Sunday, November 19, 2006

Muslim feminists want to start a Koran council

ASMA recently held a women's conference, and at the conference they called for something extreme: they called for women to start a Koran council to reinterpet the Koran according to womenly perspectives! They claimed the Koran was a pro-woman document, but the interpretation of it was anti-woman, and as applied is anti-woman. All I can say is...good luck. (see previous post about this here) What do you all think? Will this be successful?

29 comments:

Jason said...

Sounds good to me.

I can just imagine the outrage from the fundie muslim extremists.

I would do security for them if they needed, keeping out the would be acid throwers and honor killers. I've played enough videogames to know how to beat up bad guys.

Steven said...

What do you all think?
It shows once again that Muslims can't decide what Islam is themselves.

Will this be successful?
Not in our lifetimes.

Revolutionary Blogger said...

Red Tulip,

I don't think any religion can be reformed. Religions are little more then ancient legends and myths. I just don't understand people who like to eat the cake and have it to. Either you follow reason/science/feminism/human rights or follow a religion by a 7th century arab merchant.

Keep in mind Islam says that sperm comes from the spinal cord. So much for science.

Steven said...

LoL.

Where does it say that RB?

Revolutionary Blogger said...

Steven,

Its just not limited to the sperm quackery...Here is list of other "scietific" thoughts to keep one entertained for a whole day.

Guardian Unlimited | World dispatch | Seminal questions

Revolutionary Blogger said...

I am not suggesting that Islam is the only religion full of nonsensical ideas. If you carefully analyze most major religions you will find plenty of little gems of stupidity. Religion served the purpose for primitive man to understand his/her environment, it no longer serves that purpose. As Nietzsche put it best "God is Dead"

Ibrahamav said...

Christianity took about 1400 years, from 300 to 1700 to start to reform. It still took 200 years to actually see some results.

If Islam takes the same tact, it's 1400 year militant phase (after the golden age) should end around 2600. Perhaps by 2900 Islam (if there are more then a remnant of Muslims left on earth)should be at the same stage that christianity is today.

felix said...

If these feminists don't like the current Islam, maybe they should consider converting to Christianity or secular humanism.

Anonymous said...

There is nothing in the Quran for women. They are deemed second class citizens within the Quran (it specifies women only have half the brain of what a man has), women are second class citizens within Islamic culture and women are second class citizens under Sharia Law.

Steven said...

"Another religious scholar suggested it was OK for married couples to see each other naked as long as they don't look at the genitals. To avoid problems in that area, he recommended having sex under a blanket."

LoL

People like that would inspire me to become a nudist!

Re: I think God, man-made or not, still has a lot of good for society as a whole. God means law and justice; it means there is something else even greater than our top world leaders.

Steven said...

Lexcen

"(it specifies women only have half the brain of what a man has)"

"God enjoins you about your children that a boy’s share is equal to that of two girls’. And, if there are only girls among the children and they are more than two, then they shall receive two-thirds of the inheritance, and, if there is only one girl, then her share is half. And if the deceased has children, then the parents shall inherit a sixth each, and if he has no children and only the parents are his heirs, then his mother shall receive a third, and if he has brothers and sisters, then the mother’s share is the same one-sixth after the payment of any legacies he may have bequeathed and after discharging any debts he may have left behind.„
—Qur'an, 4:11

"...and call in to witness from among your men two witnesses; but if there are not two men, then one man and two women from among those whom you choose to be witnesses, so that if one of the two errs, the second of the two may remind the other...„
—Qur'an, 2:282

Hmmm, perhaps that does suggest inferior inteligence.

Red Tulips said...

Steven,

To be fair, the bible has verses such as those as well.

Obviously the only way the Koran could be pro-woman is for Muslims to ignore verses such as those, just as Christians and Jews ignore verses such as those.

At one point, one wonders...if there is so much being ignored, what's the point?

As far as God goes...I disagree. One can just as easily claim divine right for atrocities.

Steven said...

Are there bible verses like that though?

Steven said...

I found this.

Anonymous said...

Red Tulips, I think you haven't grasped the difference between Christianity and Islam. Christianity is a religion that is separated from the government/legal system and only has a say in matters of morality/ethics. Islam is a religious/political system. Not only that, it doesn't accommodate nationality, ethnicity, any laws other than Sharia, no ethics, no tradition other than Islamic, no moral values other than what the Mullahs decree. Unlike Christianity, Islam has a built in agenda, world domination which cannot be ignored by its followers. Islam has zero tolerance for other religions,check out Saudi Arabia. Islam doesn't recognise the concept of Human Rights, it doesn't acknowledge the United Nations, it doesn't tolerate diversity. In our society we can question the truth about the Bible and choose whether we believe it to be fact or mythology. Under Islam you believe what's in the Quran and that's that.

Jason said...

""""Christianity is a religion that is separated from the government/legal system and only has a say in matters of morality/ethics. """"

You clearly haven't been keeping up with modern political developments, or you're just an apologist for the theocons.

Revolutionary Blogger said...

Here is some wisdom from the Bible. Similar quotes can be found in all religions.

Find me a religion without logical fallacies and I will gladly eat my own shoe.

felix said...

Here is today's Dennis Prager Radio interview with Robert Spencer on the subject of moderate islam and radical islam.

http://www.townhall.com/talkradio/Show.aspx?RadioShowID=3

Steven said...

Just one thing Lexen, why should anyone recognise the worthless United Nations?!

-----

RB.

God is a logical fallacy... but so is the belief that everything has always just existed. The truth is there is no answer to the question of where we come from and the concept of God is just as reasonable as any other.

God can be everything and nothing. This lesson can be taught by describing Genesis. On the 7th day of creation - as the story goes - God rested. God did nothing, but by doing nothing God created the Sabbath and created the 7 day week that we still follow to this day.

On a deeper level, God can be everything or nothing, depending on us. The question is, what choice will we make?

Here is a quote, it does not summarise my feelings but I think it’s a good article:
"We are G‑d's conscience deciding whether He should live in this place we call reality or not.

So if we decide that this is a G‑dless place where every man can do whatever he likes, the strong swallow the meek, the conniving consume the naive, beauty is just an artifact of human senses and instinct, things just happen because they happen and eventually the whole place is going to fizz out anyways ever since they enacted the law of entropy--so that's the world we decided to live in and that's the way our world is. Like the Torah (Leviticus 26:23-24) says, "If you go about life haphazardly (meaning, as though there were no G‑d), then I will treat you haphazardly (meaning, I will not be G‑d and things will just be because they are)..."

It's up to us to convince G‑d to believe in His world, in us, and in His own existence But if we decide to be genuinely ticked off with injustice; perturbed by G‑d's lack of presence, obsessed with the beauty by which He shines into His world; fascinated and amazed at every cell of life and being like a ten year old boy on his first visit to Radio Shack; and yearn for an ultimate future where G‑d, purpose, meaning and life will be screaming out from every twig, rock and photon...
"

It is for us to choose.

Everything I have ever believed up to now tells me that this is all man made; but so what? God is a concept of a higher purpose and a greater meaning to life. God can embody love, charity, justice, wisdom and civilisation – if we choose.

There are all kinds of moral philosophies that have no God. Humans don’t need God to know something is right or wrong… we can choose to be good people without God.

In reality we are far too subjective. Out philosophies are also weak without the concept of God; it is God that gives moral codes the bite they need. God means responsibility for ones actions.

But about your link…

Firstly, the Christian Bible strongly contradicts itself if it takes the Torah as true - simply because many Christian Bible teachings run contrary to Jewish teachings.

Even so, it is easy to support these quotes. God can be satisfied with his work in Gen 1:31 and dissatisfied in 6:6. God can dwell in temples and not in Temples. God is both everything and nothing; everywhere and nowhere; never tired and yet rests; warlike and peaceful; visible yet hidden... and yet even the quotes on that website have been placed out of context and often been given an incorrect meaning.

I read a few random ones that interested me, this is a fantastic example of intellectual dishonesty:

Website:
"Every kind of animal allowed for food.
- Gen 9:3/ 1 Cor 10:25/ Rom 14:14

Certain kinds of animals prohibited for food.
- Deut 14:7,8
"

Off hand I have no idea what Cor or Rom is, so I just checked Gen 9:3… and sure enough it says:

"Every moving thing that liveth shall be for food for you; as the green herb have I given you all."

But what do the next few words say?

"Only flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat."

It is clear that Gen 9:3 is referring only to living plantation. One must not eat meat without following special laws which are written elsewhere.

One can't really condemn a religion by picking out blaze out of context and grossly incorrect quotes.

I'm no expert on this; but check up on a few of their references.

Steven said...

Corrections:

"[But] [i]n reality we are far too subjective. Ou[r] philosophies are also weak without the concept of God"

Steven said...

This is Felix's link!

Revolutionary Blogger said...

Steven,

I highly recommend watching this movie. The God Who Wasn't There

Jason said...

""God is a logical fallacy... but so is the belief that everything has always just existed.""

No one has killed anyone over the idea that everything always existed.

And the vast majority of atheists subscribe to some variation of the big bang.

So the number of people who think everything always existed are in the minority, and most people just pose it as philosophical conjecture and a mental excercise.

Steven said...

This is a top-topic for me at the moment (you might have noticed with all my recent comments relating to Judaism), so I have written a loooong reply!

I hope you don't mind...
-----


Thanks for the link. Someone has referenced it for me before but I have not watched it yet. I will download a copy to watch. :)

The thing is though; I don't think much for Christian philosophies. Attacking Christianity will have little meaning to me.

Plus I also know that these sorts of films tend to be intellectually dishonest like the quote I exposed on evilbible.com... they will just be far better and much to difficult for me to detect given my limited knowledge. I am therefore a bit concerned about being lead in the wrong direction - but perhaps the film will raise some good questions that are worth asking. :)

-----

On me:
Last year there was no uncertainty; I saw God as an evolutionary tool that people used to explain things they did not understand. I saw religion was a nice package of customs; but nothing more.

I could not fathom how anyone could actually believe in a God; but I was fascinated. Being a curious Atheist I talked and talked to Muslims, Buddhists, Hari Krishnas, Christians, Jews - and everyone else. Its so interesting how people still hold onto such... suspicions. God was as meaningful to me as someone saying "Touch Wood" for good-luck!

Even as close as last year there was no uncertainty; I saw God as an evolutionary tool that people used to explain things they did not understand. I saw religion as a nice package of customs; but nothing more.

I could not fathom how anyone could actually believe in a God; but I was fascinated. Being a curious Atheist I talked and talked to Muslims, Buddhists, Hari Krishnas, Christians, Jews - and everyone else. Its so interesting how people still hold onto such... suspicions. God; as meaningful to me as saying "Touch Wood" for good-luck.

Not that I couldn't see any use for all this religion lark; it was just something alien and unwanted. I often debated with religious people supporting atheist view-points. I was above all that primitive religion. ;)

But people with their eyes shut will not see - today I am in an uncertain state with no certain beliefs.

One thing I am sure about is that I am agnostic. I can never be sure of the existence or non-existence of God.

Jason: "The vast majority of atheists subscribe to some variation of the big bang."

There is no scientific theory that will explain our creation. The big bang can not come from nowhere; some scientists claim that the Big Bang is a cycle - the universe will expand to a certain point and then collapse in on its own gravity until eventually there is another Big Bang and a new world is born (I prefer that theory to the ever-expanding universe that dies a cold lonely death!).

If you think about it though, the theories are missing something. There has to be a beginning to the cycle. Atheists often opt-out of this question and say: "It's always been there" and then follow up by saying "who created God then?!" Then: "If God always existed, why couldn't the universe have always existed?!"

The truth is we do not have a clue about the answers; there is no theory that can explain our existence because there is something missing in our equations. I know some people who view God as a force; not an intelligent being; and this force is the answer to the equation.

Scientific theories fail; what we do have are conflicting pieces of evidence about religion; the best Atheists can do is attempt to discredit religions.

The fact that there are so many different religions is one way to laugh at the concept of God; looking at history is another interesting way...

One could say that Jewish people (and then Christians and Muslims) say Amen after prayers because Amen Ra of Egypt was the Egyptian King of the Gods; that all religion is just our past culture and heritage mixed with human philosophy. Religion might be very interesting; yet show no evidence of anything more... no evidence of "God".

It is also possible to look at scriptures and the effect they have had on the world and claim - yes - these are miracles.

-----

If I can get a copy of "The God Who Wasn't There" I will definitely give it a watch; thanks for the reference.

Here are two of my own: :)
crux01.pdf
crux05a.pdf


--------------
Jason: "The number of people who think everything always existed are in the minority, and most people just pose it as philosophical conjecture and a mental exercise."

Is this a way of saying that not all questions have answers? :)

felix said...

An atheist believes there is no god. An agnostic doesn't know if god exists. Maybe yes, maybe no. So you can't be an atheist and an agnostic at the same time.

Steven said...

LoL

I just realised that I repeated myself at the beginning!

Oh well.

Thomas Forsyth said...

Felix> What if you believe in God (well my definition is more something like natural law than the standard deity), but are uncertain about all else, but accept the existence of absolutes and objective truth, though have no idea what they are?

RB> A religion without logical fallacies may be so milquetoast and uninteretsing that no one would bother showing up for the service. I'm not religious now, but I can understand the appeal of mystery.

Now, as for the original topic, I think the idea is a good one, but they have their work cut out for them. Even some reforms in a faith don't do too much good, except when the proper reaction occurs.

But more power to those who fight the good fight.

Anonymous said...

Jason,
please fill me in on modern political developments. I am not an apologist or theocon. I am a atheist.

Red Tulips said...

It should firstly be noted that most atheists are not 'strong' atheists (ie, BELIEVE there is no God), but rather are 'weak' atheists, meaning, they do not believe in God without proof, and see no PROOF God exists. I fall into the weak atheist category.

As far as the theory of creation - to accept matter in the universe always existed is of no greater logical impossibility for humans than to accept that God always existed. But there is more than that. The concept of infinity is beyond human comprehension. The concept of forever is beyond human comprehension.

And thus, I believe that if somehow God does exist, it is wholly irrelevant to all our lives, as we would all be beyond understanding such a force. Worship wouold be irrelevant. Theological exploration would be irrelevant. God, if it exists, is so beyond our understanding, that it would be equivalent to ants worshipping humans, a pathetic and impossible exercise.

But I also think we are like ants. I see some beauty in the world, and I see human beauty, but I also see extreme ugliness, and I also know humans have been around for less than 10,000 years. We are a fart in the history of time. Perhaps we are God's fart, if God exists. By that I mean, perhaps God did not even intend to create us, if we are creations of God. Perhaps God farted and we are the smelly sulphuric excrements left over. Is this any less of a possibility than what religion says???

The universe was clearly not created for humanity's benefit. If God particularly created humanity, then why create such a vast and wide universe, with so many other galaxies, solar systems, planets, and stars? The universe is so vast and wide and we are such a tiny little speck on it, that, frankly, I fail to see human significance. We do think we are significant - but I am sure apes think they are significant as well - it is all a matter of perspective.

And so ultimately, life is what you make it. If humanity believes in justice, then there is justice. If humanity believes that a higher power guides their actions, they will organize society as such, and then in a sense 'create' God, which in many senses is merely a concept, rather than a metaphysical being.

If you think about the path of human evolution, it takes ideas that worked when formed, and uses them as the basis to form newer, better ideas, and such.

I don't know if humanity is ready for a godless world. I think most people need something to believe in and would go crazy if they thought God did not exist. But I also think, nay, I know, that a fully secular world is not necessarily an amoral world, because of the concept of humam evolution. The ideas of right and wrong, good and evil, while they have a foundation in religion, are so firmly ingrained in society, that it does not NEED religion to have validity. In fact, religions are the ones now who are causing injustice - just look at the way the 'big three' religions treat women and gays. (I include judaism in this - the orthodox are NOT wholly ecumenical)

And so, to sum it all up, I am fascinated by religious philosophy, as I see it as essential to the underpinning of society. However, I do not believe that society needs religion to determine 'good and evil' in the future. It just DOESN'T need the destructive 'post-modernists' (many of whom were also anti-Israel, see: Focault), who are wrecking havoc on the world.