Ask about Islam

[Kitten]

How does the islam affect how you (don't) groom or shave your pubic hair?

[Pingu]

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

Go to Google. Do a search with these three words: [Christians persecute Muslims] and look at the results. Now swap the order to [Muslims persecute Christians] and look at the results again. Pretty much identical and it is heavily leaning to links about Muslims persecuting Christians, predominantly in the Middle East countries of Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Syria.

It depends on how you define persecution. Try being a Muslim in Chechyna or a Muslim in the Balkans 20 years ago. Bear in mind that you live in the West where the press will obviously report persecution of Christianity more heavily than the other way around. Likewise, if you are living in the West then persecution of Muslims will hold more weight.

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

Paint it however you want but if you want to die a gruesome death or rot in a prison, be a Muslim who converts to Christianity in the Middle East. By contrast, you could live in Rome and convert to Islam without gaining a death sentence.

Whilst I won't deny that may happen in certain circumstances, it is inaccurate to say that this is widespread and in every single country and every single case. A lot of the top schools in Pakistan are Christianity based because they receive better private funding. A lot of Muslim children are sent abroad to American and UK schools which have their roots in Christianity. These people do not return to their country and become persecuted.

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

My problem is when the "90%" do too little to stop the known troublemaking faction BEFORE a tragedy is borne. Why is it so necessary for law enforcement and government intelligence to infiltrate a mosque to discover plots before they hatch? If that vast majority of Muslims did more to police their own members, there would be far fewer religious persecutions, murders, acid-assaults, and bombings.

Are you in law enforcement? How do you know people have not reported groups who are planning attacks. Again, bear in mind that the cells who are planning attacks are not going to around advertising that the are about to bomb somewhere.

As you said in your previous paragraph, 99.9 of Muslims are in no way linked to extremists so why should they blamed for inaction when it is almost impossible to stop it.

Using your logic - why was there inaction amongst the community for events such as a bomb at a mosque, an arson attack a mosque and even an arson attack a school.

How much press have those three incidents gotten? Imagine if the bomb was at a church.

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

And to preempt, of course Muslims are not the only ones worldwide who commit crimes. But this thread was started to clear up and educate about Islam and its followers. So the topic is Muslims, not everyone else. Please stay on your own topic and not try to toss it off on "the problem is everywhere" because well, it isn't.

You are saying that the problem only lies with Islam when there is more than enough proof that this occurs around the world regardless of religion. In order to argue against your opinion, of course other religions will need to be brought into it to provide context.

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

The last item is my suggestion to not show your own prejudice too soon. To attack a news source without proof that the story they publish is actually false is a bad tactic.

Firstly, the Vatican has refused to comment on what that particular spokesman has said. Furthermore, the organisations that they have used for comment in the article are all pro-Christian groups. The only non-biased group they got a quote from said:

"Dinah Pokempner, general counsel for Human Rights Watch, was not able to independently verify the Vatican's figure, but said, "I think there’s little doubt that every week, every day, someone in the world is being persecuted – even to the point of losing their life – based on their religion."

"Persecution is a daily event on the basis of religion," Pokempner said. "This persecution affects Christians just as it does Muslims, Jews, Bahá'ís and people of other faiths.""

The problem is not associated solely with Islam and it would be incredibly naive to think so.

[Pingu]

Originally Posted by Kitten

How does the islam affect how you (don't) groom or shave your pubic hair?

Pubic hair should be shaved or at the very least well groomed.

[Dareholic]

I remember something that I read years ago. Why it popped in my head, I will never know. But here it is: In Islam, isn't it a sin to pluck your eyebrows? If so, why would this be considered a sin?

[Sharp Shooter]

Originally Posted by Pingu

It depends on how you define persecution. Try being a Muslim in Chechyna or a Muslim in the Balkans 20 years ago. Bear in mind that you live in the West where the press will obviously report persecution of Christianity more heavily than the other way around. Likewise, if you are living in the West then persecution of Muslims will hold more weight.

I usually define words by their common use in the dictionary. Try it sometime. Although it does make slanting stories more difficult.

Originally Posted by Pingu

Whilst I won't deny that may happen in certain circumstances, it is inaccurate to say that this is widespread and in every single country and every single case. A lot of the top schools in Pakistan are Christianity based because they receive better private funding. A lot of Muslim children are sent abroad to American and UK schools which have their roots in Christianity. These people do not return to their country and become persecuted.

Good thing I never said that it was widespread and in every single country and every single case. A common trick, as you used here, is to manufacture a far more extreme set of criteria than originally used, then to denounce that "suddenly extreme" statement as being false. All the while, the original statement is forgotten. You don't score by distorting and avoiding a direct answer to a simple statement.

Originally Posted by Pingu

Are you in law enforcement? How do you know people have not reported groups who are planning attacks. Again, bear in mind that the cells who are planning attacks are not going to around advertising that the are about to bomb somewhere.

As you said in your previous paragraph, 99.9 of Muslims are in no way linked to extremists so why should they blamed for inaction when it is almost impossible to stop it.

The mainstream practice of Islam teaches passivity. Not aggression. The extremists have perverted the practice of Islam to an aggressive, violent strain that we all agree is NOT consistent with the mainstream practice of Islam. So to move along, my statement referred to the vast majority claiming to "not have a clue" about a vocal, extremist view that sticks out like a sore thumb. Yes, those radicals are ejected from the mosques. And then the majority of Muslims simply turn their backs and pretend the extremists did not exist. They normally do NOT tell law enforcement or otherwise act to protect non-Muslims who will likely be victims of those extremists. THAT is my criticism. And NO, I am not law enforcement or military. But I can send a few black helicopters over your home at night if you like.

Originally Posted by Pingu

Using your logic - why was there inaction amongst the community for events such as a bomb at a mosque, an arson attack a mosque and even an arson attack a school.

How much press have those three incidents gotten? Imagine if the bomb was at a church.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but you are in the UK, not Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, etc. England is a predominantly CHRISTIAN land. If you want moral outrage, go to the Middle East, the homeland of Islam. And the police in the first item you noted already arrested a 75-year-old loner. The other two are so recent to the reports that you need to trust in your HOST country's law enforcement to do it's job. You are not in Syria or Iraq or Egypt. If you feel those countries have superior results, I would comment to "not let the door hit you in the butt on your way out."

Originally Posted by Pingu

You are saying that the problem only lies with Islam when there is more than enough proof that this occurs around the world regardless of religion. In order to argue against your opinion, of course other religions will need to be brought into it to provide context.

No, I never said that. AGAIN! I simply pointed out the PREDOMINANCE of it happening with your chosen religion of this topic, than with any other majority religion. YOU picked to promote Islam. That is your prerogative. I simply pointed out how Islam has significant skeletons in its closet. Since I did not promote any other religion as superior or fault-free, you cannot deflect what I said into "everyone else is doing it too so it's not my fault."

Originally Posted by Pingu

Firstly, the Vatican has refused to comment on what that particular spokesman has said. Furthermore, the organisations that they have used for comment in the article are all pro-Christian groups. The only non-biased group they got a quote from said:

"Dinah Pokempner, general counsel for Human Rights Watch, was not able to independently verify the Vatican's figure, but said, "I think there’s little doubt that every week, every day, someone in the world is being persecuted – even to the point of losing their life – based on their religion."

"Persecution is a daily event on the basis of religion," Pokempner said. "This persecution affects Christians just as it does Muslims, Jews, Bahá'ís and people of other faiths.""

The problem is not associated solely with Islam and it would be incredibly naive to think so.

Your argument that because a source is not "unbiased" must mean that the source's information is wrong is horrendously invalid. You have NOT proven that the information is flawed, and by whose definition of "unbiased" are we to go, yours? Mine? Neither your opinion nor mine about ANY source will make its information any more or less factual. I suggest that you work on the factual basis of an article to decide its validity and not on whether that source meets your personal approval.

[Pingu]

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

I usually define words by their common use in the dictionary. Try it sometime. Although it does make slanting stories more difficult.

So you don't want to want to respond to my points regarding persecution of Muslims in Eastern Europe? No, I didn't think so. You obviously have nothing further to add as you are just resorting to petty insults now. I'll reply to the rest of your points and then if you have any further points, you can PM me as the point of the thread is to ask questions.

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

Good thing I never said that it was widespread and in every single country and every single case. A common trick, as you used here, is to manufacture a far more extreme set of criteria than originally used, then to denounce that "suddenly extreme" statement as being false. All the while, the original statement is forgotten. You don't score by distorting and avoiding a direct answer to a simple statement.

Quoting you exactly, "Paint it however you want but if you want to die a gruesome death or rot in a prison, be a Muslim who converts to Christianity in the Middle East". I haven't twisted your words in any way. Had you said, "Certain converts get horrific treatment in some parts of the Middle East" then I would be inclined to agree with you. That's not what you said though. Throughout your posts, you have made very general statements and then when challenged on them, you have quickly backtracked.

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

Yes, those radicals are ejected from the mosques. And then the majority of Muslims simply turn their backs and pretend the extremists did not exist. They normally do NOT tell law enforcement or otherwise act to protect non-Muslims who will likely be victims of those extremists. THAT is my criticism. And NO, I am not law enforcement or military.

The point that I was making with you not being law enforcement is that how do you know who does and does not inform on other people? You have no idea.

In respect of the Boston Bomber, as far as I recall, he was ejected from a mosque for saying that an Imam can not used MLK in a sermon as he was not a Muslim. It is a large jump to go from that to killing people in a bombing. It is not always easy to inform on a suspected terrorist because they are not going to make it easy for people to know that they are about to commit a terrorist attack.

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

Maybe you haven't noticed, but you are in the UK, not Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, etc. England is a predominantly CHRISTIAN land. If you want moral outrage, go to the Middle East, the homeland of Islam. And the police in the first item you noted already arrested a 75-year-old loner. The other two are so recent to the reports that you need to trust in your HOST country's law enforcement to do it's job. You are not in Syria or Iraq or Egypt. If you feel those countries have superior results, I would comment to "not let the door hit you in the butt on your way out."

Your xenophobia is coming out now. Firstly, I was born in England and my Dad works for the British Government so don't give me any of "HOST country" crap. This is my country as much as anyone else's.

Secondly, the reason why I posted the three articles was to show you that it is almost impossible to stop someone if they are hell bent on committing a crime. You can be sure that multiple people know who burnt down the mosque and tried to burn down a school (with children in it might I add) but no-one has come forward. Do you feel the EDL are to blame for not informing on whoever carried out the attacks?

Another reason I posted them was to show to you the indifferent response that those three attacks got in the Western press. Before I posted those articles, how much did you know about them honestly? Had there been a bomb at a Church, a Church burned down or an arson attack on a Christian school with children in it - can you imagine how much press it would have got? I direct to you my statement about the media.

Lastly, I never once criticised the police in respect of their response to the attacks. That's just your xenophobia coming out.

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

No, I never said that. AGAIN! I simply pointed out the PREDOMINANCE of it happening with your chosen religion of this topic, than with any other majority religion. YOU picked to promote Islam. That is your prerogative. I simply pointed out how Islam has significant skeletons in its closet. Since I did not promote any other religion as superior or fault-free, you cannot deflect what I said into "everyone else is doing it too so it's not my fault."

Again quoting you directly, "Try to toss it off on "the problem is everywhere" because well, it isn't." Backtracking again?

Also, this thread was never made to promote Islam. It is a thread to ask questions about Islam because a lot of people may not have Muslim friends or be comfortable going into a Mosque to ask such questions.

If I wanted to promote or preach Islam then I would be posting links to scholars who are far more educated than me. Do you really think me answering questions about whether Muslims can shave their pubic hair is going to make people convert?

Originally Posted by Sharp Shooter

Your argument that because a source is not "unbiased" must mean that the source's information is wrong is horrendously invalid. You have NOT proven that the information is flawed, and by whose definition of "unbiased" are we to go, yours? Mine? Neither your opinion nor mine about ANY source will make its information any more or less factual. I suggest that you work on the factual basis of an article to decide its validity and not on whether that source meets your personal approval.

Oh dear. Human Rights Watch and the US State Department (i.e. your government) have said they can not verify the figures. The Vatican themselves did not comment on what Tomasi said.

Tomasi himself has not given any proof or explanation has to how he got to that figure so how can you say that we should all concentrate on the facts of the article when there are none? If I said to you that 1 billion Muslims are living under threat of persecution, is that a fact merely because I have said it?

------

Anyway, like I said at the beginning, you are no longer asking any questions. If you would like to continue this then feel free to PM me.

[Kitten]

What does the Qur'an say about anal sex?
Is that alright for muslims, or no? And why?

[Pingu]

It is not allowed as Islam forbids homosexuality and this was associated with it.

[Pingu]

Bit bored so I thought I would bump this for anyone bored and curious.

[wedgie/dare girl]

Speaking of, anyone going to islamic state this thread, let me say one important thing:in islam, you are not allowed to kill anyone but enemy soldiers, threfore, islamic state is defyin islam

[CherryGirl201]

I feel like most of the people who are replying to this thread are being fairly rude. I have nothing against the people of Islam, even if I personally disagree with some decisions that SOME people of that religion make. Not everyone is strictly defined by their religious beliefs. In fact, at my temple when I was in 10th grade we spoke to a Muslim woman about her own beliefs and where they fit in with the her Muslim beliefs.
I think you all should remember that you aren't asking questions to a terrorist or an insane radical, but someone who found hope in their own religion and kindly opened up this page so you could ask questions, because just as people have already proved, this is not a place to accuse this person or this religion as a whole.
Don't be ignorant. And people are allowed to hold their own beliefs, even if you don't agree with them.

- a JEWISH girl, who holds nothing against the Islamic religion as a whole, or the individuals who practice it.

[Pingu]

Thanks guys. I don't think most people have been rude but there are some special people out there

[Wordsmiff]

Would it be insulting or wrong to include a Muslim character in one of my stories?

I like my stories to appeal to everyone but I'm always wary of including other religions and cultures in case I offend anyone. I know very little about other cultures but I'm temped to experiment a little.

Would this be wise?

[Pingu]

It wouldn't be offensive unless you decided to use a Prophet or another important Muslim figure.

[Wordsmiff]

Originally Posted by Pingu

It wouldn't be offensive unless you decided to use a Prophet or another important Muslim figure.

What about sex. I know that in Muslim countries it is forbidden to have sex outside marriage. Could I have Muslim characters (particularly female) having sex outside marriage?