"…what seems to be a nasty little secret within a certain segment of the community; women are treated as second-class citizens." -- from this news article
The phrase "second class citizens" -- a phrase also used about non-Muslims in Muslim-dominated countries -- does not convey the full scope of the mistreatment of such people. This mistreatment, in the cases of both women and non-Muslims, does not change or steadily diminish over time (as it did in the case of blacks in the American South after segregation in schools was ended "with all deliberate speed" and other forms of legalized discrimination declared unconstitutional, from lunch-counters to municipal swimming pools). The word "citizens," too, misleadingly implies a Muslim polity of the kind we have in the West, of which those women and non-Muslims can be "citizens." But the very word "citizen" implies people with political autonomy in advanced democracies, their rights enshrined in the law, their governments dependent on the expression of the will of those "citizens" in regular elections, in opinion polls, in all the activities that "citizens" of advanced democracies engage in.
Can one use the word "citizen" about Saudi Arabia? Are the people in the Sudan, the Islamic Republic of Iran, or Pakistan in any sense "citizens" of their respective states? Or are they more akin to subjects, pushed about, and above all, self-subjugated to the dictates of Islam, "slaves of Allah" ideally? If they begin to act up, if they begin to act as if they wish to considered akin to Western "citizens," they are overwhelmed by the vast primitive masses of Muslims, led by clerics, who have on their side the texts of Islam. And those "citizens" cannot confront, deny, or wish away those texts. Therefore, the small groups of the enlightened, in Pakistan or elsewhere, will continue to fail, until one or more of three things happens.
The first is that the people in this or that Muslim state willingly submit, for a while, to an enlightened despot of the Ataturk school, someone who is strong enough to systematically constrain Islam as a political and social force, and over time to create a secular class. That class must be large enough to permanently expand on the original despot's plans, and to defend secularism from the Rasputin-like reappearance of the True Believers. Apparently, as the example of Turkey teaches, not even Ataturk, whose cult of personality lived on, and whose Kemalism did so much to limit the power of Islam over Turkish minds, did not do enough, or his successors did not do enough, to ensure that the erbakans and erdogans -- who want Islam back, back in all the places from which the Kemalists had banned it -- would not reappear and succeed, as they have been doing.
The second is that an outside power forces changes upon them, as the Soviet Union did, when it, in many places successfully, managed to smash Islam (as it smashed other religions) in Central Asia. It raised up several generations of people who were not inclined to return to Islam, even if they shared the general resentment at Soviet power. The Islamic movements in several of the five stans have so far been crushed, in some cases using methods no Western state would dare to use.
The third is that the Western powers, unable to put pressure of the kind the European powers did on the Ottomans so that they would change the legal mistreatment of the rayas, or communities of non-Muslims, under Ottoman rule, will do something else: show, again and again, that Islam is the cause of the failures of Islamic states and societies. Instead of trying to rescue or aid Muslim peoples with huge infusions of Infidel money, aid that quickly becomes impossible to end (for fear of "offending" the donors) and that the Muslim recipients quickly regard as theirs by right, which is pocketed, and pocketed, but for which no real or lasting gratitude is felt (in other words, the aid becomes Jizyah), the West should insist that the aid for poor Muslims should come from the fabulously rich Muslim oil states. Those states have tiny populations and trillions of dollars, with which they are now buying up large stakes all over the Western world, not least in media companies.
Any one or more than one of these might help create, as in Turkey, "citizens" rather than subjects. But for now, the phrase "second-class citizens" misleads in two ways. The word "citizen" does not describe the reality of the Muslim in a Muslim nation-state, but conveys a false idea of the Muslim polity. And the phrase "second-class citizen" does not adequately convey the mistreatment, deep, systematic and permanent, of women and, especially, of non-Muslims in a state where Islam dominates and Muslims rule.
And in what sense can a woman living in Mississisauga, Canada be a "second-class citizen" of the Canadian state? She is not. But she is subject to a state within the state, one that inflicts, even if it is not the law of the land, all of the cruelties of the Shari'a. It inflicts all the cruelties of the texts, and the tenets, and the attitudes, and the atmospherics of Islam, that are carried about by Muslims who take their Islam seriously in their mental baggage wherever they go, whatever the particular passport they acquire. That "virtual state" exists wherever Believers exist. Sometimes they act on the dictates of that virtual state; sometimes, they prudently do not. But even if they do not, that may merely reflect their desire to stay deep within Infidel lands, to protect their own position, and to practice as much taqiyya-and-tu-quoque, to keep up a steady fog-machine of distraction and confusion, and not for a month but for years and years, until their numbers swell, and their power grows, until it is too late, or so it may seem, for Infidels to protect themselves and their legal and political institutions adequately.
It is an amazing feat, one would have said an impossible feat, save for the willingness, as we have seen, of so many in the Western world to remain willfully ignorant and to participate in their own long-term bamboozlement and, alas, destruction.
...we should not all Muslims into our lands to become pseudo-citizens....in fact, we should not allow them in at all...Ban Muslim Immigration...
The Islamic Ummah, Slaves of Allah, the Earth's' real-world version of Tolkien's orcs: "An army built for a single purpose--to destroy the world of men."
And regarding Muslim women, I think it was Ibn Warraq who pointed out that dhimmis can convert, slaves can be set free, but for the women there is no escape from their subordinate position.
Slightly O/T
From Switzerland
Some religions are more welcome than others
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/specials/Some_religions_are_more_welcome_than_others.html?siteSect=22081&sid=8120545&cKey=1190011459000&ty=st
Why not call them half-people? Or quarter people? In relation to their blood value in the sharia court system.
I know that someone else said this, but I cannot remember their name - "The only reason that evil exists is because we let it exist."
Do good.
Resist evil.
Women are no class citizens in Islam. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. Let the immam lie to you and tell you how islam has a special respect for women brought by the prophet. In contrast the prophet said about women as written in the hadith:
"I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers are women."
This hadith can be found in:-
SaHeeH Bukhari: 29, 304, 1052, 1462, 3241, 5197, 5198, 6449, 6546 (FatH Al-Bari's numbering system)
SaHeeH Muslim: 80, 885, 907, 2737, 2738 (Abd Al-BaQi's numbering system)
Sunan Al-Tarmithi: 635, 2602, 2603, 2613 (AHmad Shakir's numbering system)
Sunan Al-Nasa'i: 1493, 1575 (Abi Ghuda's numbering system)
Sunan Ibn Majah: 4003 (Abd Al-BaQi's numbering system)
Musnad AHmad: 2087, 2706, 3364, 3376, 3559, 4009, 4027, 4111, 4140, 5321, 6574, 7891, 8645, 14386, 27562, 27567, 19336, 19351, 19415, 19425, 19480, 19484, 20743, 21729, 26508 (IHya' Al-Turath's numbering system)
Muwata' Malik: 445 (Muqata' Malik's numbering system)
Sunan Al-Darimi: 1007 (Alami and Zarmali's numbering system)
Other despicable teachings of the prophet concerning women include:
women are like domestic animals:
Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur’an.
if you fear a woman's conduct beat her:
Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. Qur'an 4:34
if your woman is lewd, kill her:
If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, Take the evidence of four (Reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way. Qur'an 4:15
also, note that while the prophet said you should not break bones or hit her in the face when you are beating her for routine infractions he also said you may not inquire of a muslim man why he beat his wife.
Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife. Abu Dawud 11:2142
The beating of a woman by a muslim is a private matter between the muslim man and his allah!
Wow. That really captures the essence of the 'virtual state' of Islam wherever it goes. The distinction between the legal and legitimate state of constitutional government and law, i.e., the 'real state', is blurred by its insistence of honoring the islamic 'virtual state' in all its demands on the society they inhabit, or migrated to, or in its suppression of constitutional rights of 'citizens' of the non-muslim state, which then makes Muslims in non-muslim states 'second class citizens', not because they have fewer rights (like Blacks of the old South) but because they prevent their 'virtual citizens' from fully participating in the real state. Wow, Hugh, what great insight into such subtle repressions of humanity by Muslims, both in sharia states and non-muslim states today, thanks to massive immigration. Wow.
This is the danger of allowing a religion, especially Islam, to dictate for society its legal real state, which forces its citizens into a virtual second-class citizens status. For Muslim women, it is worse, a double whammy since she is both a second-class citizen in her own right as a 'slave of Allah' to her man, but also second-class as a woman as a virtual citizen anywhere.
Feminist hypocrisy may have gotten more blatent with the resurgence of Islam, but it is nothing new. For decades feminists have construed the most malleable of males, the western white male, as the "enemy". At the same time they have welcomed a flood of non western misogynistic cultures to settle in the West; Islam is just the latest and the worst. That is the reason that, although I am pro choice and pro equal rights, I no longer am guided by these considerations when it comes to voting.
Look at recent history. The feminist leadership gave a pass to OJ, the butcher of Brentwood, because criticism of a black man who murders his wife after years of abusing her, would be politically incorrect. The one feminist leader, Tammy Bruce, who dared suggest otherwise was booted out of the movement. Then, for pure political expediency, they gave a pass to Bill Clinton, a serial abuser and molester of women and to his wife who ran a program of intimidation against his victims.
Now any criticism of Islam, the religion of the latest group of "victims" of western imperialism, is regarded as politically incorrect. No wonder feminists have become a laughingstock.
Greetings:
Stendec et al:
If you have enjoyed Tolkien, you may also find this article, "The Once and Future Christendom," interesting.
http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_09_10/cover.html
Why not call them half-people? Or quarter people? In relation to their blood value in the sharia court system.
Halfling is the correct term.
The Islamic movements in several of the five stans have so far been crushed, in some cases using methods no Western state would dare to use.
We have some things to learn from the Soviets.
11840,
Thanks. I did happen to see that American Conservative issue, which I bought off the magazine rack at the local bookstore. The cover of that issue was eye-catching, and the Tolkien theme rang true. As I watched the recent Lord of the Rings movies, the parallels with present reality were all too poignant, with lots of appropos and quotable quotes taken straight from the wise pen of Tolkien.
The only part of the article that gave me pause was the idea of Christendom negotiating with the restored Caliphate. I see no point in that, when one side wants peace and the other wants perpetual war.
Hugh,
here and elsewhere you mention "atmospherics" of Islam. Care to expand on it or give some references?
Stendec
Also, I remember (from "the two towers" movie?)that the orcs were civilised elves once and then they were captured by evil forces and transformed/converted into warmongering barbaric orcs out to destroy the free peoples of the west. Just like people who convert and become jihadists really.
The state indeed bows to the "virtual state" of Islam. In Ontario, blatant discrimination against females (such as being relegated to side entrances of mosques) is allowed, although it contravenes the Ontario Human Rights Code. Sexism may be defined as discrimination on the basis of gender in situations in which gender is not relevant. Unless females have some inborn, uniquely female characteristic which hampers them from walking in the front door of a mosque, this fits the definition of sexism. Why does the Ontario government allow this? Apparently religious rights trump gender rights.
The recent case af Aqsa Parvez has brought to the surface other indications of this hierarchy of rights. Within the virtual state in Ontario young women may be held, as one columnist recently said, as "daughters in cages." When the bars are steel, the state objects. When the bars are proscriptions based on Sharia, the state silently acquiesces.
The right of a female in Ontario to live free of sexism is apparently worth less in the eyes of the Ontario government than the right of the practitioners of the androcentric religion, Islam, to practise sexism.
Feminist groups like NOW are outgrowths of the cultural Marxist(read Leftist movement of the 60's), as such their main target has always been the white anglo-saxon male whom they view as the source of all evil. This explains why criticism of Muslims and other misogynistic cultures is non-existent.
In a nutshell they want to tear down or make a mockery of everything the west stands for.
IMO we cannot expect elements of the Left to do anything to support what Robert Spencer and others like him are doing.
".....for years and years, until their numbers swell, and their power grows, until it is too late, or so it may seem, for Infidels to protect themselves and their legal and political institutions adequately."
Ah yes , Islam as the 'Borg' , their sum is greater than the individual persons. Once the 'hive' has achieved critical mass ...the relentess assimilation of all that isn't Borg..opps Islam will begin. You have been watching too much Star Trek ... if you think about it you are actually saying that the main weapon of war employed by the agents of Islam are their babies and the greatest enemy is our own stupid 'selves'... the former is offensive and the latter is of course is true (as applied to Climate change for example). The simple fact is that countries in the West do the assimmilation ... yes there is resistance to Western values ,yes there is reaction to the integration of the young children of migrants from their cultural gate-keepers..but the McDonald-Disney-Ipod-BlondeandperfectTeeth-getlaid West will win out. In fact Islam may well temper the excesses of Western individualism... If the hedonism of ancient Rome resulted its decay and collapse , then Islam's conservatism my well provide remedial impetus away from our own materialism and moral decay. Islam may well save us!
If the hedonism of ancient Rome resulted its decay and collapse , then Islam's conservatism my well provide remedial impetus away from our own materialism and moral decay. Islam may well save us!
Posted by: David Xavier at December 16, 2007 10:26 PM
Islam's conservatism?!!! Are polygamy, bestiality, slavery, and oppression of women, just to name a very few of islam's putrid "values", your idea of "conservative"? Islam's definition of morality is total submission to its false god, allah. Muhammad, the lecherous butcher and thief, received allah's revelations and became the perfect man, to be emulated by all muslims. He was a pedophile, homicidal maniac, inveterate polygamist, rapist, and warlord. Islam is pure, unadulterated filth.
Hedonism is no worse than islam, which proscribes all temporal pleasure except male sexual gratification at the expense of enslaved females. As for our "moral decay"; it pales in comparison to the medieval decadence and depravity dictated by islam. Muslims might abstain from drinking alcohol, (or they might not, although islam forbids it) and they might not gamble (or they might, although islam forbids it). Other than those two "vices", what in the hell is so upright and moral about islam and muslims? The Saudi royal hypocrites are hedonists extraordinare, enjoying a level of decadent wealth, luxury, and indulgence that is incomprehensible to the average person. Yet they spend billions to spread their vile Wahabbi poison throughout the world.
Muslim females are chattel, owned by men from birth to death. THey are treated like animals, brood mares, imprisoned and at the mercy of cruel, sadistic, supremacist muslim males their entire lives, unable to even obtain medical treatement without permission. Is this your idea of MORALITY and conservatism?! Man, you are crazy!
@David Xavier:
"You have been watching too much Star Trek ..."
No, we've been reading history. Islam has a 1400-year consistent track record of death and devastation. Islam has destroyed indigenous civilizations, including quite deliberately the cultural identity of the conquered populations, in every region it has come to dominate, including, for example, the Eastern Roman Empire, including former thriving Christian civilizations across the entire southern and eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, and half India (formerly Hindu, now the Islamic basket cases called Pakistan and Bangladesh). Today Islam is engaged in the relentless process of driving out or exterminating non-Muslims from Turkey, Lebanon, Indonesia, Pakistan, Kosovo, the south Philippines, southern Thailand, Darfur, and dozens of other places, often right under the noses of "UN observers" and "UN peacekeepers." Of course, the most fanatically sought prize at the moment is the Koranic-justified extermination of the Jews of Israel.
The Islamic doctrine of jahiliyya, wherein all products of prior non-Islamic civilization are discarded and left to decay as utterly worthless, insures that nothing of value remains, since Islam can create nothing of value. The Islamic "economic system" is based entirely on looting others as Allah's reward for Muslim piety.
"... Islam may well temper the excesses of Western individualism ...'
Excesses are universal human failings, not characteristics peculiar to the West. To properly temper excesses one needs a strong moral compass. Christianity, for one, provides such a moral compass, one that is loving, compassionate, tolerant, and non-violent. Islam, in contrast, "tempers excesses" through one basic mechanism--violence and threats of violence (terror, if you will). The common and symbolic manifestation of such "tempering of excesses via terror" are the religious police, who run amock everywhere in Islamic countries.
I do not wish my descendants to live in terror--terror over threatened lawsuits for "insulting Islam," terror of being raped for not wearing a burka or hijab, terror of being kidnapped and tortured into a forced conversion, terror of enduring a muderous riot over Teddy bears or Mohammed cartoons, terror in the airports, terror in the malls and theaters, terror in the classrooms.
Muslims are commanded to strike terror in the hearts of Infidels until we bow to their laws. That is what they want, that is what they strive for in every way (such striving is called jihad), that is the state of mind and the physical insecurity they intend to inflict on every citizen of our country.
That poisonous agenda is utterly vile, but it is very real. And history, both ancient and contemporary, confirms this reality in every way.
David Xavier:
I used to think of assimilation as a given--no longer. Whatever my reservations are about prevailing Western values and worldview, their is virtually NOTHING comforting about resurgent Islam. David, why not research this pervasive, self-preserving, expansionist, supremacist, all-encompassing belief-system at greater length? The USC/Muslim Students' Association databank of foundational Muslim texts is a good place to start. Then examine what you see and learn through an orthodox historical perspective (of unbroken continuity).
Typo: "their" should read "there."
ausinfidel,
That's right, orcs were elves who had been tortured and mutiliated. Thus they started out as almost divine beings--supremely cultured, learned, sensitive, and dignified, and then were transformed into creatures of polar opposite character.
That polarity was the intended symbolism in the midst of the fierce siege at Helms Deep, where the movie was depicting battle scenes showing scores of corpses densely littering the landscape. In closeup, the faces and bodies of dead elves and orcs were shown closely intermingled. (By the way, that detail was cinematic license--my daughters have corrected me that in Tolkien's book there was no army of elves at Helms Deep).
Islam definitely suppresses the best instincts of humanity and replaces them with the worst. Tolerance of non-believers and non-belief, for instance, are just cause for punishment as a blasphemer or apostate. Respect for others is replaced by loathing for them. Trust is replaced by paranoia or otherwise undermined by theologically sanctioned lying and deception. Love is replaced by permanent hatred. Compassion is replaced by cold contempt and indifference. Humility is replaced by supremacism. Love of life is replaced by a yearning for death in service to Allah. Personal responsibility is replaced by fatalistic striving (jihad), whose success or failure comes in accordance with Allah's capricious will. Dedicated service to humanity is replaced by relentless fighting to subjugate humanity. Gentlemanliness is replaced by total male dominance over women. And so on.
"Are polygamy, bestiality, slavery, and oppression of women, just to name a very few of islam's putrid "values", your idea of "conservative"? "
No they are not ... but are these values practised widely in the Islamic world? ( And as to beastiality , please give me the Koranic reference or are you just having a rush of blood to the head). The answer is qualified no! Slavery is practised illegally in certain parts of the world and is lamentable.. it certainly shouldnt be confused with poor working conditions imposed on poor foreign workforces that is common in the Middle East. Even Polygamy has been long left behind by the majority of Muslims and is not unique to Islam. And as for the oppression of women ... this is a slow process , again not confined to Islam.
If every Islamic nation aspired to be Taliban-like we would have a problem. But the movements in various Islamic countries are generally the other way, the Western way ..although slow and piecemeal and prone to set backs.
The conservative values Islam may engender in 'us' , are revisiting the notions of the primacy of family , of community that transcends the cult of individual we now have. I do not mean that we become Islamic...but a loud Islamic minority critical of the slippage of the values that underpin a viable society may sustain some shift in its behavior of those who make up our Western society. JUST like exposure to our values would affect change in Islamic communities.
"Muslim females are chattel, owned by men from birth to death. THey are treated like animals, brood mares, imprisoned and at the mercy of cruel, sadistic, supremacist muslim males their entire lives...."
Ok , this a feminist rant meant to de-humanise the "Muslim male". There is arcane scripture and there is the 'real world'..dont conflate the two.
The islamic family value of repudiation in action:
some of these kids come from two parent families; but we are going to have to face the reality that many of these kids have fathers who have no relationship with them and do not support them while they are out buying new thobes and the latest “must have” CD of Islamic lectures (or even giving the lectures). The other reality is that we have kids that have known 3, 5, and even 10 or 15 Muslim stepfathers in their lives and this colors their bitter vision of life as a Muslim. Having watched their mothers being treated poorly by the Muslim men in their life the girls can develop a negative attitude towards Muslim men and the boys see the hypocrisy in the talk and action at the masjid.
This is leading to an angry young generation and some will be isolated Muslims, some will strive for a better and more balanced way, some will develop emotional problems and personality disorders, and others may even leave the deen as some already have. I can point to examples of all of these things; I know Muslims who grew-up like this who are sincere practicing Muslims but having seen false-piety so much they don’t come around Muslims that often, others are trying to correct the errors of their parents and find a more balanced deen; but it is unfortunate that I know of a number of Muslim kids who grew up the children of active members in the community and given a full Islamic foundation who are now in prison, are mentally ill, or just out of balance. And then, and then you have those we all fear, who are not Muslim at all.
People may say I should not talk about this, I should leave this one alone, but the reality is that some of the young are leaving Islam, and if we do not get our act together more will do so as they are being raised by fanatical parents. Several Muslim kids I know from strong Muslim backgrounds are now in the streets selling drugs or in gangs. One sister I know has several children by a drug dealer and whose tattooed body and tight-jeans look is far from the niqaab she wore when she was 12. Her sisters are still Muslim, masha’Allah, but they have both been divorced three times before the age of eighteen, and I have to wonder what kind of a view the children of such unions will have towards the deen. Yes we can tell them the deen is the middle path and that we treat our women well and the Muslims are the standard bearers for all things good; but what will these empty words mean to them after they were raised in chaos? If a young girl has had six Muslim step-fathers can she then look at marriage in the idealistic and naïve way like her mother did? If a father had had twenty or thirty wives and children by several of them then is it a far step for the son to say he can have that many girlfriends and “baby mammas”? Or, on a more educated level, how will this negative experience from the deen growing up help them, say if they do go to college, combat the assault from secular humanism, outright hedonism and atheistic liberalism?
http://vena-thoughtsof.blogspot.com/
or the joys of the islamic value of polygamy:
’m talking about black men, with black wives, running off to other Arab countries marrying younger non-black wives making their first darker, older, and outer shaper wife feel inferior! That’s what I’m talking about!
My neighbor who visited me today, came over a month ago to tell me that one of our other neighbor’s husband had just brought back a ‘white Arab’ wife from another country and moved her into their tiny apartment with their five children. After telling me today, that she herself has just found out that her husband married a younger non-black woman 4 months ago and will be bringing her here to live in their house with them in just a few weeks. She then informed me that our neighbor, who she told me about last month, has been sent back to her family in another city with her three month old baby and left behind her other four children after the new wife insisted that they could not live together.
It is so widespread in my community, that if a woman hears that her husband was seen talking to a certain brother then she freaks out. S.B has 3 wives and it is he and his wives family business to be matchmakers. There speciality is polygyny. if a man wants to get his wife in line all he has to do is threaten her that he will go to see S.B. My husband even tried to pull that on me once. I was sick and tired one night and after 9 years of marriage, all of which with exception to the first 4 months I have been sick and tired (mostly child related), he wasn’t in the mood to hear this, so compassion went out the door and he resorted to, “I’m going to see S.B!” See..now I’m not one of those martyr wives who on their death beds are making coffee and tea for their husbands. I actually am one of the stupid wives who actually expect that marriage is a partnership and that on my death bed he will change my soiled sheets. So of course I retorted with, “No need to go see S.B; I know your type, I’ll hook you up! Now can I get some sleep?
http://ummadam.wordpress.com/2007/12/06/there-is-an-epidemic-in-saudi-could-it-be-in-the-water/
More polyganous family values:
It hasn't been easy and yes a lot of the times I resent my husband for not being here. I resent him for getting his break every other day and I resent the fact that the kids and I are the ones sacrificing the most. We barely see him every other day for a few hours and in those few hours he is not spending the time wisely with us. I have given up hoping that it will be any different. He tries the best he can, but his best is still never good enough. I hate to even say that, but I have to be honest with myself. But there is no sense in thinking things will change I just have to accept it the way it is for now and just try to provide as much stability as I can for these kiddos. Anyways I am sure you are all wondering who's day I had the baby on. lol. Well I had the baby on her day and they were both their as well as my mom in the delivery room. Everyone thought I was crazy for having her there, but I guess it goes with my nature that I really did not want to exclude her from my happy day because I knew it would be a sad day for her. I thought if she is there then she will feel a part of the family and that this moment was not exclusively ours. I know many of you are shaking your heads right now and saying "What the hell is she talking about?" But if you know me then you would know that that is just the type of person I am. call it naive, call it pathetic, call it whatever you want, but that's me. And yes I get burned many times for that, but that is OK because I cannot change my nature. Anyways the down fall of having her be there was that I guess my husband too felt sympathy or guilt for her that he ended up over compensating and gave her more attention than he gave me. But whatever, what's done is done and we talked it over and he sincerely did not even realize that he had made me feel neglected that day.
http://vena-thoughtsof.blogspot.com/
Ah yes, those wholesome islamic family values.
David Xavier
Muslim marriages are inherently unstable. Polygamy, or the threat of it, and easy repudiation by the male are always in the background. And it was Fatima Mernissi, a Muslim writer/sociologist, who said this, not me.
There is nothing of islamic family values that should be emulated.
Conor Cruise O'Brien: "Arab and Muslim society is sick and has been sick for a long time. At the heart of the matter is the Muslim family, an abominable institution. It looks repulsive because it is repulsive."
And polygamy if very much alive in the ummah, in the US, UK, rife in the banlieus of France and even in Turkey where it is officially banned.
"Today Islam is engaged in the relentless process of driving out or exterminating non-Muslims from Turkey, Lebanon, Indonesia, Pakistan, Kosovo, the south Philippines, southern Thailand, Darfur, and dozens of other places,.........Of course, the most fanatically sought prize at the moment is the Koranic-justified extermination of the Jews of Israel."
Exterminate, Exterminate ..we are the Daleks A.K.A Muslims! Yes there is turmoil as Islam confronts modernity , people in mobs are pretty stupid , poor education and ignorance as well as religious demagoguery all play a part. Remember the problems arent confined to non Muslims - remember Shia v Sunni schism. But looking at those countries you list , the underlying culture hasnt been obliterated - Indonesian Islamic 'character' is different from the Pakistani character. Also the problems of rigidity of Islamic doctrine become problematic the further you go from the urban centers ( the centers where Western influence is greatest).
Israel is the only 'Western' country listed so let us look at it.(Though I would of thought France would qualify , those riots were obviously meant to expel those pesky French from Paris).By the way I dont think the Koran justifies the genocide of jews ,I think that's Hadith inspired. Israel has a large Islamic minority , yet while they are strident in their concern for there co-religionists outside of Israel ..they arent exactly marching in the streets to dismantle Israel or have it handed over to Hamas or Fatah. ( The silly Jewish left , and the silly ultra orthodox Jewish right is actually doing that!!!) A properous , liberal environment does temper Islam even when its a large minority ..Israel is a prime example. The West will influence and will blunt the jihad urge.
What everyone is saying is that you have a crisis in faith in your own society's values and life force, that a bunch of cave dwelling pirates is going to get the upper hand here's some quotes that might help:
"...only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror.."
Yes unjustified INDEED! Yes tragically cliched now , good old Mr "New Deal" himself rising to the occassion. You all maybe right and we are on the slow train to world conflict. In that case never doubt the fact that the West ( OK , excluding Europe) wont produce the bellicosity necessary to defend itself , here's some Patton!
"You are not all going to die,....Only two percent of you right here today would die in a major battle. Death must not be feared. Death, in time, comes to all men. Yes, every man is scared in his first battle. If he says he's not, he's a liar. Some men are cowards but they fight the same as the brave men or they get the hell slammed out of them watching men fight who are just as scared as they are. The real hero is the man who fights even though he is scared. Some men get over their fright in a minute under fire. For some, it takes an hour. For some, it takes days. But a real man will never let his fear of death overpower his HONOR, his sense of duty to his COUNTRY, and his innate MANHOOD. Battle is the most magnificent competition in which a human being can indulge. It brings out all that is best and it removes all that is base. Americans pride themselves on being He Men and they ARE He Men. Remember that the enemy is just as frightened as you are, and probably more so. THEY ARE NOT SUPERMEN........
.............There is one great thing that you men will all be able to say after this war is over and you are home once again. You may be thankful that twenty years from now when you are sitting by the fireplace with your grandson on your knee and he asks you what you did in the great World War II, you WON'T have to cough, shift him to the other knee and say, "Well, your Granddaddy shoveled shit in Louisiana." No, Sir, you can look him straight in the eye and say, "Son, your Granddaddy rode with the Great Third Army and a Son-of-a-Goddamned-Bitch named Georgie Patton!"
Just love the last bit, had to include it even though you all probably know it ... Hoo-Harr!
"And polygamy if very much alive in the ummah, in the US, UK, rife in the banlieus of France and even in Turkey where it is officially banned. "
Oh crap ! Its in the minority and shrinking as OUR cultural traditions , laws and customs slowly suffuse through Islamic communities over time.
@David Xavier: "The West will influence and will blunt the jihad urge."
Famous last words.
I do not share your optimism, and I think it is irresponsible to invite "cave dwelling pirates" into our lands so our everday citizens can start "blunting the jihad urge." That is a grand and hubristic social experiment that I think we should pass up. When countless civilizations have been wrecked over history, somehow our civilization is going to not be wrecked.
At least, we in the United States wil get to see Europe wrecked first, so we can perhaps finally learn that lesson.
@David Xavier: "Yes there is turmoil as Islam confronts modernity , people in mobs are pretty stupid , poor education and ignorance as well as religious demagoguery all play a part."
Religious demagoguery in Islamic countries does not play a part--it plays a central role. Poor education and ignorance are deliberate products of Islam, as is economic backwardness. And Islam is not "confronting modernity." It is reverting to type. The reformation going on in Islam today is a going back to fundamentals--that is, the example of the Pirate Mohammed. And by the way, the Hadith and the Sira are "Koranic" by verse 33:21, which makes Mohammed the perfect Model of behavior for all time.
@David Xavier: "But looking at those countries you list , the underlying culture hasnt been obliterated - Indonesian Islamic 'character' is different from the Pakistani character."
No, those cultures are in the process of being obliterated. That they are in different stages of obliteration, and being obliterated at different rates, does not change the trajectory. That trajectory is defined by the immutable and consistent doctrines of Islam.
@David Xavier, quoting Patton: "You are not all going to die .."
So we are to adopt fatalism and just take whatever Islam dishes out, as we "blunt the jihad urge" with our statisically random corpses. No thanks. There is no honor involved in ignoring an obvious threat to our citizenry, or in letting our citizens shoot it out in the streets to test an abstract and historically unsupportable theory.
The only excuse that Islam doctrinally accepts, the only excuse for which Muslims are permitted to restrain their jihad imperative (their absolute individual and collective duty), is the threat of overwhelming and dominating force. They will not restrain themselves if we are nice to them, or if we shower them with economic gifts, or if we educate them, or if we entice them with worldly pleasures.
At worst, they will react to these gifts with open violence for being exposed to worldly temptation by the infidels. At best, they will attribute such gifts as the bounty provided to them by Allah in reward for their piety.
They will never attribute such gifts to the noble institutions and the compassionate cutural attitudes of the west. And they will not adopt such attitudes, but instead will be encouraged by this "success of Islam" to ramp up their jihad to even higher levels. They know, from their Islamic teaching (relentless brainwashing), that they cannot win salvation without jihad.
Jihad is never going to go away, or be significantly blunted, until Islam itself does.
Jihad is never going to go away, or be significantly blunted, until Islam itself does. - Posted by: Stendec
Until Islam accepts “responsibility of the individual” rather than group responsibility of the Ummah’s imams, their Arab tribe norms, or idiotic riotous mobs, there is no hope of blunting Islam with any modern values of freedom and rule of law. As a free human being, each one of us has a right to reject uncategorically Mohammed’s Arab tribal war cult group mentality, without succumbing to threats of violence in this life, or eternal violence in their make believe ‘hell’, or hiding women inside movable tents. We are free to make our choices in life as befits our freedoms, our constitutionally protected individual human rights, to choose life as we see fit. Islam’s Jihad brainwashing threats of violence and terrorism against our freedoms has no place in a modern world. In short, Islam is a closed book of the damned.
"And polygamy if very much alive in the ummah, in the US, UK, rife in the banlieus of France and even in Turkey where it is officially banned. "
Oh crap ! Its in the minority and shrinking as OUR cultural traditions , laws and customs slowly suffuse through Islamic communities over time. - Posted by: David Xavier
There is no obligation from civilized communities to turn to Islam’s primitive cultural traditions to solve whatever problems we may face in OUR cultural traditions. They can and must be solved by our free choices in the face of adversity, including failed social policy and amoral social behaviors. It is not up to some primitive 7th century mindset to solve problems those old caravan raiders never even imagined in their wildest dreams. Mohammed closed the book on human developments with his war-cult ideology, and his teachings of the caliphs conjured up Koran, or Hadiths, have nothing to offer humanity of the 21st century. If you think obeying the dictates of a primitive desert Arab war-cult leader oppressing one half of humanity with his enslaving Allah, or destroying one civilization after another with their Jihad war genocides, or taking human beings as hostages to either kill or enslave, then you are as lost in your forward outlook as are the Islamics mired in their 7th century idiocy. Don’t hold your breath for OUR cultural values to dilute the idiocy of primitive Islam. They are stuck in their internal vortex of their ‘sealed book’ which only tightens them in a death grip further into primitive thinking and behaviors. Islam is NOT the solution to the world’s problems on any level whatsoever. It's a dead end, and the emphasis is on 'dead' for their closed belief system.
David,
Islamists and Islamizers have no interest in "saving" our society, but rather seek to bury it. To them, signs of societal fraying and disintegration are validation of their project for humanity--universal Islamic government and Sharia law, with its irrationalities and inherent inequalities mandated by a diety who is above reason, not Reason Himself.
They are busily engaged in "fighting in the way of Allah until all deen is for Allah alone"--a Koranic command--everywhere, incrementally and by degrees, even in the West.
They are supercessionist, all the while claiming to derive from the Judeo-Christian tradition they wish to supplant--abrogating The Decalogue, The Golden Rule and The Sermon on The Mount, substituting The Verse of The Sword.
The idea that Islam is a center of moral gravity is sprung from a post-Christian vacuum. Utterly laughable. Our venerable modern civil law and ideas of universal human rights are secular applications of our foundational Judeo-Christian values synthesized with the heritage of Classical civilization.
This leads me next to the silly, farcical joke I wanted to present.
Oh, and David, do delve into the USC/MSA Compendium of Islamic Texts; then, when you come down from the Mountain, you can perhaps "enlighten" us with your discoveries.
TO: Witless Infidels
FROM: The UMMA Collective
SUBJECT: Islam Must Dominate
WE ARE UMMA.
RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.
YOU WILL BE ISLAMICIZED.
Inshallah.
LAUGHTER IS IRRELEVANT.
THERE IS NO HUMOR IN ISLAM (A.Khomeini)
YOU WILL BE ISLAMICIZED.
Allahu Akhbar.
John C
Ok let us stipulate that the Islamic texts contain all sorts of mixed messages that offend our 20th century sensiblities. Again there is scripture and dogma, then there is the reality. In the West , the majority of Muslims live in obeyance with the prevailing laws. Whats more , most Muslims DONT/HAVENT read the Koran ...its the preaching by the Mufti's that is the problem. And throughout the West the message from the Muslim leadership from within has been overwhelming one of acceptance , peace and fruitful coexistance. Whats more Muslims in the West are educated , have been exposed to liberal thought , are experiencing prosperity ...so the problems that occur when these things are lacking overseas generally dont occur in the West.( Yes I am aware that terrorists/serial killers of all persausions come from these very ranks ..but isolated , disconnected people are a consquence of our modern society ..we must be vigilant for the Cho Seung-Hui's as well as those who talk the talk about Fort Dix)
John C , you have capriciously thrown your lot in with the Hugh " Yoda" Fitzgerald who gets up every morning and has a "Planet of the Apes" apocalytical vision of himself standing in front of a trashed Statue of Liberty screaming " damn you all to hell "
I will see you in the next thread.
Oh, but to be free and capricious!
It is the ultimate sympathies of the peaceful and prosperous, and two-sided messages of prominent spokesmen with known ties to the Ikhwan, the Muslim Brotherhood, that I worry about. Jihadists swim in a Muslim ocean, and it is enablers and facilitators who concern me.
And I am spooked my demographic trends, the fallout of Iran's Islamic Revolution and ambitions, and expanding Salafist/Wahabist influence fueled by petrodollars. I also see a resurgence of truly vile and malignant anti-Semitism [yes, Arabs are Semites, too--and many are anti-Semites].
Typo: "my" should read "by."
"Damn you--DAMN you all to HELL!" LOL!