you get. My next reply will not be nearly be as courteous)

        No better evidence than newspaper news ? You are merely sticking to your point of view and rejecting a challenge to it. This is exactly the same conversation I would be having with a super religious fellow that is blinded with his lack of understanding.

        You’re starting to get on my nerves with your utter disregard for the mounting pile of evidence against religion in general, and Islam in particular.

        So you don’t think Afghans throwing acid on little girls IN THE NAME OF Allah because the girls went to school to learn to read and write is ample evidence against religion? Fair enough…but how about the pile of hadiths and Quranic verses that no modern society would ever consider as basis for a legal system, not in a million years.

        I indeed was born a Muslims,

        What does that even mean? Did you ever ask yourself why the a newborn would be assigned a “religion” and how that may borderline on child abuse?

        but I take my belief cum grano salis

        Exactly! That’s what I called cherry picking.

        and work on understanding it. I have to admit that I have the luxury to do this where I live as opposed to where you do.

        Spending time to rationalize superstitions, myths and gibberish is not something to be proud of.

        You don’t even appear to have the luxury to learn how to express yourself in English.

        I have to say Samira that I appreciate people who fight for their rights,

        And I don’t appreciate taqqiyists who lie to themselves and to others about what their religion teaches. Your cherrypicking has become ridiculous.

        but smearing will make your arguments weaker.

        My arguments stand on their own merit. Their validity is not related to any other name-calling that might arise.

        Your issue is with your paternalist culture not with religion.

        My issue is with religion. I don’t have a “paternalist culture”. I have a universal culture that allows me to appreciate and embrace the best of every culture.

        The day the civil code is justified culturally instead of religiously, I may turn the blame to culture as well, but that is not the case today. Moroccan women are oppressed IN THE NAME OF Allah.

        Women face the same issues and worse in places in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America that are less religious and less educated.

        Where in Latin America do women face worse issues that in Morocco? And where in Latin America are they less educated? You’re just making stuff up at this point.

        Don’t be naive and take news as your compass for what’s happening in the world.

        The “news” example was a genuine attempt to answer what I construed as a good-faithed a question on your part. You clearly don’t fit the description. You are not interested in learning or understanding, as much as you are interested in justifying and rationalizing whatever bullcrap Mohammed came up with.

        Being a humanist doesn’t give you a superior pass either to win arguments that you provide inferior evidence.

        Listen up…as far as I’m concerned, this argument was settled long ago. That you are unwilling or unable to accept the implications is your problem and not mine. If I were you, I would get psychological help…and this is not a joke.

        Actually being a humanist puts on you the burden to explain yourself and your stand because every humanist I met has her own opinion of what being a humanist means.

        Secular Humanism is a philosophy that espouses reason, ethics, and the search for human fulfillment, and specifically rejects supernatural and religious dogma as the basis of morality and decision-making.

        Is that clear?

        Free speech is sanctioned till someone speaks something that harms the glorious troops,

        All the more reason to defend freedom of expression! Nationalism is the enemy of freedom in general, and freedom of speech in particular.

        and minorities rights are a good message till the minority becomes the religious group that a secular government oppresses.

        Do you mean the Tibetan monks oppressed by the Chinese government? And if so, why aren’t they blowing up innocent people?

        Countries that adopt these messages stick to them when it works, which is shameful too.

        Blatant association fallacy.

        Let me say too that you might lack knowledge about inheritance law and doing some homework to educate yourself would be helpful for this conversation and latter ones of yours.

        The hell I am! I am more educated in Islam than you are.

        I happened to have read some yesterday and would like to share. In Islam, a daughter is given half the portion of what a son takes, but there are instances to which the mother inherits and the father doesn’t or she does as a grandmother where the grandfather doesn’t. Females inheriting less is complete non-sense in The law, because it mounts to cherry-picking only the daughter instance compared to the son. Islam gives inheritance according to duties, because under it you can sue a person for not supporting his needy aunt or grandmother not uncle or grandfather.

        How does that help the orphan girl who gets half what her brother gets?

        Fuck that! It’s the same shit that holds women hostages as baby-making with no rights.

        GENDER EQUALITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!b

        Even going back to a wikipedia page on inheritance will tell you that, so let this flawed argument lay to rest.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_inheritance_jurisprudence#Women_and_inheritance

        If you don’t see the gender discrimination here, you’re being willingly ignorant.

        Please stop overlooking rigorous (the funny word) philosophical search for the explanation throughout history that was pioneered by Muslims scholars and even religious renaissance philosophers.

        What the fuck? Why should I consider their crap “rigorous”? It’s about as sound as people trying to prove the existence of unicorns.

        A little research might tell you that laziness is the last thing you could use to describe their search for answers though they used their religious backgrounds and understanding of God and nature in the process.

        Of course they’re lazy! They can’t admit their limited knowledge in certain domain, so they have to make up a supernatural entity to explain a natural phenomenon. That’s laziness in a nutshell.

        Mind you all of it was based on metaphysics and logic.

        The logic of:

        All unicorns are white.
        Lulubelle is a unicorn.
        Lulubell in white.

        That’s how sound their premises were…

        Scientific research is dwarfed when compared to this long history,

        In the name of all the great mind who contributed to make science what it is today, I raise a bit fat middle finger for you

        Shiiiit…you’re clueless beyond belief.

        itself exposed to blind hypotheses and leaps of faith

        You just exposed your ignorance about the scientific method.

        I can’t believe an engineer thinks science is based around “blind hypotheses” and “leaps of faith”.

        You’re clueless!


      • Wow .. ignorance and arrogance are eating up on your posts. If you knew anything about string theory or scientific search for the beginning of creation you’d know the leaps of faith I’m talking about but why bother. It’s my fault that I deceived myself into thinking that you might be someone who is looking for a solution for the problems, but ended up realizing that a whining baby is on a keyboard somewhere pouring on nonsense. TAQIYYA ??? Are you kidding me ? You must be of a late stage of delusion to think that anyone would practice that with you ! It is not even a practice and majority of Muslims think of it to be pure hypocrisy. You continue to reveal your lack of will to even read more about inheritance law – grabbing into a link that is commentary not details – try this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inheritance since it might take you away from uttering rubbish for a second.

        Taqiyya ! Internet must be working inter-age since I can see dust coming out of your stone-age keyboard writing in Abdulla Ibn Saba time .. oh my my ..

        Secular humanism’s entire population could fit in my living room, so I’m not expecting any of them to do anything significant anytime soon – bad or good. When a less than 0.01% of Muslims decide to do something and stick it to their identity, it doesn’t harm my religious standing. I know better to distinguish between religion and bad practitioners. Many Muslim orgs – Islamic Relief – for example are doing things in the name of Islam. The 0.1% – ten times more than the people committing ignorant acts in the name of religion – that are part of it invite all secular humanists to find the closest branch to have lunch in the name of Islam. What tangible good did secular humanism do to the world ? What did they do in terms of the important subjects of poverty and disease ? I know it is easier to outline and comment, but maybe you get to try being genuine and original once.

        For women in Latin America : http://www.ilo.org/public/english/region/ampro/cinterfor/temas/gender/doc/not/wban.htm

        and one more question since I won’t have time to lavish your circular thinking and factually anaemic responses with answers : Can I snail mail your ass instead of handing it to you ?


      • Wow .. ignorance and arrogance are eating up on your posts.

        Oh yeah…I’m the one deluding myself into the spurious belief that Islam is misunderstood and that really, it’s an ideology that promotes freedom, peace and harmony. And I’m the one who makes ridiculous claims about an omnipotent omniscient being.

        You are willfully ignorant. And your arrogance knows no bounds. The part where you tried to rationalize the gender discriminating nature of Islam was despicable.

        If you knew anything about string theory or scientific search for the beginning of creation you’d know the leaps of faith I’m talking about but why bother.

        I probably know a lot more about string theory than you do. I study theoretical physics for fun. So let me explain to you how science works: What you label a “leap of faith” is in fact a mere hypothesis. A bold one for sure, but nothing more than a hypothesis. You can declare that string theory a massive fraud if you wish, and no cars will be burning. You may draw derisive cartoons of Chris Hull without repercussions. That’s because it’s a controversial hypothesis, and that should not be confused with a dogma.

        For the beginning of the universe, we naturalists are not so arrogant as to claim to know things we currently have no way of knowing. I recommend The Grand Design by Hawking/Mlodinow if you want to dig deeper in this topic.

        It’s my fault that I deceived myself into thinking that you might be someone who is looking for a solution for the problems,

        How the universe began doesn’t keep me up at night. It’s a challenging problem that we can’t answer overnight.

        What keeps me up at night, is the state discriminating against women, oppressing gas, non-Muslims, forbidding criticism of religion, etc. And the solution to these particular issues is obvious because it is the exact same issues other countries have dealt with long ago. And the solution is: Secularism!

        TAQIYYA ??? Are you kidding me ? You must be of a late stage of delusion to think that anyone would practice that with you ! It is not even a practice and majority of Muslims think of it to be pure hypocrisy.

        It’s either that or you’re lying to yourself. You don’t seem to me to be the sort of person that would be comfortable with such a level of cognitive dissonance. Either way, you’re lying.

        You continue to reveal your lack of will to even read more about inheritance law – grabbing into a link that is commentary not details – try this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inheritance since it might take you away from uttering rubbish for a second.

        Right there…proof that you are denying the gender discrimination built-in Islam.

        When a less than 0.01% of Muslims decide to do something and stick it to their identity, it doesn’t harm my religious standing.

        I see…Muslim countries criminalizing “sodomy” and “blasphemy” in the name of Allah doesn’t harm your religious standing?

        You fail miserably.

        I know better to distinguish between religion and bad practitioners.

        Yada-yada…Islam is a religion of peace…yada-yada…save your breath…we’ve heard it all before.

        For women in Latin America : http://www.ilo.org/public/english/region/ampro/cinterfor/temas/gender/doc/not/wban.htm

        Are you for real? You’re comparing the Moroccan institutionalized gender discrimination in the name of religion with inequalities in the South-American job-market? The latter is a direct result from centuries of religious discrimination!

        and one more question since I won’t have time to lavish your circular thinking and factually anaemic responses with answers : Can I snail mail your ass instead of handing it to you ?

        My side has been destroying your side for ages now:

        http://www.youtube.com/user/AtheistMediaBlog#p/u/4/2aPOMUTr1qw

        All your side has is violence and the threat of violence to make its point. Don’t even pretend that pro-religious arguments fly in this day and age.


    • Mohamed,
      What you are citing is called “make believe” tales of a rosy Islam.


  5. A demonstration of Lebanese secularist.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ui4-eyvIBY


  6. And M.D. Ph.D. explains why we believe in gods. Enjoy,

    http://www.youtube.com/user/richarddawkinsdotnet#p/u/12/1iMmvu9eMrg


  7. With all my respect you are completely ignorant of islam , you dont know nothing absolutely nothing ,, you make me smile with those words , you wana be fame or what?? ISLAM is words from SALAM (PEACE) i feel shame you are moroccan. Sorry


  8. Bravo Samira! Keep it up sister. I am Moroccan and I am fully with you on this topic. Si Kamal, now you have two Moroccans you can be ashamed of.

    V.


    • Maybe you need to call her something other than sister to avoid being stamped with the dark heritage of religious kindness ..


      • Universal fraternity exists outside of the realm of religion. It doesn’t take a genius to realize that we have common ancestors.


  9. Submission to ALLAH not something else , you can’t juge ISLAM by the behavior some practitione,(you cant say about Mathe is a useless science just because some have 0 on test)

    “l’obéissance à dieu est a la fois une libération de l’homme vis-à-vis l’homme, et une libération de l’homme vis-à-vis du matériel ”
    voyher , for a start you must have your own opinion, and 3 poor ignorant not moroccans at all
    with all my respect


    • True…submission to Allah. But by extension, submission to Allah’s commandments (no matter how asinine and ludicrous they are), Allah’s representatives on earth, etc…


    • Kamal

      As Carl Sagan once said: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I now ask you, where is your evidence for this Supreme Being that pitifully and snidely demands of my recognition in return for a place in his Paradise? Don’t you find it a bit suspicious that this is more symbolic of a human trait than a godly one?

      You mentioned the name Allah in your posting. What do you know about the history of that name Kamal? Do you have any idea as of its origins? Well, let’s take a walk down memory lane, shall we?

      Allah is not a name that was birthed with the advent of Islam. Islam owes the term to heathen Arabs as it entered numerous names in Northern Arabia, among the Nabatians, and so much of their literature. Allah was a God that they worshipped among 365…Same as Hubal, Manat, Allat, and Al Ouzza.

      Why would Mohamed stick to a deity name that was already an established name in the area?

      1. Because it wasn’t easy to come up with a different name, one that would necessitate a completely different set of beliefs and expectations, or
      2. Because it was an easier sell, or
      3. Because it was a lot more convenient to piggyback on an already established spiritual heritage, or
      4. Because it was more politically expedient to leverage the power of an existing deity and strengthen it with a new irrational superstitions, or
      5. Because it’s a mixture of all of the above.

      I can’t tell you what Mohamed was thinking about, but the factual historicity of the events can only lead you to one thing…Rational rejection of this nonsense.

      If you want to further discuss these and other issues, please provide strong arguments backed by stronger evidence. Unless you have the testicular fortitude to do so, let’s drink some atay bel louiza, eat some beshkito and listen to shikha El Hammounia as she sings: “Golo l3am zin al bnat, golo l3am zin”

      V.


  10. This a very old atheism speech , even in the first ages of humanity , man with his undeveloped brain could not assume that this world , this system of perfection , had no Master , that’s why they worshipped fire ,sun….
    you know why they say Atheists are against society , that’s they are abnormal cells because they ignore the spirit side in human being they respect only the materiel thing.
    For Prophet MOHAMED take this video , i am sure you don’t think you are more genius then thinkers and scientist (Michael hart , the legend Gandhi,Thomas Carlyle et Will Durant with son “Histoire de la Civilisation”)

    I am Ready to help You


    • You have some nerve coming back after Voyager’s crystal-clear rational exposé.

      Anyway, agnostic-atheists are the world’s fastest growing population. Yes, faster than Muslims and what have you! We are not a cohesive bunch. We despise conformity. And we shit on social norms of values of the olden days. And it is true that we do not believe in the “soul” concept. Conciousness is encoded in neurones, and we have a pretty good understanding of the process by now. You, on the other hand, have yet to present a shred of evidence to support your wild theories about omnipotent omniscient beings using us as guinea pigs.

      Atheism and spirituality are not mutually exclusive. We are amazed by the wonders of Nature and Science, that is surely more beautiful and complex than anything religions could have come up with. We are also more inclined to appreciate the fine arts such as peotry, music and movies. We can be equally attracted to the spiritual aspects of Buddhism, Taoism, Sufism, Paganism, Zoroastrianism, Calvinism, and Judaism. For us, they are all part of our species’ heritage and we can perfectly connect (albeit consciously) with the primitive “god spot” in our brain. We just use it creatively for the betterment of our race, unlike the segregationist destructive use religious people make of it.

      Read the intellectual exchange between John Stuart Mill gave to Thomas Carlyle. I don’t know who Michael hart is, but I can promise you that you misunderstood Will Durant if you think that he stands for anything other than strict secularism. I am no fan of Gandhi, but by his own account he was a “super-atheist”.

      There! Now go scour the scholar dark pits to find the odd notable religious and come back to us with some extraordinary evidence to your extraordinary claims. Bring it on! I too am ready to help you break free from the shackles of a ideology that was all in all imposed on you out of tradition.

      Best of luck to you.


    • A si Kamal!

      So this is your extraordinary evidence! A propagandist video collage not worth the disk space it occupies. But in the spirit of intellectual Jihad, something you guys would only engage in if “intellectual” were scratch out, let’s talk.

      There’s a lot to discuss but I will stick to one topic at a time. Today’s I will deal with the obnoxious statement “God sent Mohamed as mercy to the world”

      Here’s a man who took that old compulsive Arab trait of sheer looting and robbing (ghazwa), cloaked it in the word Jihad, and converted it into a religious doctrine. I wouldn’t want to pass a hasty judgment on your knowledge of history, but since I prefer to walk the talk, let’s go over the evidence:

      Please Google up the details and consult your Qur’an for the Arabic version for my references. I presume you have a copy since I, an atheist, have 5 of them. But again, that’s the reason why I became an atheist. I did read it quite a bit.

      1. The Ghazwa in Nakhla: Further justified in verses 2:216 – 217. Actually this was Mohamed’s first successful raid after 3 failed attempts.
      2. Badr: Verse 8:65 exposes Islam as a religion that encourages violence, crime, and brigandage. Verses 8:67-68 validate the loot.
      3. Banu Qaynuqa: As the smallest of Jewish tribes, it was an easy pick. They were kicked out of their houses as they left their belongings and pretty women to become sex slaves. Verses 8:55-57 justify what happened to the tribe. After all, non-Muslims are the worst of beasts.
      4. Asma Bint Marwa: Poet and critic of Mohamed, was killed along with her four children and newborn infant.
      5. Abu Afak: 100 year old poet. Slaughtered after Mohamed called on his followers to avenge the prophet’s pride after hearing some not so flattering verses about him.
      6. Uhud: After the Muslims get a shellacking in this battle, here comes 3-140 and 3:141. In these verses we clearly see again how Allah/Mohamed spins this defeat as a “trial and test” for the Umma, and yet again asks the Muslims to prove their allegiance by going out and slaughtering non-believers. Verse 3:153 absolves him of any wrongdoing and puts the guilt, blame, and shame squarely on the shoulders of his followers.
      7. The tribe of Banu El Mustaliq: Mohamed attacked this tribe mainly because of its wealth and fertile land. He drove them into the sea before he looted away a handsome booty. While Mohamed snatched Juwayriya, the chief’s daughter, his followers had a filled day (or night) with the other women. Asked if they could use Coitus Interruptus (Azl) so not to impregnate the women, Mohamed acquiesced giving them permission to basically rape their captives.
      8. Kaab Ibn Al’ Ashraf: Jewish poet killed by Mohamed Bin Maslama at the direct orders of Mohamed.
      9. Jewish tribe of Banu-Nadir: When Mohamed claimed that this Jewish tribe was plotting to kill him (actually they were not happy at all after Mohamed ordered Kaab Ibn Ashraf dead.) He encircled the tribe, destroyed their homes, and chased out to join the Khayber tribe. Goes without saying that their land, their belongings, and they daughters were halal loot for the merciful Mohamed. Verses 59:2-5 justify these heinous crimes as it vilifies the Jews and glorifies Mohamed and his followers.
      10. Banu Qurayza: This was the last Jewish tribe standing and it was time for them to go. One by one, they were given the choice to convert or meet the swords of Islam. After 900 were decapitated, Mohamed turns to Raihana Bint Amr and ask her to marry him. This after he killed her father, her brother, and her husband. This, in my opinion, is one of the reasons why Muslims have a schizophrenic view of morality. We all know how wrong it is to kill, lie, loot, and rape and yet if Mohamed allowed it to happen, it might be fine.
      11. Some verses that show the compassionate and merciful side of Mohamed and his religion: 9:5 – 47:4 – 8:39

      I will stop now. I think you got plenty to chew on. Next topic will address how Mohamed gave women their rights to be the equals of men.

      V.


    • This woman is psychologically deranged. She goes on shopping sprees looking to fill an already existing emotional and/or intellectual void, and boom, she finds Mohamed! Haven’t we heard the same old story with people binging on alcohol, sex, food, and all sorts of extravagancies before they found the light? All she needed was personal attention and some Prozac or Zoloft.

      Case in point, who in his or her right mind would say “…Sometimes I can’t wait for death to come because that’s what separates me from seeing him…” That’s complete lunacy and proof that this poor woman has no idea how lucky she is to have been given the gift of life. Not too surprising because this whole eschatology business has been on the rise for the past 2000 years.

      Just to correct this lady on a claim she made. The person most talked, written, researched, and read about is not Mohamed. That feat goes to a mythical man known as the “Son of God”… Specifically (since they were many) he goes by the name of Mr. Jesus. But, that’s another subject for another day.

      As for your prayers, I thank you, alas; they don’t work and never will for me or for anybody else. Many scientific studies were conducted that prove that point without a shadow of doubt.

      The following is from Richard Dawkins’ book “The God Delusion”, the hardcopy version, pages 61-66…I paraphrase:

      – A study conducted by Francis Galton on the UK church congregations praying for the good health of the Royal family. There was no statistical difference between the health of a typical folk and the princes and princesses. This, of course, would have been quite different if prayer worked, since the prayers from a whole nation to a few far outweigh the prayers one gets from his friends and family members.

      – Recently, the Templeton Foundation spent $2.4 million trying to prove the power and positive role of prayer in Medicine. As a side bar, the Templeton Foundation is one of the stronger voices and a true champion of religious science. To say that their credibility and reputation was at stake would be an understatement. The double blind experiments went on and 3 different congregations prayed for over 1800 patients who have undergone coronary bypass surgery. The results couldn’t have been clearer. There was no difference between those patients who were prayed for and those who were not. Actually, the patients who knew they were prayed for suffered more complications than the ones who didn’t…Go figure, maybe God wasn’t happy with an experiment testing his powers.

      Between 1997 and 2005 dozens of similar experiments were conducted on alcohol abuse, arthritis, coronary care among others. The outcome was the same.

      Don’t you also find it interesting that we seem to only apply prayer to self-limiting causes? Why is it that you never find a person praying for an amputee to re-grow a lost limb? Because we know it’s a fruitless endeavor at best and a ludicrous one at worst. But wait, there are these tiny amphibians called Salamanders who can do it all by themselves and no matter how much prayer you throw at them not to re-grow a lost limb, they always will…Again, this goes to show you that prayer is as futile as mind reading.

      As promised, I will post my reply about Women and Islam later on today! Until then please send your thoughts, evidence, and analysis next time. These youtube videos are worthless.

      V.


      • Until then please send your thoughts, evidence, and analysis next time.

        I’m not holding my breath for evidence. Faith is, by definition, a theory one holds as truth despite the lack of evidence.

        Religion is pernicious that way.


  11. Hello Si Kamal,

    Don’t think I’ve forgotten about my promise. Here’s part 1 of 3…Enjoy

    Women in Islam – Part 1

    This is a subject that most Muslim apologists often brandish out to show the moral superiority of their religion. In this reply, I would like to address it in details and expose its tenets for the sham they are.

    First of all, I shall take a couple minutes to treat and dismiss this propagandist view of what a woman’s life was like during the Jahiliya. In his book “Organisations Sociales chez les Bedouins” Ahmed al-Ali addresses the practice of burying unwanted female children as a religious ritual. This ritual was then over-exaggerated by Muslim writers to highlight the supposed superiority of Islam.

    Second, women in the pre-Islamic benefited from personal freedoms to work in the fields, the cities, and along side their male counterparts. Mohamed’s 1st wife exemplifies the case of an independent, respected, and affluent woman who lived and enjoyed an environment where she prospered.

    As far as inheritance is concerned, Mohamed bestowed certain rights to women. Considering the social conditions of that era, it raises his status to that of a reformer. But as we will see later, even though, a woman gets half the share of a man, this inequity of wealth distribution creates a myriad of social and financial problems that early Islam couldn’t foresee.

    Another example of an iconoclast and a contemporary of Mohamed is Hind bint Otba, wife of Abu Sufyan. According to the Muslim historian Al Tabari, this woman was a leader, and the vivid picture of independence and aristocracy during that era.

    So contrary to popular belief amongst Muslims, woman weren’t as oppressed as they would want us to believe. Furthermore, and for the rest of this post, let us parse out the evidence that supports the statement that Mohamed elevated the status of women and made them equal to men.

    Let’s look at some verses from the Holly Book first

    [The Women 4:34]

    ”Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).”

    This obviously establishes the superiority of men over women and justifies how Saudi Arabia, for example, treats women as wards of the state. Robbing them of the right to vote, drive, and even carry an ID card.
    This also highlights that the Qur’an never lifted a finger to protect women from the savagery of their closed minded husbands. On the contrary, it encourages a man to beat his wife on the mere suspicion of disloyalty. You don’t need to have evidence that your wife is disloyal to you. All you need is suspicion. The Qur’an will give you ‘Carte Blanche’ to teach her a lesson.
    Some contemporary scholars have tried to reinterpret the beating as ‘strong reprimand’ and even a ‘gentle slap.’ The one that steals the show is the vulgar interpretation that ‘dribohhouna’ (beat them) meant make love to them…I will leave that one alone for its stupidity stands on its own.

    …More to come shortly, stay tuned.

    V.


  12. You’re talking about women in Islam , i had never see a religion consider women ego as man , like Islam does ,before Islam women were like slaves , they could not heritage or have any type of proprieties , your not allowed to explain Quran , you who have any idea about the spirit of Islam the most tolerant religion ever . Our Prophet Peace Be Upon Him said “Treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers.” in his the last sermon. You Cannot Judge Islam by some praticant ,All i can conclude from your attacks and hate on Islam is that your fear of being ignored makes blame Islam and Muslims,
    i can’t imagine how blind , how deep in the dark, how frustrated you are .


    • you who have any idea about the spirit of Islam the most tolerant religion ever

      A monotheistic religion that has universalistic claims is as far away from tolerance as it can get.

      You are deluding yourself. From its inception, Islam has actively encouraged repression of polytheistic cults. It has and is still one of the main driving forces behind liberticidal acts, censorship and the suppression of science (the Church comes in second position).

      This is not by any means the modern interpretation of tolerance. Nor is giving the daughter 1/3 and the son 2/3 of the inheritance the modern interpretation of gender equality.

      Please don’t assume ignorance on my part. I am well-versed in theological matters.

      Take a hard-look at the extraordinary claims your religion has, and the utter lack of extraordinary evidence to back it up. Make yourself a hot beverage, take five minutes and contemplate the level of cherry-picking involved in your discourse.

      You Cannot Judge Islam by some pratican

      Voyager is not judging Islam by the actions of Muslims. He is quoting the Islamic cannon. That said, why should one not be able to judge an ideology by the way their practitioners behave and what they do in the name of their ideology. It seems fair to me.

      Lastly, you acknowledge that “some” Muslims do nasty things in the name of Islam. Yet, instead of going after them, you feel compelled to address hardcore secularists who would defend to the death your right to worship and preach whatever it is you want.

      I am neither blind, nor in the dark, and least of all frustrated. I live a healthy life and am very much aware of the different religious beliefs various around the world people hold. It ranges from the inspiring to the downright scary. But at no point do I treat it as dogma. I look at the evidence, and I suggest you start doing the same. It’s hard to ditch the familiar and risk ostracism by your community, but it’s also liberating to look for truth in a naturalistic and rationalist fashion, unencumbered with myths and superstitions.


    • I don’t think you have read my post or maybe you read it, but failed to understand it.

      “…i had never see a religion consider women ego as man”

      I never defended any religion especially when it comes to gender equality. Not only are all 3 monotheistic religions androcentric in nature, they’re misogynistic as well. My position was to show that even though Islam contends to be a liberator, it pays less than lip service to what freedom and true equality are.

      “…like Islam does ,before Islam women were like slaves , they could not heritage or have any type of proprieties”

      Please go back and read my comments about women before the advent of Islam.

      “…your not allowed to explain Quran”

      Ah! The famous “not allowed” to explain argument. Well why can’t I? I was born a Muslim, I know Arabic, I have read quite a bit on the matter, and I consider myself a rational person. Why wouldn’t comment or interpret the Qur’an? You mean to say that I need to be steeped in the Islamic Fiq’h before I can utter a word? Well I have debated many of those Ullamas…their intellectual framework, their ideas, and their exegeses are as stale as the ones coming from Al Ghazali & co.
      Question for you: Religion is not a science, so why does it venture into realms where it doesn’t belong? We know the universe wasn’t built in 6 days. We know we didn’t come from Adam and Eve. We know ants can’t talk. We also know earth isn’t flat and that we’re not the center of the universe…So why is it that Religion dares to make these statements that obviously it couldn’t prove; and we can’t venture into religion and parse out it fallacies and crazy stories? I will tell you why. Read verse 3:7 of the Qu’ran and we will see why Mohamed has forced you into an intellectual sarcophagus where every hint of innovation, critical thinking, skeptical enquiry, or reform will never emerge.

      “You Cannot Judge Islam by some praticant”

      Go back and read what I wrote. All my evidence came straight out of the Holiest artifact in the whole Islamic religion. The backbone, brain, blood, and soul of Islam…The Qur’an!

      “i can conclude from your attacks and hate on Islam is that your fear of being ignored makes blame Islam and Muslims,
i can’t imagine how blind , how deep in the dark, how frustrated you are .”

      I don’t blame Muslims for anything but I do blame their religion for its backwardness, its close mindedness, its intolerance, its hypocrisy, its bloody nature, and for its pseudo-intellectual arrogance to name a few.
      As far as being blind, deep in the dark, and frustrated statement is concerned, my reply is just this: Ignorance is bliss!

      Women in Islam part 2 of 3 coming up soon

      V.


  13. samira : “giving the daughter 1/3 and the son 2/3 of the inheritance” its simply clear : the responsibility man has much More than the woman has, a glimps on the Muslims society will show you that , i don’t mean to Say s.th bad, i apologise if i did , its the others who disrespect Our Islam & our Prophet
    for voyger who is contradicting, it’s some and only some people who are showing “intolerance” in the name of Islam and the “hypocrisy” of a few individual can’t at all ,be related to Islam , Islam is completely against hypocrisy, in the end the ” bloody nature” you said , a child losing his all his family by one bomb in Iraq or a Father who say his 1 year child killed by bullet in head , won’t call it , ” you gotta live it to feel it ,”


    • I have more than a mere “glimps on the Muslims society”[sic]. I can assure you that the patriarchal order is nothing specific to this society. It is, however, specific to old cultures. I need not tell you that women barely achieved gender equality in first-world countries last century. Some societies are more averse to undergoing that change because their ideologies are more rigid. For example: while the West is building itself on non-dogmatic principles, the Muslim world is doomed to remain in an “intellectual sarcophagus” (good one, V.!) impermeable to reason and science.

      Frankly, I think forcing kids to learn the Quran instead of teaching them about the wonders of science borders on child abuse. I think that is offensive! Much more so than the folks drawing cartoons of a person you consider “sacred”.


    • Where did I contradict myself, a si Kamal?

      Is your religion tolerant of atheists, apostates, homosexuals, Buddhists, Jainists, or Muslim women married to non-Muslims? is it?

      Is your religion ready to give women full equal rights as men and stop pretending that it had already bestowed that on them? Is it?

      Do you understand English, Kamal, or should we switch to some other language? I never condoned what the US did/is doing in Iraq, what it’s doing in Afghanistan, or what it pretends to support in Palestine. Moreover, this has nothing to do with the subject at hand. What we are discussing in this thread is Islam and not the US and its screwed up Mid-East foreign policy.

      Et pourquoi tu sautes du coq a l’ane? What’s the link into Ramadan’s speech? Although I don’t agree with his interpretation of historical facts, he was spot on asserting that no historical event should be sanctified…Amen to that!!! (pun intended)

      V.


  14. Women in Islam – Part 2

    [The Cow 2:282]
    “….Let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her…”

    Again the Qur’an is pretty clear here on how it values the mental abilities of the woman vis-à-vis the man’s. In a court of law a man’s eyewitness account is that of two women. Many apologists make the claim that God meant that in a positive way. Women weren’t familiar with business and with the men’s world and therefore could actually err. If this is a true religion coming from the epitome of justice, one must admit that it falls short on justice, equality, and foresight. As a supreme religion it could have easily mandated equal rights for both sexes, something it didn’t do although we all know it was/is the right decision. To those who claim that Islam did what it could, given the circumstances, my reply is simple: How about alcohol consumption? It went from acceptable to forbidden in less than 23 years. I now ask you: What’s more bigoted and insidious, drinking a glass of wine or treating all women as mentally challenged.

    [The Women 4:11]
    “…Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children’s (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females…”

    This is pretty much self-explanatory. The only comment I might add is the following: Since God is Omniscient; he might have known that the world would change. If so, how come the Qur’an, which is said to be timeless, isn’t keeping up with the times? Or conversely, how come time didn’t stand still not to contradict the Qur’an? And if you think this is not a serious issue, think again. I personally know of many instances where widows and daughters were left with almost nothing because the deceased didn’t have male progeny. In these case, uncles or male relatives had their share of the assets. If they didn’t have male relatives then the state comes into play. Here’s another example, regardless of how much money is left and how many wives a man leaves behind. Their inheritance will be 1/8 to share amongst the wives. As you can see this is pretty much skewed to favor men over women regardless of the case.

    b[The Cow 2:223]
    “Your wives are a tilth for you, so go into your tilth when you like, and do good beforehand for yourselves; and be careful (of your duty) to Allah, and know that you will meet Him, and give good news to the believers.”

    Your wives are your field; plow them, as you wish so you can sow your seed. Sorry to sound so crude but I needed to illustrate a point. Some apologists of Islam would want us to believe that this is a metaphor for foreplay. You need to ploy and work the earth for it to be fertile. Even if I were to accept this, how about the “when you like.”?

    V.


  15. NAIROBI, Kenya, December 3 (CDN) — A 17-year-old girl in Somalia who converted to Christianity from Islam was shot to death last week in an apparent “honor killing,”

    http://www.compassdirect.org/english/country/somalia/29407/

    Kamal, are these folks not following Islam? Is the punishment for apostasy not death according to the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence? I’m afraid Kacem’s got it perfectly right!


  16. How samira just how ?? Just another foolish argument to insult islam, If your brother go too jail , would you like to call all ur family criminels?? of cours not, In islam we have rules to everything, to all , “punishment by death was meant only for apostasy accompanied by hostility and treason”

    Dr. Mohammad Hashim Kamali
    [Professor of law at the International Islamic University of Malaysia; author of Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence, 2003 and Freedom of Expression in Islam, 1994]

    “The controversy been exacerbated further by reliance on the provision in the Sunnah which authorizes the death penalty for apostasy without due consideration of other evidence in the Sunnah to the effect that punishment by death was meant only for apostasy accompanied by hostility and treason. … The Prophet did not treat apostasy as a proscribed offense (hadd), but, on the contrary, pardoned many individuals who had embraced Islam, then renounced it, and then embraced it again. … [T]he Qur’an is consistent in its affirmation of the freedom of belief and it fully supports the conclusion that the objectives of the Shari ah cannot be properly fulfilled without granting people the freedom of belief, and the liberty to express it.” [Chapter: Freedom of Religion in Mohammad Hashim Kamali’s Freedom of Expression in Islam Islamic Text Society, 1997]

    #
    Dr. Tariq Ramadan
    [Swiss Muslim Academic and Scholar]

    “Q What about apostasy? What happens if you are born and educated a Muslim but then say: I have now decided that Islam is not for me. Would you accept that someone born into a Muslim family has a right to say that they no longer believe, and that families and communities must respect that?

    A) I have been criticised about this in many countries. My view is the same as that of Sufyan Al-Thawri, an 8th-century scholar of Islam, who argued that the Koran does not prescribe death for someone because he or she is changing religion. Neither did the Prophet himself ever perform such an act. Many around the Prophet changed religions. But he never did anything against them. There was an early Muslim, Ubaydallah ibn Jahsh, who went with the first emigrants from Mecca to Abyssinia. He converted to Christianity and stayed, but remained close to Muslims. He divorced his wife, but he was not killed.” [Interview: Tariq Ramadan]

    To more details http://apostasyandislam.blogspot.com/


    • Kamal,

      First of all, do we agree that the Islamic legal system of Shari’a or Islamic law is based on a set of laws that jurists research and infer from the Qu’ran and the Hadiths?

      If we don’t agree on that, I would say you either don’t know your religion and its precepts or you are a cherry picker, selectively taking what’s expedient and/or convenient.

      I will assume that you and I are actually in agreement and I will crack on…

      Here’s a link to five Hadiths (sahih as well) that I would like you to read and comment on. Here’s a proof again that regardless of what these politically correct “Muslim 2.0” are now wanting us to believe, the record is unalterable.

      http://www.al-islam.org/short/apostasy/

      …And how about the Riddah wars? What do you make of those? Why would Abu Bakr take the Muslim army to fight (and kill) the tribes that decided to leave Islam when Mohamed died?

      V.


    • I’m not looking to gratuitously insult Islam. I get threats from Muslims day in, day out.

      I mean…I insult Christianity and Buddhism on a daily basis, but have never ever felt threatened because of that.

      Anyway, Islamic holy texts such as Al-Bukhari are clear on the matter of apostasy punishment. No matter how progressive Muslims like yourself try to rationalize it or outright deny it.

      So please…instead of preaching to anti-theists, the priority for you should be to reform your religion and educate your co-religionists whom you say got it all wrong.


  17. Women in Islam – Part 3 of 3

    [Al Nur 24:6]
    “And (as for) those who accuse their wives and have no witnesses except themselves, the evidence of one of these (should be taken) for times, bearing Allah to witness that he is most surely of the truthful ones.”

    So if a man does not have four witnesses to prove his wife has committed adultery he can just accuse her four times and that is fine and accepted.

    Hadith – Sahih Bukhari 4:464

    “…Then I saw the (Hell) Fire, and I have never before, seen such a horrible sight as that, and I saw that the majority of its dwellers were women.” The people asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is the reason for that?” He replied, “Because of their ungratefulness.” It was said. “Do they disbelieve in Allah (are they ungrateful to Allah)?” He replied, “They are not thankful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors done to them. Even if you do good to one of them all your life, when she sees some harshness from you, she will say, “I have never seen any good from you.’ ”

    This again exemplifies the bias that Mohamed had against women. This also reinforces the notion that if a woman wants to enter the gates of Heaven, she has to willingly submit to the power and authority of her husband. Her unconditional obedience has been divinely ordained as her passport to Heaven.

    btw, there’s plenty more to address that I have omitted for the sake of time. If you want to, we can discuss the veil, Mohamed’s wives, the exegesis according to Al Ghazali especially around Adam, Eve, and women’s guilt, Omar’s input into this matter, and also how Islam is sex-positive…But for males only.

    V.


  18. Come on Guys. Islam is a man made ideology and the only reason it survived all this time is mainly due to the ruthless nature of the creed. Anybody with an iota of intellect can clearly see the evil nature of this cult.


  19. .. and I see no thought in your post.

    Cliché sur cliché, des fantaisies d’ignorant érigées en vérités générales. Cela dit, vous récolterez probablement un sucre à si bien brosser les préjugés de vos maîtres dans le sens du poil islamophobe.

    * “Religious freedom in Islamic thought has also been a periodic phase, developed to serve totalitarian goals.”
    ???

    * “At the beginning, Muslims were very vulnerable hence their initial peaceful rhetoric.”
    At the begining of what?
    What are you talking about?
    Which period of time? Which area?

    Si c’est pour être si peu rigoureux, si imprécis et croire qu’en balançant vos préjugés en anglais vous les rendrez moins grossiers, je ne vois franchement pas en quoi la liberté de pensée pourrait vous être utile.
    Votre billet montre assez clairement que vous n’en maîtrisez pas l’usage – contrairement à celui de la brosse à reluire les discours islamophobes dominants.


  20. so you take adventage on my absance , iam happy to see u doing well, this videos are chesing tails & turn in cercles , but i cant see some prgress here , Hamdolilah, watch this
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AFiwAo1uog&feature=fvw and visite http://www.ahmed-deedat.net its gonna help you


    • Welcome back.

      In trying to address the argument, “who created God”, Sheik Mohammed touches on the following subjects:

      -Anthropomorphism
      -Burden of proof
      -Ontological argument
      -First cause argument

      First of all Islam, its scholars, its apologists, and its adherents all assume a dualistically contradictory stance when it comes to anthropomorphism within their religion. While they explicitly reject it, they have no problem ascribing to their God every human characteristic there is. He’s merciful, omniscient, omnipotent, forgiving, jealous, boastful, and the list goes on. Here the Sheik claims that God is Merciful, all I need to understand is the extent to which that Mercy applies to me.

      This is very much analogous to the electromagnetic spectrum and its different segments. Although it’s a large continuum, biologically speaking, we can only see but a tiny spec of it. Now why would God create a large “Mercy” spectrum rich with nuances, flavors, and divines wisdom and yet cloak it all in one word? Why not differentiate between what is clearly representative and attributable to humans and what’s Godly and thus eliminate all confusion, clearly a small feat for an omnipotent divine being.

      If he does that, we end up in a world where there are clear characteristics and attribute differences between deity and mere mortals. But then how could we have an efficient two-way communication system that establishes the rules, the rewards, and the punishments so the members of the faith have a full understanding of their attributes and a sense of their limits as well? How do I know the meaning of Mercy, Justice at least from the standpoint of God vis-à-vis the mortals?

      How could we know when God is angry? Or Jealous? Or mad? Or knowing? The problem is when God talks about those attributes, he is talking to you, and me and he has to describe things in a way that you and I can comprehend and react to. One of two things ensues. Either he does, then anthropomorphism rules because he has to describe to us his feelings and attributes in terms we understand which will ultimately be reflected on us. Or he doesn’t, in which case this whole point is for naught because we would fail to relate to each other.

      Now on to the “If you can’t imagine something that doesn’t rule out an understanding of it” argument…You can imagine just about anything you want. You can add dimensions, colors, shapes, and entities to it, does that mean it exist? You don’t have to look past any work of fiction to get the point. Moreover, one of the many things the Sheik fails to produce through his awkward mental acrobatics is irrefutable proof to support whatever mythical beliefs he holds. The burden of proof is on the people who believe not those who don’t. Case in point, what you would say if somebody came to you and told you that he/she believed in the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
      Take a peek, it might be of interest.

      That leaves us with the First Cause Argument that the Sheik speciously uses to close the deal. This is an old and antiquated argument that’s of no longer any intellectual or philosophical importance. A Hindu was asked once “Who carried the World.” Without any hesitation, he said “The Elephant, of course.” The next question was: “And who carried the elephant?” “Easy” he replied, “the tortoise.” And finally “Who carried the tortoise, you think?” To which our Hindu friend replied, “Can we change the subject?”
      If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause as well. If you claimed that God doesn’t need a cause, then why wouldn’t I claim a universe without a cause too? That’s the fallacy and absurdity of this argument.

      Although the Sheik alluded to the problem of Evil and Religion when he quoted about Al-Ghazali, I will leave this for future article or post.

      V.


    • This gentleman is still stuck in the 15th century and I don’t have the time to answer his tawdry arguments and empty rhetoric. All he’s doing is regurgitate mixed metaphors, deceptive logic, and misinformation.

      There’s plenty of information on the Internet, libraries, and bookstores. Be highly selective of your sources, do some sound research, and respond to this gentleman yourself.

      V.


    • Empty rhetoric!

      I’m still awaiting some (any would do!) evidence that substantiates the extraordinary claim that a supernatural omniscient omnipotent being exists, and that he talked to a bedouin in 7th century Arabia.


  21. @ Princesse de Clève, or maybe Madame De La Fayette (Maybe you’re more inclined to assume the role of the puppet rather than the puppeteer…Could be mistaken)

    This is a circular argument at best and a meaningless piece of archaic psychological manipulation at worst.

    But, since you’re bringing this up, here’s a very simple question for you: If God has sealed our hearts, hearing, and eyes why would he punish us? On what grounds?

    Humor me…

    V.


  22. Here’s a link I stumbled upon. Moroccan apostates are growing in number and we should be proud of our work, progress, and intellectual courage at the collective and individual levels.

    Keep it up!

    http://www.moom-light.com/2010/08/apostasie/

    V.


  23. hey voyger you’re unfortunately funny ,stop choosing words just to show that you are a cultured person anyway that’s not our question, you say “rhetoric!” because u cant understand -for now- so i am gonna try explain to only one point : theres tow kind of atheism ; 1 is based on “scientific fact” and 2 based on a sensitive experiences or chock , i think your are the second type .

    samira you’ve ask about scientific effects This is just one , can you explain to me how the prophet Mohammad Peace upon him, could know , fourteen hundred years ago, the STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT of the embryo? tell me how

    my answer is here , i wait yours and this just one scientific proof. i have many

    http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=125946874132774&oid=173480286001549&comments

    to know how empty is the idea your defending : تحدى أحد الملحدين- الذين لا يؤمنون بالله- علماء المسلمين في أحد البلاد، فاختاروا أذكاهم ليرد عليه، وحددوا لذلك موعدا.
    وفي الموعد المحدد ترقب الجميع وصول العالم، لكنه تأخر. فقال الملحد للحاضرين: لقد هرب عالمكم وخاف، لأنه علم أني سأنتصر عليه، وأثبت لكم أن الكون ليس له إله!
    وأثناء كلامه حضر العالم المسلم واعتذر عن تأخره، تم قال: وأنا في ال…طريق إلى هنا، لم أجد قاربا أعبر به النهر، وانتظرت على الشاطئ، وفجأة ظهرت في النهر ألواح من الخشب، وتجمعت مع بعضها بسرعة ونظام حتى أصبحت قاربا، ثم اقترب القارب مني، فركبته وجئت إليكم.
    فقال الملحد: إن هذا الرجل مجنون، فكيف يتجمح الخشب ويصبح قاربا دون أن يصنعه أحد، وكيف يتحرك بدون وجود من يحركه؟!
    فتبسم العالم، وقال: فماذا تقول عن نفسك وأنت تقول: إن هذا الكون العظيم الكبير بلا إله؟!


    • “hey voyger you’re unfortunately funny”

      It’s just hilarious to stone adulterers, jail homosexuals and treat girls as half-boys.

      “This is just one , can you explain to me how the prophet Mohammad Peace upon him, could know , fourteen hundred years ago, the STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT of the embryo? tell me how”

      Surely it must have been divine inspiration. It can’t possibly be through the powers of observation. The invisible being in the sky told him 😉

      I’m sorry…if Mohammad had transmitted some modern physics formulae, I may consider the claim that he had an interstellar chit-chat with an omniscient and omnipotent being.

      You are deluding yourself and failing to see the confirmation bias that makes Muslims see whatever they want to see in the Quran. Jews and Christians have been suffering from this cognitive biases for ages. You’re just catching on.

      Educate yourself, kid! You’ll be doing us all a big favor. Maybe when you understand the history of ideas and the inner workings of the world around you, you won’t be baffled by a mediocre book like the Quran.


    • @kamal

      This is Islamic Medicine at its best and pure and shameless propaganda from the Saudis. Here’s a link to an interesting book where you can learn a bit more about this: http://amzn.to/e1AxfK
      If you are not a reader and words get you all confused, go to page 145.

      First of all, this theory that the Qur’an advances is neither original nor true. Here are some links you might find interesting. All the Qur’an has done was to copy from the works of Aristotle, Hippocrates, and Galen and reiterate something that we now know is wrong.

      Aristotle (born 900 years before Mohamed)
      http://iweb.tntech.edu/chem281-tf/Aristiotle.htm
      http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/a/aristotl.htm
      http://bit.ly/i6eikJ
      http://bit.ly/fTcMiW

      Hippocrates (born close to 1000 years before Mohamed)
      http://bit.ly/ek2oSS
      http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2009/2009-04-15.html

      The audio is a recitation of the verse 23:12-14

      Look up the word “alaqa” in one of the most important Arabic dictionaries Qamus al-Muheet by Mohamed Ibn-Yaqub al-Firuzabadi. It says that alaqa has the same meaning as a clot of blood. With that in mind, 23:12 and 23:14 convey the sense of man being created from clinging clay, which is consistent with the creation of Adam in the Bible from the dust of the ground (Genesis 2:7). Scientifically, we know that the embryo is never a clot at any stage of its development.

      In al-Bukhari, 8.593; Muslim Kitab an-Nikah, Mohamed says that the drop of sperm remains in the womb for 40 days, then becomes a clot for a another 40 days, then a lump of flesh for 40 days. It has been shown that human sperm can only survive inside a woman’s reproductive tract for a maximum of 7 days. Furthermore, in 80 days the embryo has already acquired the shape of a human being and looks nothing like either a clot or a mouthful of flesh.

      According to 23:14, the bones are created first and then they are clothed with flesh. According to modern embryologists, the tissue from which bone originates, known as mesoderm, is the same tissue as that from which muscle develops. Therefore, they both develop simultaneously and the bones continue to develop way into our teenage years. Here again we see that Mohamed and the Qur’an got it completely wrong. For more info on this, here’s a nice book on embryology :

      http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?index=books&linkCode=qs&keywords=1605479012

      Again if reading is not your suit, and words are a bit too heavy for you, check out Chapter 17, page 227…

      But wait, there’s more…Check out this book: Corpus Medicorum Graecorum: (Galen: On Semen) and you will find out that the Qur’an actually plagiarizes from the Greek physician, Galen who was born 400 years before Mohamed and who got this wrong as well. At least this guy did the work himself and didn’t pretend to get it from the almighty Allah!

      As far as your analysis of atheists, I can see that your analytical ability matches your reading and comprehension skills. You are the typical example of a person who has faith and no intellectual material to defend it. Instead of attacking my arguments, you are attacking me. Let me remind you that so far you have been unable to come up with anything that could resemble a sound and logical argument and/or evidence to support it.

      If you can dig up more half cooked, pseudo-scientific theories and claims from that infallible book of yours, please send them my way and I will debunk them for you.

      V.


  24. @ Samira,

    The aya is an aya :-)
    Words prompting reflections. They may be used as an argument – or not.

    Is the familiarity and contempt you are using with people with whom you disagree the conditions of what you call “a debate that adopts the rigors of reason and sound logic”?

    I let the readers use their own logic and reason and judge by themselves how simplistic and hateful your discourse about Islam is.

    “It’s just hilarious to stone adulterers, jail homosexuals and treat girls as half-boys.”

    Hilarious?! How can you find any oppression hilarious? How can you reduce Islam to these crimes and to your own prejudices – while its message echoes and closes the messages of monotheistic traditions?

    To start a rational dialogue, we need to be respectful of each other position which is obviously not your case. As a consequence, I won’t certainly “buzz” you soon.

    In conclusion, here is another aya – dedicated to your very inappropriate hilarity – an excerpt from the story of Noah (as) :

    “And as he was constructing the ship, whenever the chiefs of his people passed by him, they made a mockery of him. He said: “If you mock at us, so do we mock at you likewise for your mocking / And you will know who it is on whom will come a torment that will cover him with disgrace and on whom will fall a lasting torment.”
    (11:38-39)


    • The aya is an aya :-)
      Words prompting reflections. They may be used as an argument – or not.

      In the case of the Quran, it’s almost always used an argument. The same way proverbial saying are used in other cultures (and indeed our own).

      It’s a style over substance fallacy. Check out the rationalwiki entry.

      Is the familiarity and contempt you are using with people with whom you disagree the conditions of what you call “a debate that adopts the rigors of reason and sound logic”?

      Reason and sound logic do not require that I refrain from deriding ridiculous statements and beliefs.

      I let the readers use their own logic and reason and judge by themselves how simplistic and hateful your discourse about Islam is.

      Hateful? yes! Simplistic? no!

      I readily acknowledge that the Islamic tradition contains a great deal of collective wisdom. And that it enunciates certain aspects of morality. But it also codifies a system of values that is greatly outdated.

      I challenge you to find any moral precept that is somehow exclusive to Islam. How can you not see that the Secular Humanist philosophy is currently the most moral system of beliefs?

      Hilarious?! How can you find any oppression hilarious?

      It was sarcasm.

      How can you reduce Islam to these crimes and to your own prejudices

      I don’t “reduce” it to anything. I expose the values of Islam as obsolete. There is no doubt that Islam is much more than sexism, homophobia and stoning adulterers. But for the purpose of this discussion, I focus on issues that any educated moral person would find appalling.

      To start a rational dialogue, we need to be respectful of each other position which is obviously not your case.

      I respect you. I just don’t respect your beliefs. I find them delusional, retarded and very dangerous. If you were the only person to believe in winged horses and jinns, we’ll put you in a psychiatric ward. But you have strength in numbers, that developed through violent conquests, subjugation of dhimmis, and continues to expand through higher than average breeding. I am a reactionary to this expansion. You, on the other hand, hold unquestioned dogmatic beliefs because you feel the need to belong to some ethnic group. If you were born to parents who believe in Voodoo, you’ll be talking to us about how we should respect Voodoo rituals.

      I find your beliefs highly insulting. Indeed, you believe that the Islam, as a moral code of conduct, is the best we have. And that the Quran cannot be improved by mere humans because it is God’s perfect word. It’s highly insulting to me as a human, and to the wisdom and ingenuity we have displayed throughout the ages. Any of us can greatly improve the Quran in 5 minutes by scratching some of the sexist commandments it contains, and insisting on some aspects like the golden rule.

      I have no more obligation to “respect” Islam than I do to respect Fascism or any other ideology. Deal with it!


  25. GOD seal your heart only after you refuse to usa a GOD gift in goodthings
    First it was isalm how is cruel , and u find that you dont know islam well ,so you start seeing thers no God and find yourself defending a no-idea & refusing all sort of evidence you attacked me becuas i am 17 years kid, Pffff i was sure that a certain chock experience or failuer in life that makes think or unthink to be correct, since you dont have a minume of raison , you dont deserv my time anymore ,


  26. @kamal,

    Stop showing off…Based on your posts, we can all see you’re still in 2nd or 3rd grade.

    Off you go, and do some reading…It’s a life changer.

    V.


    • http://rekaaz.com/audio/playmaq-1085-0.html

      This is the same luminary who supports the false claim made by Mohamed about the human body having 360 joints. This is the same Professor of Islamic Sciences who believes in the half cooked theories of another numbskull, Dr. Keith Moore. This is the same genius that claims the stages of embryology were foretold in the Qur’an.

      This is Dr. Damardach who is on the Saudi payroll (as well as Dr. Keith Moore) to push this nonsensical Islamic Medicine propaganda. Just like the adherents of creationism and intelligence design, we have now the Muslims who believe that the Qur’an is Science.

      If you refer to “scientific miracles” as proof of the legitimacy of your faith, what do you do with those statements of the Qur’an and Mohamed that are proven wrong by science? If a true claim is proof for Islam, is a false one proof against Islam?

      V.


    • Tachri7 almoukh? This person is making the unsubstantiated claim that the Quran contains obscure knowledge that has only been recently unveiled by neuroscience.

      It’s outrageous! The scientific community would turn him a laughing stock if it ever bothered to address him.

      Kamal…you just exposed yourself as a fraud.


      • My HAT OFF TO YOU MY LADY!
        You certainly have class, stamina, knowledge, and BRAINS!
        You my lady are a living proof that whoever came up with Islam did not have the slightest clue as to what they were talking about when they spoke of anything!
        How can such poor mind(s) claim to speak on behalf of god if they have such poor judgement about human being just like them?
        I guess “god” is a convenient commodity for weak, insecure, “not yet grown up little boys” calling themselves men!


      • @Ocean

        Thank you sir! It’s always nice to read supportive comments.


  27. hi V u was rir about aristot
    so i add this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTgw1TUN_1Y&feature=relatedu can go diretly to 5 mn and u can see thw whl video after from the 1/5


    • Here’s another great example of intellectual dishonesty and dialectical acrobatics to defend the indefensible. Sperm is not created between the ribs and the backbone. Pick up any biology 101 book and you will get the correct answer.

      A Si Kamal, you have bored me to death with these stupid videos. You have no clue that you have no clue and that’s not even the start of it. Do yourself a great favor and get an education. Better yet, stay in your intellectual cave; it fits rather well the cave religion you do cling to.

      V.


  28. Hello people (and super-people i.e: mods),

    Does anyone know how Kacem is doing? The government issued a court order last year looking for him. Not to mention the numerous death threats he’s been getting.

    Is he still hiding? Arrested? Harmed? Or did he manage to flee the country?

    Peace y’all


    • @fawzi:

      Kacem is active on Facebook.
      I was not aware he was subject to a court order. I met Kacem last month and he never mentioned that. He did mention however the death threats and a complaint filed against him. Did the authorities give any credit to that complaint? That I do not know.
      He’s not exactly in hiding but had to leave his home town and now lives in a big city.
      Maybe Kacem can join the discussion and give us a bit more info.


  29. If a born again christian, a child of God, a Marroccan sho was a Muslum, is going back to Maroc, can he be safe there? Does he have rights?


    • @sylvie:

      Can he be safe anywhere? There are ex-Muslims attacks and threatened throughout the world. Some in Ummah take their religion seriously and actually follow what the Islamic cannon says about apostasy.

      In Morocco, the person will be considered Muslim without any recourse. It is illegal to renounce Islam in Morocco.


  30. Why does he want to worship human or Idols instead of worship Almighty Creator?

    Allah – there is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of [all] existence. Neither drowsiness overtakes Him nor sleep. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is it that can intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is [presently] before them and what will be after them, and they encompass not a thing of His knowledge except for what He wills. His Kursi extends over the heavens and the earth, and their preservation tires Him not. And He is the Most High, the Most Great.


  31. Stefan Mauerhofer

    @Arah: sensless sequence of words, there is no evidence for any god/allah.


  32. Wow these are real long comments – I’m a muslim, but not very religious, so long as you follow the basic rules your fine, I don’t see why it’s such a commotion.


Leave a comment:

You can use the following XHTML tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.


Swirly cluster