Sex Jihad - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Zulfiqar · #16 09-24-2013, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

Um... that's still prostitution. It might not be as profitable as the stuff over here on the streetcorners, but it's still sex for money.

to understand it one has to let go of todays thinking, imagine womens rights 1000 years ago anywhere in the world.

Without their man young women were seen as "the sum of all evil" or even open property - hence they needed a man to tag along, Older widows who did not have children usually got the magic witch brand.

in any case - this newspiece is sickening.

martureo · #17 09-24-2013, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zulfiqar

to understand it one has to let go of todays thinking, imagine womens rights 1000 years ago anywhere in the world.

.....or you could simply go to 7th century Arabia and ask the women of Muhammed's time.

Please don't be so thick as to assume that women's rights were made better by the introduction of Islam.

Quote:

Without their man young women were seen as "the sum of all evil" or even open property

Really only to the Arabs... The Greeks, Romans, Jews, Christians, etc didn't quite see it that way.

Quote:

- hence they needed a man to tag along, Older widows who did not have children usually got the magic witch brand.

in any case - this newspiece is sickening.

Muhammed is sickening.

aklim · #18 09-24-2013, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

I cannot imagine Aklim would have objected. Fun story.

I don't. If the woman has 20-30 partners, who gets sloppy seconds, thirds and so on?

aklim · #19 09-24-2013, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zulfiqar

the temporary marriage has a little detail that makes it apart from prostitution. A woman cannot enter into another contracted marriage for atleast 2 months. And if she is actually pregnant the father of the kid has to raise/support him till adulthood. No getting out.

WTH sort of fatwa is that a woman can have a baby without knowing the actual father of it. The article claims that the ladies were bunking with 30 or 100 men - for 100 men it would take 200 months gap meaning the entire war should have at least run for about 16 years at least

Maybe they are minutemen missiles? Annabell Chong did something close to it, why can't they? I mean, if they line up and each take a minute, it would take 100 minutes.

Zulfiqar · #20 09-24-2013, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

.....or you could simply go to 7th century Arabia and ask the women of Muhammed's time.

Please don't be so thick as to assume that women's rights were made better by the introduction of Islam. Really only to the Arabs... The Greeks, Romans, Jews, Christians, etc didn't quite see it that way. Muhammed is sickening.

Im not assuming that any religion made womens rights better or worse. Im trying to convey the fact that their rights were very very limited and usually tied to their husbands in most parts of history that was documented.

how does this newspiece make Muhammad sickening, some moron from Tunisia says something incredibly stupid and everyone assumes Muhammad is sickening, That is the equivalent of some priest saying something idiotic and Jesus is assumed to be sickening.

martureo · #21 09-24-2013, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zulfiqar

Im not assuming that any religion made womens rights better or worse. Im trying to convey the fact that their rights were very very limited and usually tied to their husbands in most parts of history that was documented.

You are (rightfully) trying to make your religious texts/culture seem less disgusting than it is.

The problem is the cultural context makes it sound no less worse or any less like prostitution.

Quote:

how does this newspiece make Muhammad sickening,

It doesn't. The Qu'ran and the Hadith do a good job of that. This only exposes the facts of the situation to the public. Too bad the public will just assume that is only a new development/practice of the extremist Muslim. Just like the beheading of the UK soldier a few months ago.

Quote:

some moron from Tunisia says something incredibly stupid and everyone assumes Muhammad is sickening, That is the equivalent of some priest saying something idiotic and Jesus is assumed to be sickening.

No, because the authentic writings never have Jesus saying anything like that.

The Hadith has Muhammed saying such things.

Claims and stupid comments aren't the issue, the underlying text is the issue.

panZZer · #22 09-24-2013, 02:47 PM

Look pal the title of this thread is offensive to jihadists, please show more sensetivity in the future.

martureo · #23 09-24-2013, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by panZZer

Look pal the title of this thread is offensive to jihadists, please show more sensetivity in the future.

No more offering your coworkers a bacon sandwich either. That's just rude.

aklim · #24 09-24-2013, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zulfiqar

Im not assuming that any religion made womens rights better or worse. Im trying to convey the fact that their rights were very very limited and usually tied to their husbands in most parts of history that was documented.

how does this newspiece make Muhammad sickening, some moron from Tunisia says something incredibly stupid and everyone assumes Muhammad is sickening, That is the equivalent of some priest saying something idiotic and Jesus is assumed to be sickening.

I think that both are sickening. Which is more is debatable

Zulfiqar · #25 09-24-2013, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

You are (rightfully) trying to make your religious texts/culture seem less disgusting than it is.

The problem is the cultural context makes it sound no less worse or any less like prostitution. It doesn't. The Qu'ran and the Hadith do a good job of that. This only exposes the facts of the situation to the public. Too bad the public will just assume that is only a new development/practice of the extremist Muslim. Just like the beheading of the UK soldier a few months ago. No, because the authentic writings never have Jesus saying anything like that.

The Hadith has Muhammed saying such things.

Claims and stupid comments aren't the issue, the underlying text is the issue.

I think you are assuming a lot without any reason, why would I have the need to prove any religious culture/text on this forum. I myself said that this is sickening - you then go ahead and add the word Muhammad for some reason known to you only - which then somehow becomes me trying to prove MY cultural/religious rights...

The underlying text is that - morons such as this wacko in Tunisia should be hanged, in no circumstances can multiple bed partners be allowed in the sanctity of marriage. Even the 4 wives deal is for muslim men because their kids would have their family names, not like the article where a party of men are with a handful of women. How can a woman tell whose kid is born when she slept with 50 men.

martureo · #26 09-24-2013, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zulfiqar

I think you are assuming a lot without any reason, why would I have the need to prove any religious culture/text on this forum.

IIRC you have identified yourself as a Muslim before. It is only natural for you to defend or lessen the blow to the religion/culture of yourself or your relatives/friends.

I never said you needed to.

Quote:

I myself said that this is sickening - you then go ahead and add the word Muhammad for some reason known to you only -

Muhammed is the source for the practice, is he not? Or do you reject those particular Hadith?

Quote:

which then somehow becomes me trying to prove MY cultural/religious rights...

You have the right to believe whatever you wish.

I have the right to disagree.

Zulfiqar · #27 09-24-2013, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

IIRC you have identified yourself as a Muslim before. It is only natural for you to defend or lessen the blow to the religion/culture of yourself or your relatives/friends.

I never said you needed to.Muhammed is the source for the practice, is he not? Or do you reject those particular Hadith? You have the right to believe whatever you wish.

I have the right to disagree.

So identifying myself as a muslim automatically makes me someone who would defend anything some idiot like this guy in Tunisia is saying because it has the word Islam attached to it - NO! - the guy is an idiot.

aklim · #28 09-24-2013, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zulfiqar

So identifying myself as a muslim automatically makes me someone who would defend anything some idiot like this guy in Tunisia is saying because it has the word Islam attached to it - NO! - the guy is an idiot.

The other option is to reject it. IOW, I wash my hands of you and your Tunisian crap. OTOH, if you keep silent, I can't read your mind. Your past has shown that you can get offended and make noise, etc, etc so I can't believe that you can be silent if you actually believed it was a bunch of crap and an insult to your faith.

For instance, I insult your wife. If you simply stand by, I might believe you are the meek sort. However, if you punch me in the nose, I assume you know how to show your displeasure. So, if you wife says or does something and you remain silent, what should I conclude about you?

What you are saying is that an organization like the RC church has "a few bad apples" concerning the boy-priest relationships. On the surface, sure. However, look deeper. What did the church do about it? I know in Milwaukee, they declared bankruptcy. What did the Pope, the head of the organization do with a big timer like Cardinal (Prince of the church) Law? Did the Pope defrock him and toss him to the authorities for his part? Nope. They did the Catholic Shuffle and brought him to the Vatican. What that Pope did was perpetuated by the next head. So, what would you say? That they are honorable people or a bunch of crooks? I'd go for the latter. When my employee screws up, I take ownership and fix the problem and not hide the employee away.

martureo · #29 09-24-2013, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zulfiqar

So identifying myself as a muslim automatically makes me someone who would defend anything some idiot like this guy in Tunisia is saying because it has the word Islam attached to it - NO! - the guy is an idiot.

You're missing something.

I never claimed that you were defending the actions of anyone in Tunisia or Syria. Neither did I say that you were somehow required to defend anything of the sort, modern or ancient.

I observed that you were trying to defend your religion by trying to provide 7th century context of the practice. And I further noted that context didn't make it any better.

Kuan · #30 09-24-2013, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

I don't. If the woman has 20-30 partners, who gets sloppy seconds, thirds and so on?

eeeew...