Israeli police arrest harem 'messiah' Goel Ratzon

Hang on a second, don't run away and try to get out of it that easily just yet. If you disagree with the above then why are you so relucent to condemn them openly when they are done specifically in the name of your religion?

Why is it every time a gross injustice done in the name of islam (your religion) is highlighted your condemnation falls fully on the fact that it was highlighted and never on the fact that it was commited?

 

I m here, don't panic..

I will be more than glad to answer your question, just notice how many questions you left unanswered so far, and try to get back to them and answer them, also there another poster in another thread are wondering if you ran away or still there..

me? so reluctant to condemn them openly?

what do you mean by openly? Appear on TV?

Great, each time some Muslim does a crime, I should appear on BBC maybe, and say, "I am Imad who posts on DP, I condemn this crime:

yeah good idea I will be famous!

but why I do not see you on Jordanian TV condemning crimes done by Atheists? oh do not answer.. I know the answer already, it would a pain to stay on on front of TV camera for like 25 hours every 24 hours repeating the same "I m StOx, I condemn the crime being done by bluh bluh"

 

Can you only manage to read one paragraph at a time. ?

Why is it every time a gross injustice done in the name of islam (your religion) is highlighted your condemnation falls fully on the fact that it was highlighted and never on the fact that it was commited?

 

Check some of the threads, where you and some others where highlighting and see what I posted there.

If you been following the thread here, we were talking about accusations to Islam, not crimes done by some Muslim, and when you been asked if it was based on a study, you said, it was based on an experience, then you ignored, then you finally said yes, and listed some points, and asked me to condemn them, I did, despite it was a clear divert attempt,

now can you try to get back and read the thread post by post? and see where you failed to answer? so far the first questions is not fully answered by you, since you did a study of my book, why you do not link it to the points you mentioned?

 

imad whats the point? I will link to a passage that clearly instructs muslims to murder and oppress and you will cry about it being out of context like you always do, As though given the right context cutting off someone's fingertips is even remotely acceptable.

Your ears are shielded for rational through by your inability to question even slightly the filth you have been raised to believe.

 

Or better say, you will misquote something, interpret it as you like, and not as it really means, then, cry how I twist, I already told you about this little game you use, I already told you about it here:

so let's review our progress so far:

1- you see a poster saying something about Islam, you comment agreeing and adding more info.
2- you are asked, is this info based on a study of Islam?
3- you did not answer, but said what means No, it was "from experience".
4- you are asked if you been a Muslim woman before?
5- you did not answer, but said what means No, it was from watching, reading news in your glorious nation.
6- you are asked about others who do crimes in your glorious nation, it looks like you do not even see them.
7- you did not answer, but started to speak about me not condemning crimes openly.
8- you are asked, what do you mean be openly? appear on TV?
9- you did not answer but said, I condemn highlighting not the crime.
10- you are asked ..
11- you did not answer ...

and so on ...

so where do you want to get, you are like having no point at all, my point was clear, was it based on a study of Islam?

it is very very very clear to all readers that it is not it is based on your hatred to Muslims, racism, but not a real study you did about Islam,

maybe you met a Muslim there in UK who did not bath for like few months not Islam's fault, maybe you met with a Muslim woman how is wearing hijab, and wished if she would walk half naked there like the other women in your glorious nation, to please you.

maybe else, I do not know, but what I know, and very sure about it, is you speak about Islam without knowing Islam

so try to know Islam before you start speaking about it, and making a fool of yourself as you did here, and in the other thread.

you are here demanding for answer, when you yourself is not answering, do not forget Realm's question, I m too curious now to know the answer, cos you ignored it twice now, despite he asked you directly.

 

The funny thing about your list is that i clearly, by your own admission, did answer your questions. You actually included my answers in the list you clown. Sorry if you couldn't understand the answer given or if it differed from the one you expected, but your limitations are hardly my fault are they.

But if you insist we can play the little game where i expose your religion as an oppressive cult and you run around in circles trying to justify something which is patently abhorrent and which, if actually practised in my country, would have you arrested and charged with domestic abuse.

Men are the managers of the affairs of women for that God has preferred in bounty one of them over another, and for that they have expended of their property. Righteous women are therefore obedient, guarding the secret for God's guarding. And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them.

Such a short passage and yet so many instructions to abuse women. it really is the cult of cowardly bullies.

So, with regards to that statement, answer the following question.
1. Are men the managers of women's affairs?
2. Should women be obedient?
3. Is it ever acceptable to ground women, deliberately starve them of affection as a punishment (something which is known today as passive abuse) or beat them?

Now you are in a tricky situation because you either, as a muslim, have to agree that men are the rulers of women, women should do as they are told and that they should be beaten if they don't do as their husband says or you have to, as a human being, say that these instructions are immoral, In which case you have reject that which you claim is the word of god.

I am ignoring realms question for 2 reasons. 1) he is a no mark and should refrain from addressing me directly and 2) it was, even if he doesn't have the capacity to know it, a rhetorical question. It would be like me asking you why you are such a cretin, then expecting an answer. Well done for procuring yourself a cheerleader though.

 

clown? oh great, why you been wasting glorious time with a clown till now?

well, the clown, still do not see an answer for the first question:

was it based on a study of Islam, speak like a man, why are your answers so vague, say something like:

Yes, I studied Islam, read its book, ..etc
or
No, It was based on an experience

then when you are asked about experience, make it clear, watching news, is not an experience, I hope you know this.

now you quoted a verse, from a translation of Qur'an,

which is a BIG progress, even if it came late, congratulations for knowing finally what the last 20 posts are about,

before I answer, there are so many different translations of Qur'an to English, why did you pick this specific translation for that verse?


the one you had is Arthur J. Arberry translation:

Arthur J. Arberry

all the below quotes are different translation for the verse you had in your post:

Yusuf Ali

Marmaduke Pickthall

S. V. Mir Ahmed Ali

Muhammad Mohsin Khan

Muhammad Asad

M. H. Shakir

Translation Committee

Ahmad Zidan and Mrs. Dina Zidan

Saheeh International

Muhammad Farooq-i-Azam Malik

Abdalhaqq and Aisha Bewley

M. A. S. Abdel Haleem

Thomas Cleary

Zakir Naik

before I reply your post, why did you pick that translation and not any of the other ones?

 

Oh, u're a fan of Zakir Naik too?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMAZR8YIhxI
Probably, you also think that a Muslim who chooses Christianity, and, for example, tries to convince you to join him, is punishable by death?

But it gets even better:
Zakir Naik, the same guy who supports death penalty for missionaries etc', he himself specializes in "da'wah", from Arabic "invitation" -> the name given to those who "invite" members of other religions to join Islam.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yj29Df-fy5M
0':30''
"Amal alawal, faini Ad'uhu ila (al-)Islam" = "Firstly, hereby I am inviting him (Obama) to (accept) Islam"
Ad'uhu , from the root like "Da'wah" --> invite, invitation.


It just doesn't get any funnier than these 7th century Muslims who suddenly find themselves in the 21th century so totally unprepared....You gotta love these guys.

 

Ok Chaos, try not to divert this thread too, and if you like to participate in the discussion, then make your participation related to the topic being discussed, right now, I m waiting StOx to answer, why he picked that translation in specific, despite there are many others, if you know the answer, go ahead,

I did not say I m a fan or not fan of anybody, just listed translations, by many translators, from West and East, that does not mean I m a fan of any of them or not, duh.

 

Ok, let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the translation i used is an inaccurate one and lets focus on an aspect of the passage which all translations agree on. The beating of a wife. Every one of the translations you posted, as well as the one i posted, instructs muslims to beat their wives for being disobedient.

Is it ok to beat your wife for being disobedient? Bearing in mind that you are arguing that islam isn't oppressive towards women.

 

The Islamic woman: a user's manual (based on the quran)

 

Good point stOx, but this is not why I asked about why you picked this translation in specific, it might not be you who picked it, but the site from where you copied it before pasting it here,

check that site, you will find other quotes from Qur'an, but I noticed on some of these sites, that they once quote Yusuf Ali translation for example, another time, they quote Pickthall, in another, they quote Arberry translation, the reason is clear, they will pick the translation that is most close to the hate agenda they are trying to promote.

for non-Muslim readers, they do not know, they think that this is Qur'an, but wrong, this is not, it is a translation of Qur'an from its original language, and as you have seen, there are so many different translations, not only in English but almost in every living language.


to your question, of course it is not OK to beat your wife, and it was never OK in Islam, and it will never be OK, Muslims asked the prophet about this specific verse, and it was the prophet pbuh who explained its meaning, not some scholar who came later, or an apologetic,

this been discussed and answered many times on these forums, and on internet million of times, this link below will explain Islam position in regard of wife beating:

The Truth about Wife Beating and Islam

Remember, contrary to that propaganda you support and promote, about women in Islam are ordered to be oppressed and do not reject it, women in Islam have the right to divorce their husbands, even if for the reason they do not stand them,

this list will summarize some of the women right in Islam, it will give you an idea why your fellow judge said that about Islam, why there are so many women reverting to Islam in Europe, despite the hate campaign against it there, they use their minds, women cos they are physically weaker than men, they are stronger in minds, they think, you too, use your mind, more often than you use your skills in spite, and hate, and bad-mouthing:

What are women's rights in Islam?

Now I h ope you and Chaos will stop trying to turn every thread to become about bad-mouthing Islam and Muslim, if you have something about the thread topic, post it, if you still feel you want to bad-mouth, spite, start a thread about Islam and Muslims, to keep this thread about its topic,

if you have anything about the topic go ahead say it, if not, I think I have smoe.

 

Are you saying it's ok to hit women so long as you mildly hit them? It's difficult for you to argue that islam doesn't oppress women when you are left splitting hairs of the severity and force with which they are hit by their husbands.

I think your inability to see how hitting women, however hard, is wrong shows just what your religion has done to you and your sense of what is acceptable.

 

Honestly stOx, did you watch that video?

 

Yes i did. the guy was arguing that when the quran say to "hit your wife" it meant hit them lightly.

Is it ok to hit your wife with any degree of force for being disobedient?

 

This is not exactly what he said, it means tap, and he mentioned that original hadith where the prophet himself pbuh explained by example, he took a miswak (toothbrush) and hit himself with it,

hit them lightly, hit them, beat them, and so on, were not left for anybody's imagination, because a light hit, for a bodybuilding champion for example, can be a big painful punch for another,

that's why there was an exact example, the question is, how did you understood it when you first read it, and how do you understand it now, or in specific, what is your understanding for a light hit? my answer to your question will depend on your understanding for a light hit, which I do not know,

but I say, it is OK to tap with something with the size of toothbrush that does not cause any pain, but more cause a signal that there is something wrong, that should be reviewed, which of course should not curtain any right.

 

lol.. good for him. put why does these women allow this goel to fool them. crap.

 

If the purpose was to "fool" then you would not see a right for a woman in Islam to "obtain divorce from her husband, even on the grounds that she simply can't stand him"

unless of course if you think women are inferior, and do not have minds, and can easily be fooled, I do not blame you, I know where this is coming from for you

Bible:

compare it with this from Qur'an:

 

See, imad, you think you have gotten out of it by splitting hairs over the varying degrees of force that a "hit" could involve. But for everyone else on this forum condoning hitting a woman, even with a "light tap", for being what their husband deems "disobedient" shows exactly the disdain and disrespect your religion has towards women. Even without the hitting, the expectation that they should be "obedient" is abhorrent enough.