21 Mar 06
Originally posted by TetsujinI think that still stands. All I've read is hear-say, and "I saw...."
I'd like to see some references. Perhaps something that relates specifically to the core of the religion. Perhaps we can start this debate with something other than opinions.
There's no reason for me to believe you any more than there is for you to believe me.
Now unless you intend to provide me with information I can cross reference, we simply don't have a debate.
You've given me nowhere to start, and so I cannot get to the end. Is this your method to winning arguments?
What do I do now, cross refference everything in the Quran and hadith to find your argument?
Dare I call you a liar? For the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was himself an orphan adopted, in every sense, by his uncle. Furthermore, he too adopted a child himself. Though I'm sure you did not know this.
What now? You ask me for some reference to resources? You don't believe me?
I'll bring my references when you bring me yours. You can be sure of the fact that I have them ready.
21 Mar 06
Originally posted by TetsujinHere is a link to the adoption problem. I can tell you for a fact that in palestine muslims do not adopt:
I think that still stands. All I've read is hear-say, and "I saw...."
There's no reason for me to believe you any more than there is for you to believe me.
Now unless you intend to provide me with information I can cross reference, we simply don't have a debate.
You've given me nowhere to start, and so I cannot get to the end. Is this your method t ...[text shortened]... references when you bring me yours. You can be sure of the fact that I have them ready.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/SKM/zeinab.htm
21 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseLMAO!!!! 🙄
Here is a link to the adoption problem. I can tell you for a fact that in palestine muslims do not adopt:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/SKM/zeinab.htm
*falls over*
You're too funny.
I can see now why you’re confused. When you think of the terms adoption, indeed you think of annexing that child to the family. No? You change the surname, you add the boy/girl to the will, etc… etc…
Adoption, for the record, is allowed. But, there are rules to the relationship with the adopted child. Your legal definition of adoption is different from what it means in islam.
http://islam.about.com/cs/parenting/a/adoption.htm
The guardian/child relationship has specific rules under Islamic law, which render the relationship a bit different than what is common adoption practice today. The Islamic term for what is commonly called adoption is kafala, which comes from a word that means "to feed." In essence, it describes more of a foster-parent relationship. Some of the rules in Islam surrounding this relationship:
• An adopted child retains his or her own biological family name (surname) and does not change his or her name to match that of the adoptive family.
• An adopted child inherits from his or her biological parents, not automatically from the adoptive parents.
• When the child is grown, members of the adoptive family are not considered blood relatives, and are therefore not muhrim to him or her. "Muhrim" refers to a specific legal relationship that regulates marriage and other aspects of life. Essentially, members of the adoptive family would be permissible as possible marriage partners, and rules of modesty exist between the grown child and adoptive family members of the opposite sex.
• If the child is provided with property/wealth from the biological family, adoptive parents are commanded to take care and not intermingle that property/wealth with their own. They serve merely as trustees.
These Islamic rules emphasize to the adoptive family that they are not taking the place of the biological family -- they are trustees and caretakers of someone else's child. Their role is very clearly defined, but nevertheless very valued and important.
33 : 4 - Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his (one) body: nor has He made your wives whom ye divorce by Zihar your mothers: nor has He made your adopted sons your sons. Such is (only) your (manner of) speech by your mouths. But Allah tells (you) the Truth, and He shows the (right) Way.
33 : 5 - Call them by (the names of) their fathers: that is juster in the sight of Allah. But if ye know not their father's (names, call them) your Brothers in faith, or your maulas. But there is no blame on you if ye make a mistake therein: (what counts is) the intention of your hearts: and Allah is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.
What you have come to understand as adoption includes severing ties to the biological parents and creating a relationship with the adopted child that is the same as a biological child.
In Islam, one cannot deny any man, woman, or child the rights of blood relations.
So you would be correct to say that “adoption” is not allowed, but it is only because you define adoption differently than a muslim does.
I see adoption as taking care of a child that is not yours. You have duties to fulfill, and great responsibilities to consider when doing it. I don’t think it is any less than what one would give their own biological child.
Read this:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544668
…and as for the issue of inheritance:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503546974
“Adoption (tabanni) in the sense of changing the name of a child’s biological parents is not permissible in Islam. However, if one takes care of a child as a custodian or guardian and wants to write something for that child in his/her will, then one is allowed to do that within one third of his/her estate. One is allowed to give up to one third of one’s wealth to any charity or to any one who would not receive any share of the inheritance otherwise.”
Again, Islam protects the rights of those who are connected to the person either through blood relations or marriage. They, much like the bank to your mortgaged home, have first say in the division of assets.
21 Mar 06
Perhaps I have an advantage of knowing, but the website you referenced was quite biased.
They have a link called leaving islam, and the tone of the writing always denegrates the religion.
What's up with that?
Why don't they present everything at face value, and then allow you to decide yourself?
21 Mar 06
Originally posted by TetsujinI know about the adoption vs adoption thing, but that still does not explain why there are so many orphans in orphanages. I only saw the ones in Palestine but they told me it was pretty much the same everywhere in the muslim world.
Perhaps I have an advantage of knowing, but the website you referenced was quite biased.
They have a link called leaving islam, and the tone of the writing always denegrates the religion.
What's up with that?
Why don't they present everything at face value, and then allow you to decide yourself?
21 Mar 06
Originally posted by sonhouseYou knew? I'll ignore the implications of that.
I know about the adoption vs adoption thing, but that still does not explain why there are so many orphans in orphanages. I only saw the ones in Palestine but they told me it was pretty much the same everywhere in the muslim world.
Perhaps the reason Palestinians have difficulty finding homes for the orphans is ... well... there's a lot of them.
I seems to remember a conflict in that region. I don't know, these things happen so fast.
Maybe, people are struggling to provide for themselves, maybe it's hard to take on the responsibility of more dependants.
I know of muslim families that have "adopted" children. I plan to do it myself.
So... are there any more vile concepts?
There was something about women and cows you've seem to forgotten about.
22 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by TetsujinSince the women/cows reference has been made—
You knew? I'll ignore the implications of that.
Perhaps the reason Palestinians have difficulty finding homes for the orphans is ... well... there's a lot of them.
I seems to remember a conflict in that region. I don't know, these things happen so fast.
Maybe, people are struggling to provide for themselves, maybe it's hard to take on the respon /i] concepts?
There was something about women and cows you've seem to forgotten about.
Let me ask you, Tetsujin (with absolutely no sarcasm or innuendo), given the Qur’anic references to the equality of women—which seem to be further reaching than, say, Jewish or Christian scriptures—why do women seem to be oppressed in Islamic cultures? Not that they aren’t in other cultures as well, but—again, given Qur’anic references, why aren’t there any women Imams for example? (Or are there?)
Fatima Mernissi (a Muslim feminist and sociologist), in her The Veil and the Male Elite, suggests that it is because the “patriarchy” (the male elite) captured Islamic education....
One example I recall, but can’t immediately lay my hands on, is when the Caliph (either Umar or Uthman) was explaining the Qur’an, and an elderly woman in the congregation stood up and told the Caliph his interpretation was incorrect. The Caliph thought for a bit, then said: “She is right; I was wrong.” (I will search diligently for the reference if it’s important.)
A comment by Mernissi: “Islam was, at least during its first centuries, the religion of reasoning, responsible individuals capable of telling what was true from what was false as long as they were equipped to do so, as long as they possessed the tools of knowledge—specifically the collections of Hadith. The fact that, over the course of centuries, we have seen believers who criticize and judge replaced by muzzled, censored, obedient and grateful Muslims in no way detracts from this fundamental dimension of Islam.” (The Veil and the Male Elite, pp. 35 & 36.)
Mernissi’s conclusion, with regard to women at least, is that at some point “the tools of knowledge”—or at least their interpretation—were reserved for a few; she at least, growing up as a Muslim woman in Morocco, was not granted access to them. With regard to Hadith, she refers particularly to isnad, and the individual believer’s ability/right to determine if specific Hadith ought to be accepted or not.
I know this is pretty general, but I am interested in your thoughts.....
22 Mar 06
U.S. Backs Afghan Man Who Converted to Christianity
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration issued a subdued appeal Tuesday to Afghanistan to permit a Christian convert on trial for his life to practice his faith in the predominantly Muslim country.
The State Department, however, did not urge the U.S. ally in the war against terrorism to terminate the trial. Officials said the Bush administration did not want to interfere with Afghanistan's sovereignty.
The case involves an Afghan man who converted from Islam and was arrested last month after his family accused him of becoming a Christian. The conversion is a crime under Afghanistan's Islamic laws...
There's more, the complete article can be found at:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,188672,00.html
So apparently, not only is converting from Islam to Christianity a crime in Muslim lands, it's a crime punishable by death...
The religion of peace rolls on...
22 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by TheBloopApostasy definitely seems risky, although capital punishment is apparently not called for by the Koran. Here, read more:
So apparently, not only is converting from Islam to Christianity a crime in Muslim lands, it's a crime punishable by death...
http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_apos.htm
"There is no historical record which indicates that Muhammad (pbuh) or any of his companions ever sentenced anyone to death for apostasy."
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by Bosse de NageWell just as christianity is not about jesus, it was started by paul, islam is not about mohammed, it split in two after he died.
Apostasy definitely seems risky, although capital punishment is apparently not called for by the Koran. Here, read more:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_apos.htm
"There is no historical record which indicates that Muhammad (pbuh) or any of his companions ever sentenced anyone to death for apostasy."
Here is another link to the tolerance of islam: same story
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/03/22/afghan.christian/index.html
24 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by vistesdI'm sorry I haven't responed in these past few days. I've been preoccupied with some of life's annoying tasks. 😕
Since the women/cows reference has been made—
Let me ask you, Tetsujin (with absolutely no sarcasm or innuendo), given the Qur’anic references to the equality of women—which seem to be further reaching than, say, Jewish or Christian scriptures—why do women seem to be oppressed in Islamic cultures? Not that they aren’t in other cultures as well, but—agai ...[text shortened]... be accepted or not.
I know this is pretty general, but I am interested in your thoughts.....
The western world, in all fairness, believes in equality. It tries to, in most cases, give the bestow the same rights and freedoms to all of its citizens.
The Islamic reasoning leans towards equity, The idea is that, while it is recognized that not everyone is the same, each person has the same share/importance in the community/society. Albeit the rights and freedoms are not the same for every person, the are in place to create the most harmony, and the most synergetic relationship in a morally righteous manner.
It's obvious that the philosophies for moral righteousness are different, but they're not as "stupid", "useless", or "opressive" as they are made to look.
24 Mar 06
Originally posted by sonhouseSo what's your goal? Are you trying to find the most marginally opposing story or "proof" against Islam and then rationalize it to conclude the religion is bad?
Well just as christianity is not about jesus, it was started by paul, islam is not about mohammed, it split in two after he died.
Here is another link to the tolerance of islam: same story
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/03/22/afghan.christian/index.html
I don't get you at all.
You said you read the Qu'ran once and didn't like a lot of it. May I ask what parts you didn't like? Perhaps, I can help you out.
24 Mar 06
Originally posted by TetsujinNo apologies necesssary; happens to me all the time.
I'm sorry I haven't responed in these past few days. I've been preoccupied with some of life's annoying tasks. 😕
The western world, in all fairness, believes in equality. It tries to, in most cases, give the bestow the same rights and freedoms to all of its citizens.
The Islamic reasoning leans towards [b]equity, The idea is that, while it is r ...[text shortened]... nt, but they're not as "stupid", "useless", or "opressive" as they are made to look.[/b]
I understand (and Mernissi, for example, points out that “western” feminists have difficulty understanding the perspective of Muslim feminists).
But—
(1) I see no reason why excluding women from the interpretive and decision-making process about what constitutes an equitable social arrangement is necessary for such equity to obtain.
(2) There seems to be at least some evidence that women were not always excluded.
(3) It is not obvious to me that such exclusion rests on any Islamic religious principles, but instead developed historically for other reasons.
The question here is not so much what people decide is an equitable arrangement, but who gets to decide, and their reasons....
25 Mar 06
Originally posted by vistesdI think it's a matter of education, or lack thereof.
No apologies necesssary; happens to me all the time.
I understand (and Mernissi, for example, points out that “western” feminists have difficulty understanding the perspective of Muslim feminists).
But—
(1) I see no reason why excluding women from the interpretive and decision-making process about what constitutes an equitable social arrangement is ...[text shortened]... people decide is an equitable arrangement, but who gets to decide, and their reasons....
I haven't done any research, so to speak, but it seems like the trend is that the more the general populace is deprived of education, the far easier it is to control it.
As to why it would be done, I don't know. Probably the same reasons feudal lords run Afghanistan.
Money? Power? False sense of security?
25 Mar 06
Originally posted by TetsujinBased on my (limited) reading, I think that's a fair analysis.
I think it's a matter of education, or lack thereof.
I haven't done any research, so to speak, but it seems like the trend is that the more the general populace is deprived of education, the far easier it is to control it.
As to why it would be done, I don't know. Probably the same reasons feudal lords run Afghanistan.
Money? Power? False sense of security?