Understanding ed

[Stu]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 13 2010,17:14)

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 13 2010,15:38) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 13 2010,07:52) 13 (It is) the setting free of a slave,   23:1 Successful indeed are the believers 23:5 And who guard their modesty – 23:6 Save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy, 24:32 And marry such of you as are solitary and the pious of your slaves and maid- servants. If they be poor, Allah will enrich them of His bounty. Allah is of ample means, Aware. 2:178 O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. (Slaves are not worth the same as free men…females are listed last). 16:75 Allah coineth a similitude: (on the one hand) a (mere) chattel slave, who hath control of nothing, and (on the other hand) one on whom we have bestowed a fair provision from Us, and he spendeth thereof secretly and openly. Are they equal ? Praise be to Allah! But most of them know not. How many of your slaves does 90:13 suggest you actually free?  One? Stuart It would have been better to conced the point since you asked where and I showed you, but instead you chose the path of contention and for what reason?

I made no comment about the sura you quoted. All I am pointing out is your hypocrisy in claiming that the koran suggests slaves should be freed, when it doesn't actually say you should free slaves, and elsewhere it describes how slaves should be treated and that they have a different value as human beings.

I await your next change of subject on the point you have lost.

Not that I care that you have lost.

Stuart

[theodorej]

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 10 2010,15:13)

BD Stu: You can be miserable and still feel you have been treated right.  Is this a bone you are going to hold onto for dear life despite the absurdity of your claim? Quote Then you have just made my point Huh?  I have pointed out that happiness is not a prerequisite to having ones rights upheld.  I don’t think that was the point you were making. Stu: So you, BD, MD, are declaring that menstruation is an illness.  How much more chauvinistic or just plain wrong could you be? Quote Did you know that women routinely call in sick to work because of cramps or heavy menstrual flow? If they can take a sick day because of it then it is a sickness sorry you have a very low regard for the health of women. When my wife tells me she is tired and doesn't feel like doing something because of her cycle I don't argue the point because she really doesn't feel good. So it’s not what you claimed then.  Thanks for straightening up your story.  Perhaps you could write to a few imams and point out that their koran is wrong regarding this fact. Quote There is so little you know or understand do you complain as much about pornography as you do women covering up? Dodge.  We are discussing your nasty belief system’s callous disregard for women’s rights.  You still have no arguments. Quote This is why I say you have no sense. Do you. Quote Women in Islam have much more rights than most nonmuslims give their wives they have the right to keep and spend all their own money however they wish while the man must spend his money taking care of the wife and the family, If my wife gets hungry or wants an ice dream in the middle of the night I cannot like a nonmuslim man say “okay see you later” I have to get up and go with her. Now go ask any woman would she prefer to travel alone or with a companion and see what will the answer be. Dodge, dodge, dodge.  No attempt to address the long list of rights abuses mandated in the koran. Quote No wonder rape is very high in America and extremely low in Saudi arabia It is not the rate of rape but the rate of reporting, which is lower because Saudi Arabia systematically abuses women’s rights in its application of the koran.  Would you be honest enough to actually outline the basis on which a woman may complain of rape and be taken seriously in Saudi Arabia? Quote You are violating the rights by trying to take away the right to practice freely ones religion without harassment I am not harassing you.  Harassment would be what Mo did to arabia. We do have freedom of expression in Western countries.  The harassment is in your head only, and does it actually constitute harassment to point out how nasty a belief system is?  Many people have died because of islamic supersensitivity to criticism, no doubt brought on by the way it hijacks the believer’s brain and makes the person confuse his own identity with the crazy ideas of his religion. Is islam the religion of peace or a manifesto of death?  Muslims don’t want that question discussed, and many want to have the right to kill people who try to discuss it.  That alone answers the question. Stu:  What is the penalty for apostacy from islam?  How much freedom do you think christians or atheists get if they try to publicly proclaim their beliefs in downtown Tehran or Riyadh? Quote I don't know but are you talking about Islam or the culture of some places where muslims live I keep telling you it's not the same. The Quran gives no penalty for apostacy and the Quran says let there be no compulsion in religion Shame most muslims who claim to be following Sharia Law because they are muslims, aren’t really muslims after all.  Are you the only muslim in the world?  Maybe when people ask you how many muslims there are you shouldn’t give the answer of a billion.  You obviously believe it is much lower. Have you joined any campaigns to have the fatwa on Salman Rushdie revoked? Stu: According to the Holy Wikipedia (pbui), “The traditional Sunni schools of Islamic jurisprudence are unanimous in holding that apostasy by a male Muslim is punishable by death.”.  Are those muslims real muslims BD or are they some of the millions who are not BD cult muslims and therefore are not islamic? Quote They are real Muslims but that doesn't mean they are practicing Islam just like the KKK here is the USA called themselves a Christian organization if that's what they are than that's what they are “Christians” it doesn't mean they are following the Bible rightly but if they say they are Christians who am I to say that their not in Islam God knows who the Hypocrites are and HE is the best judge Who defined islam as following just the koran? Quote You really don't know what a womens right should be, you just know what you would like. In some areas women should have more rights and in others men should have more rights.  Men and Women are different So you are ignorant and sexist after all.  And you are still not addressing points such as the value the koran places on witness statements from men compared with women.  Why should a woman not have the right to make a statement of equal value in the eyes of the law? Quote You mean how every man had a RIGHT to own other men or some other formerly held universal agreement, you make no sense if you go to a native land where cannibalism is the way of life are you going to suggest they have a right to do it? You also “Modern ethical philosophy”? Who's philosophy would tha be? It is the s ame kind of ethical thinking that demolished slavery. Stu: he nine year old Aisha that Mo had sex with was unquestionably a minor. Quote If that's true and it wasn't illegal and it wasn't even condemned in any other Holy Book such as the Bible why is it unethical or wrong? Are you claiming that holy books are ethical?  I would disagree strongly.   Mo’s sex with a minor was wrong because as such she was not of an age to understand the emotional implications of sexual intercourse and thus could not reasonably be considered to be capable of informed consent. Stu:  No you should not be allowed to kill people because you took offense at their reaction to your Dark Age misogynistic religious dogmas. Quote Welcome to Islam …the religion of peace. Stuart

Hey Stu….. This sounds to me ….To be a discussion that should be between women….The Korans teachings with respect to husband and wives become obvious in the public arena…If muslim woman elect to be modest and embrace full body cover it is their perogative although iam sure it is quite uncomfortable in warm humid weather…If they decide to be submissive that is their privledge….What I do not understand is why we have not heard from them when it comes to the laws they are subjected to….perhaps it is because thay have elected to embrace a life of submission or they are afraid for their lives….

[shimmer]

What people are raised into is what they consider normal. All others are not. To be submissive to a husband is normal in one place, culture, religeon, but in another, the woman would never be like that… no man tells them what to do…
With dress, wear muslim clothes in a western country and its just different. Wear revealing western clothes in a Muslim country you could get shot.

[Stu]

Absolutely right, both of you. Muslims living in Western countries where, apart from requiring covering of genitals, which is a different discussion, there are no proclamations about what you may wear are the litmus test here. If a vast majority of muslim women in Britain wore one of the forms of dress apparently mandated in the koran then we would understand that it is their preference. However that is not the case, and I rather think it is right that many of the women that do wear inverted sacks do so because there is an ongoing expectation from inside the family that they do.

There is some sick irony that jihadist terrorism has caused people to want to be able to see others' faces in public, and the same religion that inspired that terrorism also requires the wearing of face covering.

I do have some difficulties with the moves of some countries, notably France, to ban the burqa. However the context is important. Such a ban should be repealed if can be established that women are not being compelled to dress this way by their families or mosques.

Stuart

[Stu]

[Stu]

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 13 2010,17:51)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 13 2010,17:14) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 13 2010,15:38) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 13 2010,07:52) 13 (It is) the setting free of a slave,   23:1 Successful indeed are the believers 23:5 And who guard their modesty – 23:6 Save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy, 24:32 And marry such of you as are solitary and the pious of your slaves and maid- servants. If they be poor, Allah will enrich them of His bounty. Allah is of ample means, Aware. 2:178 O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. (Slaves are not worth the same as free men…females are listed last). 16:75 Allah coineth a similitude: (on the one hand) a (mere) chattel slave, who hath control of nothing, and (on the other hand) one on whom we have bestowed a fair provision from Us, and he spendeth thereof secretly and openly. Are they equal ? Praise be to Allah! But most of them know not. How many of your slaves does 90:13 suggest you actually free?  One? Stuart It would have been better to conced the point since you asked where and I showed you, but instead you chose the path of contention and for what reason? I made no comment about the sura you quoted.  All I am pointing out is your hypocrisy in claiming that the koran suggests slaves should be freed, when it doesn't actually say you should free slaves, and elsewhere it describes how slaves should be treated and that they have a different value as human beings. I await your next change of subject on the point you have lost. Not that I care that you have lost. Stuart

It actually did say that was the best path “The stting free of a slave” you can deny it but it is a poor choice on your behalf to deny what has been shown as it makes you unreliable in a dialogue.

If I say something is green and you see it as green but instead decide to say bad things about green then you are being dishonest.

Also it is you that has changed the subject, you asked me to show you where in the Quran does it say to FREE a Slave is an ISLAMIC VALUE and I did and you did not concede the point, if you had conceded the point then you could have started the topic of the VALUE of a slave or whatever but I did 100% show you what you doubted was in the Quran and you should concede the point if you want to be honest in the argument.

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,07:52)

Absolutely right, both of you.  Muslims living in Western countries where, apart from requiring covering of genitals, which is a different discussion, there are no proclamations about what you may wear are the litmus test here.  If a vast majority of muslim women in Britain wore one of the forms of dress apparently mandated in the koran then we would understand that it is their preference.  However that is not the case, and I rather think it is right that many of the women that do wear inverted sacks do so because there is an ongoing expectation from inside the family that they do. There is some sick irony that jihadist terrorism has caused people to want to be able to see others' faces in public, and the same religion that inspired that terrorism also requires the wearing of face covering. I do have some difficulties with the moves of some countries, notably France, to ban the burqa.  However the context is important.  Such a ban should be repealed if can be established that women are not being compelled to dress this way by their families or mosques. Stuart

The Quran does not instruct full covering as the burka it says:

O Children of Adam! We have bestowed raiment upon you to cover yourselves (screen your private parts) and as an adornment; and the raiment of righteousness, that is better. Such are among the Ayat (proofs, evidence, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah, that they may remember (i.e. leave falsehood and follow truth ).
( سورة الأعراف , Al-Araf, Chapter #7, Verse #26)

Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: And Allah is well acquainted with all that they do. And say that the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss.
—Sura 24 (An-Nur), ayat 30-31, Qur'an[1] O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them. That will be better, so that they may be recognized and not harassed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful. —Sura 33 (Al-Ahzab), ayah 59, Qur'an[2]

“And be moderate in thy pace, and lower thy voice; for the harshest of sounds without doubt is the braying of the ass.”
( سورة لقمان , Luqman, Chapter #31, Verse #19)

As you can see the Instruction is to be Modest out in public just as the Bible says

Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.
Philippians 4:4-6

This is why I say don't confuse Culture with Religion on one hane you have some wearing very little and some wearing too much but then you see as you say people who will be moderate showing the best of that religion because it's where the truth is.

This is why I say why just assume you know what the Quran teaches without actually reading it or asking someone who knows what's in it?

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,07:59)

This image is shown without the benefit of seeing her in her own house without the burka, you do know it is only an outside garment right?

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,08:00)

Why would it be important for you to see this woman's body? That is the question you should ask yourself

[Stu]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,09:44)

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 13 2010,17:51) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 13 2010,17:14) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 13 2010,15:38) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 13 2010,07:52) 13 (It is) the setting free of a slave,   23:1 Successful indeed are the believers 23:5 And who guard their modesty – 23:6 Save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy, 24:32 And marry such of you as are solitary and the pious of your slaves and maid- servants. If they be poor, Allah will enrich them of His bounty. Allah is of ample means, Aware. 2:178 O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. (Slaves are not worth the same as free men…females are listed last). 16:75 Allah coineth a similitude: (on the one hand) a (mere) chattel slave, who hath control of nothing, and (on the other hand) one on whom we have bestowed a fair provision from Us, and he spendeth thereof secretly and openly. Are they equal ? Praise be to Allah! But most of them know not. How many of your slaves does 90:13 suggest you actually free?  One? Stuart It would have been better to conced the point since you asked where and I showed you, but instead you chose the path of contention and for what reason? I made no comment about the sura you quoted.  All I am pointing out is your hypocrisy in claiming that the koran suggests slaves should be freed, when it doesn't actually say you should free slaves, and elsewhere it describes how slaves should be treated and that they have a different value as human beings. I await your next change of subject on the point you have lost. Not that I care that you have lost. Stuart It actually did say that was the best path “The stting free of a slave” you can deny it but it is a poor choice on your behalf to deny what has been shown as it makes you unreliable in a dialogue. If I say something is green and you see it as green but instead decide to say bad things about green then you are being dishonest. Also it is you that has changed the subject, you asked me to show you where in the Quran does it say to FREE a Slave is an ISLAMIC VALUE and I did and you did not concede the point, if you had conceded the point then you could have started the topic of the VALUE of a slave or whatever but I did 100% show you what you doubted was in the Quran and you should concede the point if you want to be honest in the argument.

Obviously a book that tells you how you may treat your slaves is hypocritical to claim that it is right to free a slave.

Your claim that the koran advocates freeing slaves is not convincing because of its hypocrisy. No change of subject there.

Stuart

[Stu]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,10:00)

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,07:52) Absolutely right, both of you.  Muslims living in Western countries where, apart from requiring covering of genitals, which is a different discussion, there are no proclamations about what you may wear are the litmus test here.  If a vast majority of muslim women in Britain wore one of the forms of dress apparently mandated in the koran then we would understand that it is their preference.  However that is not the case, and I rather think it is right that many of the women that do wear inverted sacks do so because there is an ongoing expectation from inside the family that they do. There is some sick irony that jihadist terrorism has caused people to want to be able to see others' faces in public, and the same religion that inspired that terrorism also requires the wearing of face covering. I do have some difficulties with the moves of some countries, notably France, to ban the burqa.  However the context is important.  Such a ban should be repealed if can be established that women are not being compelled to dress this way by their families or mosques. Stuart The Quran does not instruct full covering as the burka

I didn't say it did. However, as with the abiguous edict to kill those who oppress you, without pointing out that oppression is not the same as objection, it is the ambiguity of 33:59 especially that causes some to take it to its absurd conclusion. Therefore it is derived from the koran. Had islam not preserved the tradition of covering women up that existed before Mo, probably it would have stopped in Medieval times, if not in the Dark Ages when islam was invented.

Perhaps you should be out there telling burqa-wearing women not to take the koran so literally. More to the point, you should tell the muslim men who insist on this abusive dress code that the koran does not demand it.

Stuart

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,10:42)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,10:00) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,07:52) Absolutely right, both of you.  Muslims living in Western countries where, apart from requiring covering of genitals, which is a different discussion, there are no proclamations about what you may wear are the litmus test here.  If a vast majority of muslim women in Britain wore one of the forms of dress apparently mandated in the koran then we would understand that it is their preference.  However that is not the case, and I rather think it is right that many of the women that do wear inverted sacks do so because there is an ongoing expectation from inside the family that they do. There is some sick irony that jihadist terrorism has caused people to want to be able to see others' faces in public, and the same religion that inspired that terrorism also requires the wearing of face covering. I do have some difficulties with the moves of some countries, notably France, to ban the burqa.  However the context is important.  Such a ban should be repealed if can be established that women are not being compelled to dress this way by their families or mosques. Stuart The Quran does not instruct full covering as the burka I didn't say it did.  However, as with the abiguous edict to kill those who oppress you, without pointing out that oppression is not the same as objection, it is the ambiguity of 33:59 especially that causes some to take it to its absurd conclusion.  Therefore it is derived from the koran.  Had islam not preserved the tradition of covering women up that existed before Mo, probably it would have stopped in Medieval times, if not in the Dark Ages when islam was invented. Perhaps you should be out there telling burqa-wearing women not to take the koran so literally.  More to the point, you should tell the muslim men who insist on this abusive dress code that the koran does not demand it. Stuart

How is covering oneself outside abusive? Why isn't allowing someone to wear a bikini abusive? You have a twisted sense of abuse.

You know a lot of people think it's abusive to put make up on little girls. The society as a whole in “Liberal” places put pressure on women to look a certain way wear high heels that often cause foot problems later in life and enforce body images that lead to eating disorders, really Stu who is being abused?

[bodhitharta]

Quote (bodhitharta @ June 25 2010,18:00)

The reason why I created this thread was because ED has for several months set up a scenario of appearing to have special or secret knowledge While some may pay no attention to this “knowledge” others who do not understand his methods may be seduced by the repetitive use and structure of these “codes” lending them credibility when used with The Holy Bible. This has been an evolution initially ED presented his case calling these “the God Numbers” and his usage pro-spiritual and not derogatory or demeaning to individual or in my case The Quran or Islam and while I have no problem with anyone being derogatory or demeaning to something they don't heed to the problem was when I showed ED that his system worked well with Islam too but then I realized more and more that we were creating meaning not that there was any because if there was meaning ED wouldn't have been able to reject the positive Islam combinations and from that point he started creating all sorts of number codes as a tool to degrade and I had warned him previously that after looking over exactly how he was calculating that with not too much effort I could put together something that seemed dreadful if he “really believed” Notice in my first post I wrote Quote Of course there is no actual connection but the numbers make it seem so Now also note I called the thread understanding ED which clearly gives him room to respond and explain if the system he uses is valid or invalid I believe especially here in the “skeptics” section it is appropriate to challenge his usage of numbers just as I have been challenged for my belief and commitment to Islam and The Quran. Finally I made the second post to make extremely clear that either he has to admit his system is essentially arbitrary , subjective and without merit or he has to consider he may be the beast of revelations(once again my view is the former)

You never did explain

[Stu]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,11:22)

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,10:42) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,10:00) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,07:52) Absolutely right, both of you.  Muslims living in Western countries where, apart from requiring covering of genitals, which is a different discussion, there are no proclamations about what you may wear are the litmus test here.  If a vast majority of muslim women in Britain wore one of the forms of dress apparently mandated in the koran then we would understand that it is their preference.  However that is not the case, and I rather think it is right that many of the women that do wear inverted sacks do so because there is an ongoing expectation from inside the family that they do. There is some sick irony that jihadist terrorism has caused people to want to be able to see others' faces in public, and the same religion that inspired that terrorism also requires the wearing of face covering. I do have some difficulties with the moves of some countries, notably France, to ban the burqa.  However the context is important.  Such a ban should be repealed if can be established that women are not being compelled to dress this way by their families or mosques. Stuart The Quran does not instruct full covering as the burka I didn't say it did.  However, as with the abiguous edict to kill those who oppress you, without pointing out that oppression is not the same as objection, it is the ambiguity of 33:59 especially that causes some to take it to its absurd conclusion.  Therefore it is derived from the koran.  Had islam not preserved the tradition of covering women up that existed before Mo, probably it would have stopped in Medieval times, if not in the Dark Ages when islam was invented. Perhaps you should be out there telling burqa-wearing women not to take the koran so literally.  More to the point, you should tell the muslim men who insist on this abusive dress code that the koran does not demand it. Stuart How is covering oneself outside abusive? Why isn't allowing someone to wear a bikini abusive? You have a twisted sense of abuse. You know a lot of people think it's abusive to put make up on little girls. The society as a whole in “Liberal” places put pressure on women to look a certain way wear high heels that often cause foot problems later in life and enforce body images that lead to eating disorders, really Stu who is being abused?

The women who are forced to wear clothing against their will are being abused.

Stuart

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,11:36)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,11:22) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,10:42) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,10:00) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,07:52) Absolutely right, both of you.  Muslims living in Western countries where, apart from requiring covering of genitals, which is a different discussion, there are no proclamations about what you may wear are the litmus test here.  If a vast majority of muslim women in Britain wore one of the forms of dress apparently mandated in the koran then we would understand that it is their preference.  However that is not the case, and I rather think it is right that many of the women that do wear inverted sacks do so because there is an ongoing expectation from inside the family that they do. There is some sick irony that jihadist terrorism has caused people to want to be able to see others' faces in public, and the same religion that inspired that terrorism also requires the wearing of face covering. I do have some difficulties with the moves of some countries, notably France, to ban the burqa.  However the context is important.  Such a ban should be repealed if can be established that women are not being compelled to dress this way by their families or mosques. Stuart The Quran does not instruct full covering as the burka I didn't say it did.  However, as with the abiguous edict to kill those who oppress you, without pointing out that oppression is not the same as objection, it is the ambiguity of 33:59 especially that causes some to take it to its absurd conclusion.  Therefore it is derived from the koran.  Had islam not preserved the tradition of covering women up that existed before Mo, probably it would have stopped in Medieval times, if not in the Dark Ages when islam was invented. Perhaps you should be out there telling burqa-wearing women not to take the koran so literally.  More to the point, you should tell the muslim men who insist on this abusive dress code that the koran does not demand it. Stuart How is covering oneself outside abusive? Why isn't allowing someone to wear a bikini abusive? You have a twisted sense of abuse. You know a lot of people think it's abusive to put make up on little girls. The society as a whole in “Liberal” places put pressure on women to look a certain way wear high heels that often cause foot problems later in life and enforce body images that lead to eating disorders, really Stu who is being abused? The women who are forced to wear clothing against their will are being abused. Stuart

Everyone is forced to wear some clothing in most parts of the world are we all really being abused? Frankly if I could I would love to walk around naked everywhere I go, am I being abused?

[Stu]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,12:05)

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,11:36) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,11:22) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,10:42) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,10:00) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,07:52) Absolutely right, both of you.  Muslims living in Western countries where, apart from requiring covering of genitals, which is a different discussion, there are no proclamations about what you may wear are the litmus test here.  If a vast majority of muslim women in Britain wore one of the forms of dress apparently mandated in the koran then we would understand that it is their preference.  However that is not the case, and I rather think it is right that many of the women that do wear inverted sacks do so because there is an ongoing expectation from inside the family that they do. There is some sick irony that jihadist terrorism has caused people to want to be able to see others' faces in public, and the same religion that inspired that terrorism also requires the wearing of face covering. I do have some difficulties with the moves of some countries, notably France, to ban the burqa.  However the context is important.  Such a ban should be repealed if can be established that women are not being compelled to dress this way by their families or mosques. Stuart The Quran does not instruct full covering as the burka I didn't say it did.  However, as with the abiguous edict to kill those who oppress you, without pointing out that oppression is not the same as objection, it is the ambiguity of 33:59 especially that causes some to take it to its absurd conclusion.  Therefore it is derived from the koran.  Had islam not preserved the tradition of covering women up that existed before Mo, probably it would have stopped in Medieval times, if not in the Dark Ages when islam was invented. Perhaps you should be out there telling burqa-wearing women not to take the koran so literally.  More to the point, you should tell the muslim men who insist on this abusive dress code that the koran does not demand it. Stuart How is covering oneself outside abusive? Why isn't allowing someone to wear a bikini abusive? You have a twisted sense of abuse. You know a lot of people think it's abusive to put make up on little girls. The society as a whole in “Liberal” places put pressure on women to look a certain way wear high heels that often cause foot problems later in life and enforce body images that lead to eating disorders, really Stu who is being abused? The women who are forced to wear clothing against their will are being abused. Stuart Everyone is forced to wear some clothing in most parts of the world are we all really being abused? Frankly if I could I would love to walk around naked everywhere I go, am I being abused?

As I said, that is a separate discussion. The reason it is separate is because compulsion to cover the genitals is the majority view in democracies, and while it is unlikely to be changed soon, we could elect a government that had a policy of legalised nudity. You can campaign to have nudity legalised if you want, and if you gained enough support then I'm sure it could be made to happen.

Contrast that with Saudi Arabia and other islamic dictatorships where it is not the people but the clerics that hold sway regarding the compulsion for women to hide in a bag. That certainly is abuse.

It is also true that there are beaches all over the world where you can go naked. I bet that not many of those countries are muslim countries.

Stuart

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,15:02)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,12:05) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,11:36) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,11:22) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,10:42) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,10:00) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 14 2010,07:52) Absolutely right, both of you.  Muslims living in Western countries where, apart from requiring covering of genitals, which is a different discussion, there are no proclamations about what you may wear are the litmus test here.  If a vast majority of muslim women in Britain wore one of the forms of dress apparently mandated in the koran then we would understand that it is their preference.  However that is not the case, and I rather think it is right that many of the women that do wear inverted sacks do so because there is an ongoing expectation from inside the family that they do. There is some sick irony that jihadist terrorism has caused people to want to be able to see others' faces in public, and the same religion that inspired that terrorism also requires the wearing of face covering. I do have some difficulties with the moves of some countries, notably France, to ban the burqa.  However the context is important.  Such a ban should be repealed if can be established that women are not being compelled to dress this way by their families or mosques. Stuart The Quran does not instruct full covering as the burka I didn't say it did.  However, as with the abiguous edict to kill those who oppress you, without pointing out that oppression is not the same as objection, it is the ambiguity of 33:59 especially that causes some to take it to its absurd conclusion.  Therefore it is derived from the koran.  Had islam not preserved the tradition of covering women up that existed before Mo, probably it would have stopped in Medieval times, if not in the Dark Ages when islam was invented. Perhaps you should be out there telling burqa-wearing women not to take the koran so literally.  More to the point, you should tell the muslim men who insist on this abusive dress code that the koran does not demand it. Stuart How is covering oneself outside abusive? Why isn't allowing someone to wear a bikini abusive? You have a twisted sense of abuse. You know a lot of people think it's abusive to put make up on little girls. The society as a whole in “Liberal” places put pressure on women to look a certain way wear high heels that often cause foot problems later in life and enforce body images that lead to eating disorders, really Stu who is being abused? The women who are forced to wear clothing against their will are being abused. Stuart Everyone is forced to wear some clothing in most parts of the world are we all really being abused? Frankly if I could I would love to walk around naked everywhere I go, am I being abused? As I said, that is a separate discussion.  The reason it is separate is because compulsion to cover the genitals is the majority view in democracies, and while it is unlikely to be changed soon, we could elect a government that had a policy of legalised nudity.  You can campaign to have nudity legalised if you want, and if you gained enough support then I'm sure it could be made to happen. Contrast that with Saudi Arabia and other islamic dictatorships where it is not the people but the clerics that hold sway regarding the compulsion for women to hide in a bag.  That certainly is abuse. It is also true that there are beaches all over the world where you can go naked.  I bet that not many of those countries are muslim countries.   Stuart

No, it's not a seperate discussion at all it's the same thing you just see it differently because of your own opinion of what is acceptable which in your case would include two men intimately tongue kissing each other in the park even if they were Father and Adult Son being incestuous

[Ed J]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,11:30)

I called the thread understanding ED which clearly gives him room to respond and explain if the system he uses is valid or invalid

Hi Everyone,

BD is lying again!
BD uses a flawed x6 cipher,
which BD wrongly attributes to me!

For the reader's sake:
I(Ed J) no longer Post directly to BD, nor answer his postulating questions,
because BD continues to make outrageous personal attacks
which go ignored by the owner of this site.

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 15 2010,08:04)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 14 2010,11:30) I called the thread understanding ED which clearly gives him room to respond and explain if the system he uses is valid or invalid Hi Everyone, BD is lying again! BD uses a flawed x6 cipher, which BD wrongly attributes to me! For the reader's sake: I(Ed J) no longer Post directly to BD, nor answer his postulating questions, because BD continues to make outrageous personal attacks which go ignored by the owner of this site.

How is it flawed, ED and why is it flawed when it doesn't agree with your ideas? The fact is we can use a known acceptable system of numbers to say honestly that ED is LUCIFER=666 which happens to also say Mark of the beast=666

Now in revelations it says the mark of the beast is 666 which in simple gematria is 111 nust like ED is Lucifer =111 in simple gematria but Revelations said use wisdom so if Mark of the beast =666 in English Gematria and ED is LUcifer=666 in English Gematria what should I think?

Is it coincidence, are the numbers wrong or are you Lucifer?

[Author]

Posts