Errors of the Islam

[†LøD† Hussarknight]

NOTE I AM NOT RACIST AGAINST MUSLIMS I JUST THINK SOME RULES OF THEM ARE WRONG!!!!!!!!

Contents
1. Freedom of expression
2. Woman in Islam
3. Gay sexuality
4. How people of other faiths living in Muslim countries
5. Conclusion
6. Afterword

Freedom of expression
In Islam you can not say what you think. If you are criticizing certain things such as government, The Quran, the royal familie or Muhammad then you are thrown into prison or very deeply religious countries like Saodi Arabia even the death penalty.

In my country, I am allowed to say what I think. You can express your opinion about everything. I think this is the way it should be.

Woman in Islam
Islam says that women are equal to men.
But is that true? Women must wear a burqa so they can hide their beauty and their identity. In some Islamic countries they even remove the ''thingy'' which a woman can feel when having sexual intercourse. If a woman wants to go outside her house than a male person must always go with her(no matter what age the man is, a woman is not allowed to go outside the house alone). A woman has no right to choose who she wants to marry, only her father has the right to choose with who she may marry. If a woman wants a well paid job then she must realy fight for it, usually it will not work so they're forced to marry a man and stay home the rest of their lives. Also its prohibited for a woman to become president, or any other imporant job like that.

I've learning and that no matter from which sex you are, you can do every job you want. A woman has the right to choose when she says no or yes.

Gay sexuality
In Islam you are not allowed to be gay sexual, somethimes they even get the death penaly for being gay sexual. also more than 80% of all muslims do not want to live next to a gay sexual person. Gay sexual people are forced to be strait, result: they live a unhappy life, sometimes even suicide.

In my country gay sexual people, have the same rights as strait people. Gay people can even marry each other, in my country there's a event thats called gay pride it showes how free a gay sexual could be (check: http://static.rnw.nl/migratie/www.ra...-mc-redirected).

I've learned that gay sexuals can't help it that they're gay, these thing just happen for example being black or having slit eyes (I know it's just crazy for only hating a person because he's black, has slit eyes or being gay sexual).

How people of other faiths living in Muslim countries
If you're a follower of another religion than Islam and you live in a muslim country, than you're seriously living a harsh life. Alot of these people got killed just for this reason. in some muslim countries they expect of you to be a follower of Islam, in Saudi Arabia and Iran it's realy the law. But in most Islamic countries you must follow the rules of the Quran, for example Ramadan and not dinking alcohol or not eating pigs meat.

In my country it doesn't matter from which religion you are. It doesn't happen that much as in Islamic countries that people get killed only for their religion. 5,3% of the population in my country is muslim and we respect them.

Conclusion
If the Islam won't change their rules soon, than Islam might be one of the worst religions on this planet. This might be the reason why Islam is one of the hated religions of the world.

Afterword
I've typed all this because I think some of the rules of Islam are wrong. I hope you learned something.
Thank you for reading.



NOTE I AM NOT RACIST AGAINST MUSLIMS I JUST THINK SOME RULES OF THEM ARE WRONG!!!!!!!!

[My Favorite Martian]

It is not really a philosophical topic, is it?

[Tankbuster]

First of all, you won't be called a racist because you insult a religion. Youc an be called a bigot, but that's another story.

Second of all, unlike some of the politicans in your country (*cough* Wilders *cough*) would want you to believe, these rules are no more inherent to "the" Islam, than to the "the" Judaism or "the" Christianity. Different people have different rules, and they cherry-pick different verses out of their books.
Ultimately, it's not the religion that makes a person, it's a society and a cultural background that makes a person.

Some muslims use these rules (mostly because they come from countries that are less culturally advanced), some don't. To classify them all as "the Islam" is wrong, and it's the sign of someone who doesn't understand the deeper societal influences that cause religions to change.

No religion is set in stone, so there are no "Errors of the Islam" any more than there are "Errors of the Judaism" or "Errors of the Christianity". The idea that Islam is somehow radically different from any other religion, is a lie and a distortion of reality, mainly peddled by extreme-right bigots and ignoramuses. Like the politican I mentioned above.

[†LøD† Hussarknight]

First of all, you won't be called a racist because you insult a religion. Youc an be called a bigot, but that's another story.

Second of all, unlike some of the politicans in your country (*cough* Wilders *cough*) would want you to believe, these rules are no more inherent to "the" Islam, than to the "the" Judaism or "the" Christianity. Different people have different rules, and they cherry-pick different verses out of their books.
Ultimately, it's not the religion that makes a person, it's a society and a cultural background that makes a person.

Some muslims use these rules (mostly because they come from countries that are less culturally advanced), some don't. To classify them all as "the Islam" is wrong, and it's the sign of someone who doesn't understand the deeper societal influences that cause religions to change.

No religion is set in stone, so there are no "Errors of the Islam" any more than there are "Errors of the Judaism" or "Errors of the Christianity". The idea that Islam is somehow radically different from any other religion, is a lie and a distortion of reality, mainly peddled by extreme-right bigots and ignoramuses. Like the politican I mentioned above.

Wilders has nothing to do with the reason I wrote this, indeed I actualy feel a kind of hate against him because he just wants that the west only hates the Islamic world more and more. Please don't call Wilders a politican he's just the big ''blooper'' of the Dutch goverment.

[Phier]

First of all, you won't be called a racist because you insult a religion. Youc an be called a bigot, but that's another story.

Second of all, unlike some of the politicans in your country (*cough* Wilders *cough*) would want you to believe, these rules are no more inherent to "the" Islam, than to the "the" Judaism or "the" Christianity. Different people have different rules, and they cherry-pick different verses out of their books.
Ultimately, it's not the religion that makes a person, it's a society and a cultural background that makes a person.

I have to somewhat disagree. When your religion facilitates violence, and its hard to argue Islam doesn't, it seems you need to cherry pick the peaceful bits out and say the violent bits are all 'context' related, its easier to slip into fundamentalist psychopath mode. Christians being violent have to get creative in their justification, Jesus wasn't much on the conquest and such, Islam its how the religion was born, conquest and massacre.

My take is that most people who call themselves Muslims are peaceful despite their religion. That peace is not actively encouraged by their religion.

[Tankbuster]

I have to somewhat disagree. When your religion facilitates violence, and its hard to argue Islam doesn't, it seems you need to cherry pick the peaceful bits out and say the violent bits are all 'context' related, its easier to slip into fundamentalist psychopath mode. Christians being violent have to get creative in their justification, Jesus wasn't much on the conquest and such, Islam its how the religion was born, conquest and massacre.

My take is that most people who call themselves Muslims are peaceful despite their religion. That peace is not actively encouraged by their religion.

Take the Bible, turn to Joshua, Exodus, Deuteronomy or Leviticus, and you'll find a God who is a homophobic, psychopath murderer, who exterminates entire tribes and whose primary mode of communication is violene and supression.
The Christians and Jews get plenty of leeway for barbarism right there. And then there are the continuous ramblings of Jesus about how sinners should be thrown into everlasting fire and anguish (with as moment suprême Luke 19:27 "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.").

You don't have to be 'creative' at all to not be a peaceful hippie Christian. The entire Old Testament is a recipe for disaster, and the New Testament consists mainly of tales of the apocalyps. A fundamentalist can have just as much fun with the warrior codes in the Qu'ran as you can have with the "cleanse the world of sinners"-codes and the apocalyptical ideology from the Bible.
Creative in their justification, my ass.
If the peacefulness of Jesus' teachings is so obvious, and the fundamentalists have to be so creative, how come colonialism, crusades and gruesome wars were done with the same vigor (if not more) by Christians than by anyone else. The crusaders had read the Bible. The inquistioners had read the Bible. Cortez had read the Bible. Yet they somehow managed to read trough it all and come to 'obvious' conclusions completely opposite to the 'obvious' conclusions Christians make today. There's a rather big fly in your soup right there.

The interpretation of Holy books is society-driven.

[basics]

" The crusaders had read the Bible. The inquistioners had read the Bible. Cortez had read the Bible. Yet they somehow managed to read trough it all and come to 'obvious' conclusions completely opposite to the 'obvious' conclusions Christians make today. There's a rather big fly in your soup right there."

Tankbuster,

Then you must question the system rather than the books. Were they really Christian or just in name only, that measured by what the books themselves have to say?

[Tankbuster]

Then you must question the system rather than the books. Were they really Christian or just in name only, that measured by what the books themselves have to say?

They were Christians, and they were very happy to say that they were fighting for Christianity and for Jesus.

Don't even try to use the No True Scotsman fallacy. Just because their interpretation of christianity is very different from yours, doesn't make them any less Christian.

Are you seriously saying that 'true Christianity' was only discovered in the 20th century?

[Katsumoto]

Then you must question the system rather than the books. Were they really Christian or just in name only?

That's exactly what's going on with the Taliban and Al Qaeda. People think Islam is to blame, when in fact its just their false intepretation of it. The Taliban call themselves Muslims, yet throw acid on little girls as they walk to school. Al Qaeda call themselves Muslims, but hijack planes and fly them into buildings, killing thousands of innocent civilians. No Muslim would do that. Terrorists will always find a way to manipulate people into believing their aims are righteous, be it promise of freedom or independence, or "fighting against the infidels".

[Phier]

Take the Bible, turn to Joshua, Exodus, Deuteronomy or Leviticus, and you'll find a God who is a homophobic, psychopath murderer, who exterminates entire tribes and whose primary mode of communication is violene and supression.

Thats all old testament, which while an amusing read in psychosis, it is superseded by a guy that told you to turn the other cheek. It was also rather directly targeted, if insanely violent.

The Christians and Jews get plenty of leeway for barbarism right there. And then there are the continuous ramblings of Jesus about how sinners should be thrown into everlasting fire and anguish (with as moment suprême Luke 19:27 "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.").

Luke 19:27 is an interesting one, and often cited by Muslims as 'see you are as bad as us!' only they don't use those terms. Being an atheist my first reaction would be like your own which is, that it definitely advocates murder. Yet it was in a parable, not a recounting of a direct event, and didn't happen. Apparently it has something to do with Armageddon and the end times, which were not yet at hand. So while I agree it could be twisted if you ignore other aspects, it just doesn't seem to be. I'm also not sure what hell has to do with it in this world.

You don't have to be 'creative' at all to not be a peaceful hippie Christian. The entire Old Testament is a recipe for disaster, and the New Testament consists mainly of tales of the apocalyps. A fundamentalist can have just as much fun with the warrior codes in the Qu'ran as you can have with the "cleanse the world of sinners"-codes and the apocalyptical ideology from the Bible.

Exactly, and we ignore it for the same reason we don't do burnt sacrifices anymore.

Creative in their justification, my ass.
If the peacefulness of Jesus' teachings is so obvious, and the fundamentalists have to be so creative, how come colonialism, crusades and gruesome wars were done with the same vigor (if not more) by Christians than by anyone else. The crusaders had read the Bible. The inquistioners had read the Bible. Cortez had read the Bible. Yet they somehow managed to read trough it all and come to 'obvious' conclusions completely opposite to the 'obvious' conclusions Christians make today. There's a rather big fly in your soup right there.

The interpretation of Holy books is society-driven.

If I were a 15th century Spaniard and I came upon a culture who's religion was human sacrifice of the most gruesome kind and cannibalism I think I would be right with them saying my religion is superior and they must be destroyed. In context the crusades were on paper to defend Christians from the invading Muslims. I'm not sure why the Crusades get a bad wrap when they were invading territory invaded by the Muslims themselves. It was hardly a strike on Mecca. This is not to say that horrible things were not done in the crusades, but you couldn't find a passage in the New testament to directly justify such acts, unlike the Koran.

Much like you need to cherry pick out the vague violent bits from the New Testament, such is the cherry picking the peaceful bits out of the Koran.

[Tankbuster]

Thats all old testament, which while an amusing read in psychosis, it is superseded by a guy that told you to turn the other cheek. It was also rather directly targeted, if insanely violent.

The idea that Jesus 'supercedes' the Old Testament is a very young idea. The Crusaders did battle with the words of Joshua and Kings on their lips; they managed to bring that into accordance with the Sermon on the mount.
Again, Jesus gives plenty of leeway for this interpretation. He repeatedly backs up the Jewish laws and customs and praises the Old Testament; he NEVER denounces it. In fact he states that "those who teach the Jewish law will be great in the kingdom of heaven" and "I have not come to denounce the law but to fulfill it"; one of Jesus' main messages is that the law should be followed not because of the law itself, but because it is a covenant with God, and those who uphold this will be great in the kingdom of heaven. There is absolute no mention of this law being 'superceded' by turning the other cheek, and the Christians who maintain this are cutting out a tremendous part of Jesus' original message. What you're indulging in is projection of modern beliefs on ancient figures.
In fact, we have good evidence that the attitude outlined above was his real, historic message (since Jesus was a jew and his early followers were as well).
The mellow hippie Jesus with liberal/socialist ideas is a very recent construct and is a complete fantasy. Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher who rambled on about sinners and hellfire. See the 'Is Jesus a socialist?' thread for details.

Luke 19:27 is an interesting one, and often cited by Muslims as 'see you are as bad as us!' only they don't use those terms. Being an atheist my first reaction would be like your own which is, that it definitely advocates murder. Yet it was in a parable, not a recounting of a direct event, and didn't happen. Apparently it has something to do with Armageddon and the end times, which were not yet at hand. So while I agree it could be twisted if you ignore other aspects, it just doesn't seem to be. I'm also not sure what hell has to do with it in this world.

'Twisted'? The message of the parable is quite unambiguous, and you don't need a lot of 'imagination', as you started by claiming, to 'twist' its message from the reality.
The reality is that the Bible is not even close to the peaceful book you make it out to be.

Warrior codes are no more part of the Qu'ran than crazy genocide and apocalyptical ramblings are part of the jewish and christian core ideologies.
I think the danger of religion is that it promotes irrationality and provides a cover-up for fundamentalists, but this is something that's innate in all religions.
I'm very sceptical of the idea that religion influences people's morality more than society can.

Exactly, and we ignore it for the same reason we don't do burnt sacrifices anymore.

Exactly. Because our society has advanced beyond that time, irregardless of the fact that the Bible does in fact justify witch burning.
When society had not yet advanced to that point, people had no problem believing those verses the way they were meant to be, people were happy to burn witches. (Although I am simplifying the reality of witch-burning, my main point is sound).

If I were a 15th century Spaniard and I came upon a culture who's religion was human sacrifice of the most gruesome kind and cannibalism I think I would be right with them saying my religion is superior and they must be destroyed.

Coming from a culture that burned witches and had inquisitions and pogroms against jews, that's more than a bit hypocritical. Especially considering the extraordinary culture the Aztecs had.

In context the crusades were on paper to defend Christians from the invading Muslims. I'm not sure why the Crusades get a bad wrap when they were invading territory invaded by the Muslims themselves. It was hardly a strike on Mecca.

You should drop into the Vestigia Vegustatis and try to argue that. Then watch as you get ripped to tiny pieces
The crusaders were not motivated to 'defend Christians from invading muslims' (what Christians? The Byzantines that they fought as much as the muslims?) nor to 'reclaim territory invaded by the Muslims themselves' (yeah, invaded 400 years ago. Funny they didn't think of reclaiming it earlier).
The crusades had more to do with religion than modern people can possibly wrap their heads around, and this is agreed by the vast majority of historians; at least the ones who aren't Christian apologetics. I'm very sorry, but the Crusades were done by extremely devout Christians who had read the Bible and who were very confident in their 'imaginative' interpretation.

This is not to say that horrible things were not done in the crusades, but you couldn't find a passage in the New testament to directly justify such acts, unlike the Koran.

I've already shown you one and you can find plenty more.
Again you have this strange fixation with the New Testament. Newsflash: fundamentalist Christians don't reject the Old Testament in the same way the liberal Christians do. And I'd argue that their ideas are in fact much closer to what Jesus would have wanted.

Much like you need to cherry pick out the vague violent bits from the New Testament, such is the cherry picking the peaceful bits out of the Koran.

I have to wonder if you've actually read the New Testament?
Are you seriously saying that I have to CHERRY-pick the apocalysm and talks of hellfire, sinners out of the Bible? And again, why this sudden distancing from the Old Testament? That's a very recent attitude.
And I also wonder to what extent you've read the Qu'ran. Most of the violent and dubious parts of Islam are in the Hadith (the sayings attributed to Muhammed).

Again, there two four rather big flies in your soup:
(i) you have to explain why such an obviously 'peaceful' religion like Christianity (according to your admission) didn't stop its followers from retarding human civilisation for so long, through gruesome wars, colonisation and other things that seem to conflict with the 'peace' propagated by Jesus (Could it be because these interpretations are in no way more contrived than the hippie interpretations of today?)
(ii) you have to explain why the vast majority of muslims today don't indulge in hatred and violence, and a majority of them are very happy in pluralist and democratic societies

Good luck This is a debate I'm very interested in.

[Adhamh Ashashi]

Freedom of expression
In Islam you can not say what you think. If you are criticizing certain things such as government, The Quran, the royal familie or Muhammad then you are thrown into prison or very deeply religious countries like Saodi Arabia even the death penalty.

In my country, I am allowed to say what I think. You can express your opinion about everything. I think this is the way it should be.

Ok first of, yes you can. You can criticize anything you want within reason. Shia disagree with things Sunni say and so on so forth.

The royal family have nothing to do with Islam, that is the corrupt way of many Arab royal families. The minipulate Islam to make sure they cannot be empeached.

If you go to a Muslim country, why would you insult our holy book and our prophet? it is just looking for trouble, we respect our religion, if you wish to say anything about oure religion keep it behind your own doors and don't start saying it in the street. Muslims are forbidden to insult the Bible or the Torah, as they are books of Allah also, so your point is invalid.

In your country, Muslims do not insult Christianit and if they do, they are not pious Muslims as they are insulting another book of God, therefore insulting God, which is one of the worst sins a Muslim can commit.

Woman in Islam
Islam says that women are equal to men.
But is that true? Women must wear a burqa so they can hide their beauty and their identity. In some Islamic countries they even remove the ''thingy'' which a woman can feel when having sexual intercourse. If a woman wants to go outside her house than a male person must always go with her(no matter what age the man is, a woman is not allowed to go outside the house alone). A woman has no right to choose who she wants to marry, only her father has the right to choose with who she may marry. If a woman wants a well paid job then she must realy fight for it, usually it will not work so they're forced to marry a man and stay home the rest of their lives. Also its prohibited for a woman to become president, or any other imporant job like that.

I've learning and that no matter from which sex you are, you can do every job you want. A woman has the right to choose when she says no or yes.

Yes it is true, women are given equal treatment. The Burqa isn't Islamic, it is traditional, the hijab is Islamic. It just asks for a woman to dress modestly, which I seem fair, same way men are asked to dress modestly. Most people forget that Muslim men are to dress modestly also, such as not walking around topless infront of women.

As for jobs, most Muslim women do get jobs. There are a few countries that this does not happen, but in majority it is true.

Also, even in Western society, the husband to be still asks out of respect if he can marry his daughter. If he says no, what happens?

Same principle to be honest.

Also, to the mutilation of women and the removing of the clitoris, it is un-Islamic, it is haram. It is practised by African tradition, and is completly haram.

Gay sexuality
In Islam you are not allowed to be gay sexual, somethimes they even get the death penaly for being gay sexual. also more than 80% of all muslims do not want to live next to a gay sexual person. Gay sexual people are forced to be strait, result: they live a unhappy life, sometimes even suicide.

In my country gay sexual people, have the same rights as strait people. Gay people can even marry each other, in my country there's a event thats called gay pride it showes how free a gay sexual could be (check: http://static.rnw.nl/migratie/www.ra...-mc-redirected).

I've learned that gay sexuals can't help it that they're gay, these thing just happen for example being black or having slit eyes (I know it's just crazy for only hating a person because he's black, has slit eyes or being gay sexual).

This is something, that in my personal opinion, I don't agree with homosexuality. I see it as a sin, but I don't not bother making a fuss about it. It doesn't involve me so why would I complain.

However those gay pride, parades in my opinion are also looking for trouble, why would flaunt something that you know could cause trouble, not just among Muslims but among Christians and Jews also. If you are gay, fine, I have no problem, but keep it to yourself.

I do nto agree with killing them, leave them be, but if a gay person constantly pesters you have the right to tell them off. Same way if for a man, a woman constantly pesters him, he can tell her off.

How people of other faiths living in Muslim countries
If you're a follower of another religion than Islam and you live in a muslim country, than you're seriously living a harsh life. Alot of these people got killed just for this reason. in some muslim countries they expect of you to be a follower of Islam, in Saudi Arabia and Iran it's realy the law. But in most Islamic countries you must follow the rules of the Quran, for example Ramadan and not dinking alcohol or not eating pigs meat.

In my country it doesn't matter from which religion you are. It doesn't happen that much as in Islamic countries that people get killed only for their religion. 5,3% of the population in my country is muslim and we respect them.

Ok, you are severly wrong here.

In countries such as Egypt and Lebanon, Chrisitians are treated equally. There will be squabbles between Muslims and Chrisitans, such way there are squabbles between black people and white people in some countries, it is just natural rivalry. However there is no mistreatment of different faith.

Also in Saudi Arabia, Islam isn't forced upon you. You are asked to dress modestly and obide by laws. You cna eat pork and drink alcohol in your own private residence, but why would go to Saudi Arabia and intend to holiday. There is not much there. Quite pointless.

Conclusion
If the Islam won't change their rules soon, than Islam might be one of the worst religions on this planet. This might be the reason why Islam is one of the hated religions of the world.

Afterword
I've typed all this because I think some of the rules of Islam are wrong. I hope you learned something.
Thank you for reading.



NOTE I AM NOT RACIST AGAINST MUSLIMS I JUST THINK SOME RULES OF THEM ARE WRONG!!!!!!!!

Islam most likely will continue to grow. Muslims are becoming more modern, we are fixing the western world around our religion, I am Muslim yet I live a life that is quite acceptable in the eyes of a Muslim. I go out, I have fun and I know Muslims who do the same.

[†LøD† Hussarknight]

Ok first of, yes you can. You can criticize anything you want within reason. Shia disagree with things Sunni say and so on so forth.

The royal family have nothing to do with Islam, that is the corrupt way of many Arab royal families. The minipulate Islam to make sure they cannot be empeached.

If you go to a Muslim country, why would you insult our holy book and our prophet? it is just looking for trouble, we respect our religion, if you wish to say anything about oure religion keep it behind your own doors and don't start saying it in the street. Muslims are forbidden to insult the Bible or the Torah, as they are books of Allah also, so your point is invalid.

In your country, Muslims do not insult Christianit and if they do, they are not pious Muslims as they are insulting another book of God, therefore insulting God, which is one of the worst sins a Muslim can commit.



Yes it is true, women are given equal treatment. The Burqa isn't Islamic, it is traditional, the hijab is Islamic. It just asks for a woman to dress modestly, which I seem fair, same way men are asked to dress modestly. Most people forget that Muslim men are to dress modestly also, such as not walking around topless infront of women.

As for jobs, most Muslim women do get jobs. There are a few countries that this does not happen, but in majority it is true.

Also, even in Western society, the husband to be still asks out of respect if he can marry his daughter. If he says no, what happens?

Same principle to be honest.

Also, to the mutilation of women and the removing of the clitoris, it is un-Islamic, it is haram. It is practised by African tradition, and is completly haram.



This is something, that in my personal opinion, I don't agree with homosexuality. I see it as a sin, but I don't not bother making a fuss about it. It doesn't involve me so why would I complain.

However those gay pride, parades in my opinion are also looking for trouble, why would flaunt something that you know could cause trouble, not just among Muslims but among Christians and Jews also. If you are gay, fine, I have no problem, but keep it to yourself.

I do nto agree with killing them, leave them be, but if a gay person constantly pesters you have the right to tell them off. Same way if for a man, a woman constantly pesters him, he can tell her off.



Ok, you are severly wrong here.

In countries such as Egypt and Lebanon, Chrisitians are treated equally. There will be squabbles between Muslims and Chrisitans, such way there are squabbles between black people and white people in some countries, it is just natural rivalry. However there is no mistreatment of different faith.

Also in Saudi Arabia, Islam isn't forced upon you. You are asked to dress modestly and obide by laws. You cna eat pork and drink alcohol in your own private residence, but why would go to Saudi Arabia and intend to holiday. There is not much there. Quite pointless.



Islam most likely will continue to grow. Muslims are becoming more modern, we are fixing the western world around our religion, I am Muslim yet I live a life that is quite acceptable in the eyes of a Muslim. I go out, I have fun and I know Muslims who do the same.

No, I am not gay sexual I'm just writing how free a gay sexual is in my country and that a gay sexual person is also human and should be treated as one not like crap.
For a woman it's alot harder than for a man to get certain jobs and it's wrong that if a woman want to go outside that a male person must always stay with her, still with a hijab you cover huge part of your body which I think is wrong. It's harder to identify someone, check: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/...EX_228x381.jpg thats what I mean this person could be Osama Bin Laden for example. I just find it strange why cannot choose how you want to dress in Saoedi-Arabia. People from other religions are less respected in muslim countries as in no-muslim countries, thats just what I noticed

[Adhamh Ashashi]

No, I am not gay sexual I'm just writing how free a gay sexual is in my country and that a gay sexual person is also human and should be treated as one not like crap.
For a woman it's alot harder than for a man to get certain jobs and it's wrong that if a woman want to go outside that a male person must always stay with her, still with a hijab you cover huge part of your body which I think is wrong. It's harder to identify someone, check: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/...EX_228x381.jpg thats what I mean this person could be Osama Bin Laden for example. I just find it strange why cannot choose how you want to dress in Saoedi-Arabia. People from other religions are less respected in muslim countries as in no-muslim countries, thats just what I noticed

Read my post again.

[AngryTitusPullo]

No, I am not gay sexual I'm just writing how free a gay sexual is in my country and that a gay sexual person is also human and should be treated as one not like crap.

This homophobic or against gay issues is not just about religious issue but more about cultural issue. Eastern people which make up bulk of muslims (but not limited to muslims) are usually against open flauntation of anything sexual, not just about the same sex. This sentiment is not just prevalent in muslim societies but also in Hindu India and Buddhist China.

For a woman it's alot harder than for a man to get certain jobs and it's wrong that if a woman want to go outside that a male person must always stay with her, still with a hijab you cover huge part of your body which I think is wrong.

Tell that to my wife.. She almost all the time found it easier to find jobs. Not less than a month after she resigned a certain job she was offered another.. and she don't wear a hijab or anything except during prayer.

It's harder to identify someone, check: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/...EX_228x381.jpg thats what I mean this person could be Osama Bin Laden for example. I just find it strange why cannot choose how you want to dress in Saoedi-Arabia. People from other religions are less respected in muslim countries as in no-muslim countries, thats just what I noticed

Then make it a rule in your country. Anyway Saudi Arabia is not the only muslim country. In fact Arabs represent a small percentage of muslims worldwide. There are more muslims in South East Asia than in the middle east.

[Gromovnik]

If you go to a Muslim country, why would you insult our holy book and our prophet? it is just looking for trouble, we respect our religion, if you wish to say anything about oure religion keep it behind your own doors and don't start saying it in the street. Muslims are forbidden to insult the Bible or the Torah, as they are books of Allah also, so your point is invalid.

The point is very much valid. In my country I can insult every book I want. It's called the freedom of expression. And you don't have to do it "behind your own doors".

[†LøD† Hussarknight]

The point is very much valid. In my country I can insult every book I want. It's called the freedom of expression. And you don't have to do it "behind your own doors".

You get my point. Exactly what I mean!

[Adhamh Ashashi]

The point is very much valid. In my country I can insult every book I want. It's called the freedom of expression. And you don't have to do it "behind your own doors".

Why would you want to? You can criticize, like ask "How is this better or stuff?", but saying "The Qu'ran is so full of crap, I really think we should burn it" is just being crude.

I don't care about Freedom of Expression, I have never insulted the Bible or the Torah, I have criticized them but never insulted them.

But you see, I don't like seeing people go at eachother's throats, I prefer to see people talk things over, that is why I prefer to hear people criticize than insult.

It's mine because I live here and the majority of the people here think burkhas suck arse, and are an insult to womankind, and a silent advertisement that a woman should be ashamed of looking like a woman or that a man is not 100% responsible for his own actions.

Burkhas are primitive, caveman shite, my friend. I'm sorry.

Boof, the Burkha is not an Islamic ruling, it is an Arab tradition. Has nothing to do with Islam. in the Qu'ran is says dress modestly, some Muslims take it to an extremem level while some are at the right level, buy just wearing a hijab but wearing jeans and a normal t-shirt.

Boof, you seem to forget that is a major factor. Not Islamic, tradition.

[boofhead]

Boof, the Burkha is not an Islamic ruling, it is an Arab tradition. Has nothing to do with Islam. in the Qu'ran is says dress modestly, some Muslims take it to an extremem level while some are at the right level, buy just wearing a hijab but wearing jeans and a normal t-shirt.

Boof, you seem to forget that is a major factor. Not Islamic, tradition.

Dude I was just about to type that when I saw your edit.

Burkha isn't Islamic, it's a cultural, retarded fail.

[Adhamh Ashashi]

Dude I was just about to type that when I saw your edit.

Burkha isn't Islamic, it's a cultural, retarded fail.

Glad to see we agree.