/sarcasm mode on

Ah, but if slavery is imposed along strict Islamic lines, it is perfectly acceptable. It's Allah's will, you see.

Indeed, one correspondent talks of phasing it out, presumably as Islamic societies become more enlightened.

You cannot simply abolish slavery overnight, you know?

/sarcasm mode off

Posted by: A Nonny Nonny at September 23, 2007 6:29 AM

I've had numerous online discussions with Muslims about this issue. At least half of them do not deny but try to justify the practice.

Recently, Ali Eteraz started a thread with the hope of using the Islamic texts or principles to argue against sex slavery, but they hadn't gotten very far with it last time I checked. Again, there are many Muslims why try to use relativistic arguments to try and justify it or explain it away.

Here is some Islamic textual and other evidence that gives the Muslim male permission to rape the non-Muslim female slaves and captives that his "right hand possesses."

Quranic verses:

23:5. “And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts, from illegal sexual acts).
23:6. Except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, for then, they are free from blame;”

70:29. “And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts from illegal sexual acts) .
79:30. Except with their wives and the (women slaves and captives) whom their right hands possess, for (then) they are not to be blamed,”

4:24. “Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you…”

Ibn Kathir’s tafsir of verse 4:24 states:

“Forbidding Women Already Married, Except for Female Slaves

Allah said,
(Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess.) The Ayah means, you are prohibited from marrying women who are already married,
(except those whom your right hands possess) except those whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are not pregnant. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, "We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed,
(Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess). Consequently, we had sexual relations with these women.'' […]”

And al-Jalalayn tafsir (4:24) states:

“And, forbidden to you are, wedded women, those with spouses, that you should marry them before they have left their spouses, be they Muslim free women or not; save what your right hands own, of captured [slave] girls, whom you may have sexual intercourse with, even if they should have spouses among the enemy camp, but only after they have been absolved of the possibility of pregnancy [after the completion of one menstrual cycle]; this is what God has prescribed for you (kitāba is in the accusative because it is the verbal noun)…”

Likewise, Ibn Abbas’ tafsir (4:24) states:

“(And all married women (are forbidden unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess) of captives, even if they have husbands in the Abode of War, after ascertaining that they are not pregnant, by waiting for the lapse of one period of menstruation…”

33:50. “O Prophet (Muhammad SAW)! Verily, We have made lawful to you your wives, to whom you have paid their Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage), and those (captives or slaves) whom your right hand possesses - whom Allah has given to you…”

Ibn Kathir notes, from 33:50,

“…which refers to the slave-girls taken captive by Mohammad “…(those (slaves) whom your right hand possesses whom Allah has given to you,) means, `the slave-girls whom you took from the war booty are also permitted to you.' He owned Safiyyah and Juwayriyah, then he manumitted them and married them, and he owned Rayhanah bint Sham`un An-Nadariyyah and Mariyah Al-Qibtiyyah, the mother of his son Ibrahim, upon him be peace; they were both among the prisoners, may Allah be pleased with them…”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 143:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: “…when Allah enabled him [the Prophet] to conquer the Fort (of Khaibar), the beauty of Safiya bint Huyai bin Akhtab was described to him. Her husband had been killed while she was a bride. So Allah's Apostle selected her for himself and took her along with him till we reached a place called Sad-AsSahba,' where her menses were over and he took her for his wife. Haris (a kind of dish) was served on a small leather sheet. Then Allah's Apostle told me to call those who were around me. So, that was the marriage banquet of Allah's Apostle and Safiya…” (Brackets added. Also see Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Number 3325).

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 523:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: “The Prophet stayed with Safiya bint Huyai for three days on the way of Khaibar where he consummated his marriage with her. Safiya was amongst those who were ordered to use a veil.”

One jihadist’s declaration (in Tabari IX:25): "By Allah, I did not come to Fight for nothing. I wanted a victory over Ta'if so that I might obtain a slave girl from them and make her pregnant.” Sex with the “war booty” captives was considered by Mohammad to be a much-deserved reward for the jihadists:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 637:
Narrated Buraida: “The Prophet sent 'Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty) and I hated Ali, and 'Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave-girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, "Don't you see this (i.e. Ali)?" When we reached the Prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, "O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumus."”

Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Number 3432 (also 3433, 3434): “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that: "And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end).”

Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume 2, Number 2150:
“Abu Said al-Khudri said: “The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, "And all married women (are forbidden) unto your save those (captives) whom your right hand possesses". That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period."”

(Sahih Muslim) "Chapter 29: IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH A CAPTIVE WOMAN AFTER SHE IS PURIFIED (OF MENSES OR DELIVERY) IN CASE SHE HAS A HUSBAND, HER MARRIAGE IS ABROGATED AFTER SHE BECOMES CAPTIVE" [transl. M M Khan]

Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Number 3371 (3371-3388):
“Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa'id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): O Abu Sa'id, did you hear Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 34, Number 432:
“Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: that while he was sitting with Allah's Apostle he said, "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, “Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.””

Malik’s Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.95:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman from Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Habban that Ibn Muhayriz said, "I went into the mosque and saw Abu Said al-Khudri and so I sat by him and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Said al-Khudri said, 'We went out with the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, on the expedition to the Banu al-Mustaliq. We took some Arabs prisoner, and we desired the women as celibacy was hard for us. We wanted the ransom, so we wanted to practise coitus interruptus. We said, 'Shall we practise coitus interruptus while the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, is among us before we ask him?' We asked him about that and he said, 'You don't have to not do it. There is no self which is to come into existence up to the Day of Rising but that it will come into existence.' "

Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number 2153:
Narrated Ruwayfi' ibn Thabit al-Ansari: Should I tell you what I heard the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) say on the day of Hunayn: It is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the last day to water what another has sown with his water (meaning intercourse with women who are pregnant); it is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the Last Day to have intercourse with a captive woman till she is free from a menstrual course; and it is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the Last Day to sell spoil till it is divided.

Malik’s Muwatta, Book 30, Number 30.2.13:
Yahya related to me from Malik that Abdullah ibn Dinar said, "A man came to Abdullah ibn Umar when I was with him at the place where judgments were given and asked him about the suckling of an older person. Abdullah ibn Umar replied, 'A man came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said, 'I have a slave-girl and I used to have intercourse with her. My wife went to her and suckled her. When I went to the girl, my wife told me to watch out, because she had suckled her!' Umar told him to beat his wife and to go to his slave-girl because kinship by suckling was only by the suckling of the young.' "

Malik’s Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.100:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, "Tell them." She was embarrassed. He said, "It is alright, and I do it myself." Malik said, "A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practising coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else's slave-girl as a wife, does not practise coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission."

Malik’s Muwatta, Book 2, Number 2.23.90:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that the slave girls of Abdullah ibn Umar used to wash his feet and bring him a mat of palm leaves while they were menstruating.
Malik was asked whether a man who had women and slave girls could have intercourse with all of them before he did ghusl. He said, "There is no harm in a man having intercourse with two of his slave girls before he does ghusl.[1] It is disapproved of, however, to go to a freewoman on another's day. There is no harm in making love first to one slave girl and then to another when one is junub." [2]
Malik was asked about a man who was junub and water was put down for him to do ghusl with. Then he forgot and put his finger into it to find out whether it was hot or cold. Malik said, "If no filth has soiled his fingers, I do not consider that that makes the water impure."
Notes:
[1] ghusl: full ablution (ritual washing to remove some “impurity”).
[2] junub: in a state of impurity following sexual activity.

In his in-depth article on Sex and Sexuality in Islam, (Islam critic) Abul Kasem writes:

“...a Muslim man (whether married or not), while living in an infidel country, can...(...have sex) with any number of infidel women without even having the slightest fear of committing Zina (fornication) or adultery…This is what I found when I consulted the living and breathing Islam, that is, Sha'ria [the material below is quoted from the Hedaya; note ‘Mussulman’ means Muslim]:

“No punishment for Zina or adultery committed in a foreign country (ref. 11, p185)

“Punishment is not incurred by committing whoredom in foreign country. If a Mussulman be guilty of whoredom in a foreign country, or in the territory of the rebels, and afterwards return into a Mussulman state, punishment is not to be meted out on him, on the plea that a man, in embracing the Mussulman faith, binds himself to all the obligations thereof, wherever he may be. The arguments of our doctors on this occasion are twofold; --FIRST, the Prophet has said, "punishment is not to be inflicted in a foreign land"; SECONDLY, the design of the institution of punishment is that it may operate as a prevention or warning; now the Mussulman magistrate has no authority in a foreign country, wherefore if punishment were instituted upon a person committing whoredom in a foreign country, yet the institution would be useless; for the use of the institution is that punishment may be executed; and as the magistrate has no authority in a foreign country, the execution is impossible; whence it appears that the commission of whoredom in a foreign country does not occasion punishment there; and if this person should afterwards come from the foreign territory into a Mussulman state, punishment cannot be executed upon him; because as his whoredom did not occasion punishment at the time of its being committed, it will not afterwards occasion.””(11) [Brackets added].

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 23, 2007 6:39 AM

Oh, so to them it's ok to rape prisoners????
LOL
...and they have the nerve to bitch about "abby grabby" BS????
LMAO

Posted by: jcom972 at September 23, 2007 6:45 AM

http://www.colorq.org/HumanRights/article.aspx?d=Indonesia&x=Jakarta
Indonesia 1998. Chinese woman forced to watch gang rape and burning death of her sisters
“Another worker at the women's aid center, Ita Nadia, said some women had committed suicide after their ordeals. The reported attacks ranged from the degrading and humiliating to the horrific; from women who were made to strip and perform calisthenics in public to women who were repeatedly raped and then thrown into the flames of burning buildings. The reports involve girls and women ranging in age from 10 to 55, the aid workers said. Some were gang-raped in front of a crowd in the Chinese commercial district of Glodok, said Rita Kolibonso, executive director of the women's group Mitra Perempuan.”
"Some of the rapists said, 'You must be raped because you are Chinese and non-Muslim,"' said Ms. Ita, who works at a crisis center called Kalyana Mitra.”

http://www.refugeesinternational.org/content/article/detail/3215
“This strategy of rape as a weapon of war and social control is having a profound effect on the conception of the meaning of being Muslim for the people of Darfur. A distinction is being drawn between the Islam lived out in Darfur and that promulgated by the Khartoum government. Abnan and Al Tahir, two women from Darfur who have been raped had this to say: “A minority in power uses both Islam and Arabism to blindfold the whole society, to silence any political opposition or arrest human rights activists. On the contrary, in Darfur the ordinary people see Islam through a different lens. It’s for them a religion with its true meaning. It’s a religion and not a political tool. This is how you can understand how a Janjaweed Muslim can be told by Khartoum to rape a Muslim woman and her young girl regardless of Islam... and they too can do it…Muslims in Khartoum have corrupted Islam.””

http://www.hrtribune.com/report/Thesis_Jenny3.pdf
Rape as Genocide Under International Criminal Law: The Case of Bangladesh.
Thesis by Jenny Lundström. Lund University. Global Human Rights Defence.
Excerpts:
“In Bangladesh, gang rape has become a major tool of political terror, forcing minorities to flee and has proven more effective than murder. The victims have all been belonging to ethnic/religious minorities.* Neither little girls nor pregnant women and the elderly are spared. The perpetrators are men belonging to various branches of Muslim extremist political parties, including direct branches of the ruling BNP (e.g., various student wings of BNP like JCD and Jubo Dal. In many cases the rapists are closely related to BNP leaders.” Page 31.

Bolding added.
BNP. Bangladesh Nationalist Party
*Note: Victims referred to here are primarily the Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Ahmadis.

Page 34. “The rapes taking place in Bangladesh are often associated with brutal violence (e.g., beatings, cuttings, and the forceful insertion of objects into the vagina) and a great majority of are gang rapes that takes place in front of the victim’s husband, children, or parents. The investigative material from human rights organizations like GHRD provides countless examples of how victims have suffered physically and mentally as a result of rape. A victim as young as four years old was gang-raped in Jhenida and the rape was initiated by a local leader of Jatiyatabadi Chhatra Dal, (JCD) a student wing of the BNP. In order for the perpetrators to enable the act they had to first cut her vagina open with a knife.”

Page 38. “…the rapes in Bangladesh are taking place in a generally discriminatory structure and are supplemented by additional systematic attacks (killings, arson, destruction of cultural and religious places and other violence).”

http://www.synergyaids.com/documents/Turkey_GenderSex&CriminalLaws.pdf
Well-researched article. See especially pp. 33-43 on Rape

http://www.hrdc.net/sahrdc/hrfeatures/HRF31.htm
“Churches have been vandalised by Islamic extremists and Christian villages have been looted and burned, leaving thousands homeless. There have also been shocking cases of rape and murder. On their way home from working at a factory, eight Christian women, seven of whom were teenagers, were raped at gunpoint by Muslim men in May 2000. In 1998, four Muslim men raped a seven-year-old Christian girl named Nageena. In both cases, the perpetrators have gone unpunished while the victims and their families have been threatened with facing the "consequences" if they seek justice. Accused by his daughter’s attackers, Ghulam Masih, Nageena’s father, was put on death row for allegedly killing an old woman in his village.”

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 23, 2007 6:52 AM

Popular Muslim sites admit to the Islamic validity of the practice:

Ask-Imam:

“Islam ensured that the slave girl's duties were not restricted merely to domestic chores but also gave her master permission to copulate with her. This concession created an atmosphere of love and harmony between the slave girl and her master. Islam thereby raised the status of the war captive-maidens close to that of wives. It was a psychological cure to her grief-stricken heart, being deprived of her family and thrown into the hands of a strange society.”
http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=5482

‘Islam Q & A’ reviews several Islamic scholarly opinions and concludes:

“The Book of Allaah indicates that the sexual relationships that are permitted are only of two types, either marriage or those (women slaves) whom one’s right hand possesses.
Al-Umm, 5/43.

The wife has no right to object to her husband owning female slaves or to his having intercourse with them.

And Allaah knows best.”
http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=10382&ln=eng&txt
(accessed March, 2007).

Some 'progressive' Muslims admit that Islamic law allows sex slavery:

Traditionalist View on Sex Slavery
by Oliver A Ruebenacker.
This author appears to be a progressive Muslim condemning the traditional view which permitted Muslim masters to rape non-Muslim female captives and slaves in their possession.
http://www.averroes-foundation.org/articles/sex_slavery.html
http://www.averroes-foundation.org/articles/sex_slavery_addendum.html

Sex with slaves and captives, notes at this progressive Muslim site http://silvers.progressiveislam.org/On_Rape

Non-Muslim scholars on sex slavery in Islam:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/med/lewis1.html
Bernard Lewis. Race and Slavery in the Middle East
Oxford Univ Press 1994.
Chpt. 1 Slavery
Lewis: “A Muslim slaveowner was entitled by law to the sexual enjoyment of his slave women. While free women might own male slaves, they had of course no equivalent right.”

http://voi.org/books/mssmi/ch12.htm
CHAPTER XII: SEX SLAVERY

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 23, 2007 7:01 AM

Donna M. Hughes writes on the atrocities unfolding in Sudan:

“Where Islamic fundamentalists attack enemy populations, women and girls suffer even more. In Sudan in 1989, a coup installed the present military dictator Omar al Bashir, who declared Sudan to be an Islamic republic and imposed sharia (Islamic law). The Arab Islamist government intensified the long-standing conflict with the south by backing raids against the Christian and animist civilian populations. The raiders killed men and animals, burned villagers, and abducted women and children. Since 1983 — when the Sudan People's Liberation Army started the warfare that preceded Bashir's coup — an estimated 2 million people have been killed and 4.5 million people have become refugees and internally displaced persons. Two hundred thousand women and children have been captured for labor and sexual slavery. Some of the victims were trafficked into slavery and sexual servitude beyond northern Sudan to Middle Eastern countries.

“Once in the north, the slaves are subjected to forced Islamization and Arabization…...The inhabitants of Darfur are Muslims but from black African tribes. They are not Arab, and most significantly, not Islamist. The government seized this opportunity to ethnically cleanse the west as it has done in the south.

“Government airplanes and helicopters have bombed and strafed villages, and government-backed militia, called Janjaweed — meaning armed men on horseback — have attacked civilian populations in a scorched-earth campaign of killing, raping, burning villages, and driving people from their homes. An estimated 1.2 million people have been internally displaced and 170,000 have fled across the border into Chad. An estimated 30,000 have been killed.

“…One rape victim was told by her attacker: "You, the black women, we will exterminate you, you have no God."”
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/hughes200408120844.asp

“Christian Solidarity Worldwide reported that in April 2005, a 9-year-old Pakistani girl was raped, beaten with a cricket bat, hanged upside down from the ceiling, had spoonfuls of chillies poured into her mouth, and repeatedly bashed while handcuffed. Her Muslim neighbours told her they were taking revenge for the American bombing of Iraqi children and informed her they were doing it because she was an “infidel and a Christian.””
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20646

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 23, 2007 7:13 AM

Not only slaves, but also wives can be raped under Islamic law:

Islam critic Abul Kasem, in his article Sex and Sexuality in Islam (11), quotes from the Hedaya, an authoritative commentary on Islamic laws:

“Here is what Hedaya (ref. 11, p. 141) writes:

“One can enjoy a wife by force”

“But not if she be refractory.”

“If a wife be disobedient or refractory and go abroad without her husband's consent, she is not entitled to any support from him, until she return and make submission, because the rejection of the matrimonial restraint in this instance originates with her; but when she returns home, she is then subject to it, for which reason she again becomes entitled to her support as before. It is otherwise where a woman, residing in the house of her husband, refuses to admit him to the conjugal embrace, as she is entitled to maintenance, notwithstanding her opposition, because being then in his power, he may, if he please, enjoy her by force.””

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 23, 2007 7:23 AM

Re: Sexual relations between a female slave and a Muslim master

Anyone who does not believe human beings are capable of this are naieve, especially if religion permits it. It has taken 60 years for the Japanese to apologize to the rest of Asia for the sexual slavery of non-Japanese women there.

Islam is a perfect rationalization system for slavery, as well as racism and mass murder.
Hitler once noted that Islam is compatible with Nazism. (He thought Christianity was not compatible with Nazism and called Christianity "the Jewish Christ Creed with its pity ethics".) Lately, I've realized why he said that.

If one looks at Muslim societies it is striking how ethnically homogeneous they are (that is especially true with the Arabs) and Muslim societies are also prone to persecute and exploit ethnic minorities as, for example, in Saudi Arabia. (There is no way a country such as Saudi Arabia would tolerate large numbers of African Negros, Orientals, Irish, etc. in their midst on any basis of equality. No way. It's not the USA.)

Islam in practice will produce a racist society that will permit slavery, as well as mass murder(as with the Armenians). Arabs were extensively involved in the African Negro slave trade. (Ironically, the British, with their control of the sea lanes, did much to end slavery in the 19th century.)

I am not at all surprised that Muslims dream of having slaves-particularly women slaves. This is also a culture that fears women and must control them. It's a rationalization system for exploitation of almost every kind-including slavery.

Posted by: Frank at September 23, 2007 7:38 AM

BTW, the propaganda term "Islamophobia" will not stop the critical analysis of Islam. They cannot stop the communications revolution that is causing non-Muslims to see that Islam is a supremacist (primarily Arab Imperialism). As Hugh said, "the cat's out of the bag".

Posted by: Frank at September 23, 2007 7:47 AM

Robert Spencer, in a 2004 article, cites examples of rape carried out by Muslims during jihads, from two different parts of the world:

“...This happened in Darfur, from which Sudanese military personnel actually airlifted women to Khartoum to serve as sex slaves…

“[a victim reported that] Each of us was raped by between three and six men….One woman refused to have sex with them, so they split her head into pieces with an axe in front of us.”

“Meanwhile, Indira Dzetskelova, the mother of one of the child hostages in Beslan, Russia, reports that “several 15-year-old girls were raped by terrorists.” Her daughter “heard their terrible cries and screams when those monsters took them away.”
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15206

Rape perpetrated by predominantly Muslim immigrants and those of Muslim background have increased alarmingly in Europe in recent years, as has been well-documented by Fjordman:

“According to a new study from the Crime Prevention Council, Brå, it is four times more likely that a known rapist is born abroad, compared to persons born in Sweden. Resident aliens from Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia dominate the group of rape suspects. According to these statistics, almost half of all perpetrators are immigrants. In Norway and Denmark, we know that non-Western immigrants, which frequently means Muslims, are grossly overrepresented on rape statistics. In Oslo, Norway, immigrants were involved in two out of three rape charges in 2001. The numbers in Denmark were the same, and even higher in the city of Copenhagen with three out of four rape charges. Sweden has a larger immigrant, including Muslim, population than any other country in northern Europe. The numbers there are likely to be at least as bad as with its Scandinavian neighbors. The actual number is thus probably even higher than what the authorities are reporting now, as it doesn't include second generation immigrants. Lawyer Ann Christine Hjelm, who has investigated violent crimes in Svea high court, found that 85 per cent of the convicted rapists were born on foreign soil or by foreign parents.”

“The number of rapes committed by Muslim immigrants in Western nations are so extremely high that it is difficult to view them only as random acts of individuals. It resembles warfare. This happens in most Western European countries, as well as in other infidels countries such as India. In Bradford, England, Channel 4 pulled a documentary about Pakistani and other Muslim men sexually abusing white English girls, some
as young as 11. Writer Theodore Dalrymple thinks that "thanks to their cultural inheritance, (Muslim) abuse of women is systematic rather than unsystematic as it is with the whites and blacks." In France, grotesque reports about systematic
gang rapes of French or "too Western" Muslim girls keep coming in. At the same time, European jails are getting filled up with Muslims imprisoned for robberies and all kinds of violent crimes, and Muslims bomb European civilians. You can
see the mainstream media are struggling to make sense of all of this. That's because they can't, or don't want to, see the obvious: This is exactly how an invading army would behave. Rape, pillage and bomb…If you postulate that many of the
Muslims in Europe view themselves as a conquering army and that European women are simply war booty, it all makes perfect sense and is in full accordance with Islamic law.”
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/Fjordman51213.htm

The same type of trend has emerged in Australia, where once again Muslim male perpetrators are targetting non-Muslim women on the belief that non-Muslim women are not to be respected, whereas strict Muslim women must be spared from being raped. Journalist Sharon Lapkin writes:

“When a number of teenage Australian girls were subjected to hours of sexual degradation during a spate of gang rapes in Sydney that occurred between 1998 and 2002, the perpetrators of these assaults framed their rationale in ethnic terms. The young victims were informed that they were “sluts” and “Aussie pigs” while they were being hunted down and abused.

“In Australia's New South Wales Supreme Court in December 2005, a visiting Pakistani rapist testified that his victims had no right to say no, because they were not wearing a headscarf.
“And earlier this year Australians were outraged when Lebanese Sheik Faiz Mohammed gave a lecture in Sydney where he informed his audience that rape victims had no one to blame but themselves. Women, he said, who wore skimpy clothing, invited men to rape them.

“And with haunting synchronicity in 2004, the London Telegraph reported that visiting Egyptian scholar Sheik Yusaf al-Qaradawi claimed female rape victims should be punished if they were dressed immodestly when they were raped. He added, “For her to be absolved from guilt, a raped woman must have shown good conduct.””
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20646

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 23, 2007 7:55 AM

It says right in the Qur'an that a Muslim warrior can have sex with his wives and any captives that his right hand possesses. (Guess they don't have to be female, but maybe that is understood)

Radical, facist, jihadist muslim males want to kill infidel men, rape their wives and children and then sell the less desirable as slaves.

It has occurred in the past and there are very few "moderate" muslims who will stand up and condemn it and demand it be removed from Islamic beliefs.

How can we tolerate the intolerable?

Posted by: tanstaafl at September 23, 2007 9:26 AM

"You do know what the definition of a slave is?"

...someone who votes dhimmicrat?...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at September 23, 2007 11:12 AM

There are many aspects of Islam that are ludicrous, disgusting, barbaric, etc. However, sanctifying women as inferior beings and the practice of slavery are the two things that make it an ideology of the lowest consciousness on our planet.

The submission of women and slaves. It's all here in one tidy package:

http://www.amazon.com/Submission-Women-Slaves-CSPI/dp/0979579406/ref=sr_1_1/103-0821454-5128662?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1190560910&sr=1-1

Posted by: the poetess at September 23, 2007 11:24 AM

Why is the world Muslim population so large today? How did that come to be? While Buddhism and Christianity spread, at least initially through persuasion and voluntary conversion, Islam followed a different path. There were three major ways that Islam grew from a religion practiced by small groups of primitive nomads - Arabs and Turks - to one with billions of adherents who are the descendants of the peoples conquered by these primitives. The first is through the conversion of the vanquished worn down by incessant warfare, continuing raids and oppression, unending humiliation and ruinous taxation. This is what is meant by "voluntary" conversion to Islam.

The other way was through the institution of Islamic slavery which attained epic proportions. Whole populations were displaced and uprooted in this manner and lost their cultural moorings and so naturally ended up following the religion and adopting the language of their masters.

The third way was through the more specific institution of female slavery and concubinage. That was the means, along with polygamy that enabled the conquerors to coopt numerous native women and turn them into breeding stock producing the next generation of jihadists. The very importance of the Muslim breeding system, which requires the complete degradation of women, in making Islam such a successful means of conquest, is probably also the reason that Islam is so averse to any reform of the status of women.

Posted by: RBLA at September 23, 2007 11:58 AM

Let's cut to the chase.

Today, in the twenty-first century, is the treatment of slaves really the issue?

Posted by: PRCS at September 23, 2007 1:17 PM

"Let's cut to the chase.

Today, in the twenty-first century, is the treatment of slaves really the issue?"

Posted by: PRCS September 23, 2007 1;17 PM

Of course it is. There are hundreds of thousands or people, maybe more, enslaved by Muslim rulers. Look at Darfur alone. Islam may be occupying the 21st century, but their collective mindset goes back to the year 632. They cannot progress beyond that point because their religion forbids it.

Posted by: CapitalistGig at September 23, 2007 3:07 PM

"Let's cut to the chase. Today, in the twenty-first century, is the treatment of slaves really the issue?" Posted by: PRCS

The issue for me is that, in the 21st century, many Muslims seem to be okay with keeping and raping slaves. That puts the lie to Islam being a "religion of peace". And it makes me wonder just how they would behave if they ruled our countries under Sharia law.

They justify this treatment of slaves (which seems to include their current-day non-Muslim domestic servants) the same way they justify the second-class (and worse) treatment of non-Muslims.

They faux-intellectualize these hateful practices, put a "gentle" spin on them (raping female slaves actually made them happy because they were almost like wives), and it all reveals their superiority complex based on Islamic holy texts.

It's an issue because some Muslims seem to look favourably on keeping slaves even in this day and age.

If Mohammed did it, they should do it. Makes sense to them (not to me).

Posted by: Josephine at September 23, 2007 3:07 PM

PRCS writes: "Let's cut to the chase.
Today, in the twenty-first century, is the treatment of slaves really the issue?"

As CapitalistGig says, yes it is.

It is one of the major Islam-related issues, partly because so many people in the world are affected by it.

http://www.meforum.org/article/189
Slavery in the Middle East
Charles Jacobs (in 1999) writes:
“According to conservative estimates, twenty-seven million people today are living in human bondage around the globe. By definition, these slaves are made to work for little or no money by means of force or the threat of force. In the worst case, that of chattel-slavery, people are the owned property of others and are bred and passed on through their masters.
In Mauritania and Sudan, one finds, respectively, the most ignored and the worst cases of slavery. […]”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6455365.stm.
No return for Sudan's forgotten slaves. Friday, 16 March 2007

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L18334379.htm
FEATURE-Slavery still exists in Mauritania. 21 Mar 2007 18:04:58 GMT
Source: Reuters.

Two hundred thousand women and children have been captured for labor and sexual slavery. Some of the victims were trafficked into slavery and sexual servitude beyond northern Sudan to Middle Eastern countries.
“Once in the north, the slaves are subjected to forced Islamization and Arabization…
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/hughes200408120844.asp

The Persistence of Slavery in Islam (Robert Spencer)
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=29227

Saudi sheik: 'Slavery is a part of Islam'
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35518

Slaves in Saudi Arabia
http://www.thedailystar.net/2004/07/27/d40727150297.htm

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/012979.php
Saudi officials pressure U.S. to release slave-owner from jail.

Saudi Slavery in America http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/joelmowbray/2003/02/12/169237.html

Exploitation and Abuse of Migrant Workers in Saudi Arabia
http://hrw.org/mideast/saudi/labor/

(UAE) "Emirates anti-slavery law throws camel races into crisis" 11 July, 2006
http://www.asianews.it/view.php?l=en&art=6665

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/014866.php
Kuwaiti diplomat alleged to have imposed slavery-like conditions of domestic workers in U.S

Irvine couple pleads guilty to enslaving girl from Egypt
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/northern_california/14935135.htm

Mende Nazar’s Story (tells of slavery in Sudan)
http://www.antislavery.org/homepage/news/mendenazarfeature.htm
Ex-Sudanese Slave Recounts Horror of His Abduction and Treatment in Northern Sudan
http://www.assistnews.net/Stories/s06090025.htm

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070428/SPECIAL12/704290309
Darfuri refugees say they face apathy, silence from most of their fellow Muslims
Pakistani Muslims Kidnap Christian Children for slavery

http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/002179.html
http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/003665.html
Should The Islamic World Apologize For Slavery? By Adrian Morgan

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 23, 2007 3:16 PM

You folks are working on the soft underbelly of ISLAM. The more exposed it is, the more repugnant it is.

Posted by: credit man at September 23, 2007 3:53 PM

Possibly overlooked by some, but among the helpful quotations in a posting above, is this (un)astonishing response at www.islam.tc, "ask-imam":

“Islam ensured that the slave girl's duties were not restricted merely to domestic chores but also gave her master permission to copulate with her. This concession created an atmosphere of love and harmony between the slave girl and her master. Islam thereby raised the status of the war captive-maidens close to that of wives. It was a psychological cure to her grief-stricken heart, being deprived of her family and thrown into the hands of a strange society.”

http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=5482

It's no different with all the domestic-workers-cum-sex-slaves in Saudi Arabia, or Arabia, today. Their Arab masters know that the slave girl's duties "were not restricted merely to domestic chores but also gave her master permission to copulate with her" because this "created an atmosphere of love and harmony between the slave girl and her master."

A whole lot of creating of that spirit of love and harmony between the slave girl and her master -- think of Muhammad his Jewish concubine -- is going on today, all over those palaces in Riyadh, Jiddah, and up and down the Arab littoral of the Persian Gulf.

Posted by: Hugh at September 23, 2007 4:08 PM

CapitalistGig, Josephine, Khaybar Oasis,

This issue isn't the treatment of slaves, but is, rather, slavery itself.

No slavery; no mistreatment of slaves.

Muslims should be challenged to explain where they believe slavery should be allowed--and why--anywhere on the planet today.

Asking them to justify the rape of slaves gives legitimacy to the concept of slavery.

Posted by: PRCS at September 23, 2007 4:38 PM

Khaybar Oasis,

Thanks for the links.

“Islam ensured that the slave girl's duties were not restricted merely to domestic chores but also gave her master permission to copulate with her. This concession created an atmosphere of love and harmony between the slave girl and her master. Islam thereby raised the status of the war captive-maidens close to that of wives. It was a psychological cure to her grief-stricken heart, being deprived of her family and thrown into the hands of a strange society.”

--These people are so twisted. They actually think that raping a slave is good for her.

Posted by: mrockroll1969 at September 23, 2007 4:49 PM

Please note that it is common for the followers of Koran to point out slavery and atrocities done by others. But whether others are apologetic or are in denial today, they consider slavery itself (not to say raping female slaves) as inhuman today, something shameful. But none of the defenders say that, they justify, see some 'goodness' there too. No one has condemned it. The real question is this, would slavery never be considered shameful by them, would it never be considered as unacceptable, just because Allah tala knows the best and he has given permission in the most perfect code of conduct for all times.
And second assurance that defenders are giving us is even more alarming. Many are asking us not to be worried about it as they say, free muslims can not be taken as slaves, so slavery will eventually disappear. Do you read what I am reading here!!!

Posted by: pagan at September 23, 2007 4:55 PM

"Asking them to justify the rape of slaves gives legitimacy to the concept of slavery."
--PRCS

I don't anyone who challenges Muslims today on the rape of slaves is intentionally or unintentionally giving legitimacy to slavery. Muslims need to be challenged on both (and on the other major issues). This in turn challenges the legitimacy of Islam itself.

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 23, 2007 5:10 PM

No slavery; no mistreatment of slaves.

Posted by: PRCS at September 23, 2007 5:14 PM

Khaybar Oasis posted some links that make me wonder;
What is up with the blacks here in the USA?

Why do so many American Blacks convert to Islam?

Blacks in America are still moving forward and claiming their freedoms and liberties as citizens.

It is a never ending battle and the worse is behind them;
So why step backward and join Islam?

Maybe they have not been informed of Mo's owning blacks slaves.

Modern Western nations' involvement in the black slave trade lasted little more than 350 years, yet Islam has been involved in the black slave trade for more than 14 centuries, from the time of its founder. Mohammed owned black slaves.

http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/003665.html

Posted by: Joe Schmoe USA at September 23, 2007 5:54 PM

This must be one of those clear signs of superior Muslim morality and sober puritanism that D'Souza always finds Britney Spears -and the rest of bawdy, open, and sardonic Western existence- scandalizing.

Sex slavery is so much more moral than bikinis.

And acid in the face of a young girl -who does not stay under their rigid control- is clearly the noble gesture of a profound culture.

Profoundly ill.

Cut off half of humanity and you become sick.

If not a Sickness.

Posted by: profitsbeard at September 23, 2007 6:21 PM

PRCS -- I see your point and I agree with you. Some people on the website in question are saying the same thing.

The point is that someone actually posed this question and various people are engaging in an earnest discussion of the benefits of slavery in Islam. It's outrageous.

I am reading through that thread and it is freaky.

Some of the posters define a slave as a prisoner of war. Some state that slaves of Muslims have been, and are, treated better than slaves of non-Muslims (and mention Gitmo, etc).

Posted by: Josephine at September 23, 2007 7:23 PM

Josephine,

Yes. Sadly, I've seen that question asked on other websites over the years with the same kinds of responses.

That anyone today can rationalize slavery based upon a 1400 year old religious 'ordination'--as though the world has stood still since--boggles my Western mind.

Ma and Pa America need further exposure to issues like this.

I'm going to pull a few lines out of that website and pass them on to my congressman and both senators.

Posted by: PRCS at September 23, 2007 8:16 PM

First, I so appreciate this website Posting on these daily atrocities and crimes against women, by Moslems and the quoting of Islamic texts to not only justify these barbaric and misogynist crimes but that encourage such...

It is SO NEEDED and there is Serious need for Public Attention to these issues,

because unfortunately, the Mainstream Feminists organizations DON'T WANT TO TOUCH THESE TRUTHS NOR WILL THEY--

I'm referring here to the Major Mainstream organizations that have a lot of political pull among women--they are DEAD SILENT AND EVEN 'APOLOGETIC' TO THESE CRIMES--

AND TO THEM I SAY--THERE IS NO EXCUSE,

no matter how much misogyny is in the free world, there is absolutely no Justification or excuse for the silence and silent 'accomodation' of these atrocities in Islam. And it is for that reason I lost so much respect for the leaders and main key advocates for today's mainstream and yes, Radical feminists...who claim on one hand to be fighting pornography and rape, yet on the other hand, are silently 'giving the o.k. to Islam and the Sharia codes of Hell they FORCE GIRLS AND WOMEN TO ENDURE',

but too, its not just the mainstream feminists, you'd be horrified to know, at how many in the far left, are not just indifferent, but too, will make the same reasonings for the tolerance of rape and enslavement--

Socialist parties in the West, are NOTORIOUS for dismissing and being completely 'indifferent' to the horrors women endure in Darfur, Asia, even Russia--to them, women aren't even people...just things to pin up, Literally.

I want to take this moment to applaud every one of you for writing on this and for taking a stand...for years, working in the far left, I met men and a few women who were apologetic and/or would make 'culture' 'EXCUSES' or would dismiss these horrors, then they would have the odacity to call me 'comrade',

Comrades they were not--why eventually I had to leave, and why eventually I was not only 'purged politically' but 'exiled' for refusing to be silent or to support the agenda of indifference and twisted ethics...[its funny that in the free world, just working in a safe political zone so to speak, meaning not living under a socialist/communist regime] how I began to Really understand, what the Russian artists, poets and many intellectual refuseniks of socialism meant, in their words,

but this I will say, if I ever, felt pride in calling someone 'comrade',

it is now, you here who have stood up for human rights, women's rights, children's rights, who have as a brave minority, stood up against a world 'mental sickness' being pushed by the Lies of Islam,

you, you are the true comrades, and I'm proud to have known you on this site. Proud to be writing here, and proud [grateful more so] even, to have learned enough, not to be lured and duped by the social engineers who use rhetoric and lies, to dupe millions into slavery. On that note however, I can say, I understand the Power of that type of mind control and emotional control, how despotic theories can take a few 'good' ideas and use them to ENSNARE one into a point of loyalty and sometimes no return--AND THAT WILL BE MY STRENGTH IN OPPOSING THESE FORCES NOW.

The horrible TRUTH is, there are those, behind the scenes, underground so to speak, and some not so underground, some in academica, politics, media, who would and are, working to see, such a world exists here, a world where raping of girls, boys [because they rape and are horrible to boy children too] raping and torturing and enslaving in the most horrible ways imaginable,

would be the reality here [as long as its not them of course] and who see nothing wrong with being supportive of these maggots who use the world's Worst Cult--to carry out the world's worst human rights abuses records.

In other words, not only do we have to combat the Lies of Islam but the Lies of those who are bent on the destruction of the ways of 'western democracy' and who are using the forces of political Islam to do so--and believe me, they are. There are those who are working to establish a revolution--a world order that will not just destroy capitalism [though in all honesty, its not the destruction of capitalism they are seeking--not if you really peel away the layers of their bullshit and I have no hesitation in calling it for what it is]--no, they are seeking to bring about the destruction of life,

as we know it, especially democracy, individual rights, and why they are so opposed to women's rights, worker's rights [when they say worker owned they really mean, worker's own nothing--only the politburo does and the workers all work as equals, in chains, literally]. They want control--MASS CONTROL--why they are in bed with Islamists, and many of them, are the elements of Nazism that have over time--in my opinion [actually not in my opinion, why there are major political parties now, in far left, that are a mix of Nazism, and Leninism--and they are growing--but they are not anti-people of color, just anti-semitic, in that way they are different from Nazism--they are taking tenants from both, and why they have taken to being allies with the worst Islamists in the world]--taken on the rhetoric of Lenin and so forth--what is termed as Red Nazi's...

they Do exist. In some countries, where socialist parties are in power, they don't even 'mask' the reality of Nazism and Leftism, combining forces--you see,

their 'anti-Semitism' is what drives them. I say this not because I am Jewish, [not that I'm anti-Jewish--I include this to shut up the idiots out there that say 'oh its one of those Zionists or Jews, you know the typical slants they use--well this is a non-Jew who is saying--yes the post colonialists and ones who scream anti-Israel the most in the Left ARE INDEED, ANTI-SEMITIC, AND THEY ARE ANTI-SEMITIC BIG TIME] I say this because it is true. Why you will see the many far left parties praise Iran and Syria--they want Israel gone-

and then the US--they say they are anti-imperialists, THAT IS A LIE. They only want to replace one form of imperialism with another, a form that is far worse--far more evil, hideous, and terror filled. When you have far leftists or Socialists, claiming that to aid Darfur, to end the horrible butchering, is bad because it will prop up US interests,

and to hell with the thousands of innocents raped, burned, beaten, ripped from families [and yes, their hypocrisy about racism is laughable, they are the worst racists that ever lived], across Africa by Moslem MAGGOTS, and Maggots, I have to apologize to the flies and maggots for even using that comparison because Maggots and flies do not rape en masse,

that proves, these are not worthy people to fill the shoes of any type of political leadership. These are egomaniacs using the political stage to upsurp their lust for power, and they'll sacrifice the 'citizens' as well as the 'individual' [e.g. Rousseau--under these despots, it won't matter which] to do so.

The issue of slavery--is one that the left/socialists esp, need to be held ACCOUNTABLE FOR, AND NOW--

That means, on Every college campus, in Every political party, in Every political organization--their silence and accomodating of the Islamists HUMAN RIGHTS CRIMES, esp towards Women and Children--the Islamists Condoning and Encouraging Rape--

they should be tried, as WAR CRIMES--including those entities that in indifference, or manipulation, or apathy, or condoning, or accomodating--

they should be tried as well. No Exceptions. One thing the far left was good about, and that was pointing out and even taking cases to the UN [esp about economic injustices/anti-imperialism] AGAINST the west--

its time to do the same. No more, should those academics, leftists, organizations, be allowed, to support in any way, the political and not so political Islamists who not only carry out these atrocities but who work to conspire to bring these crimes to the whole world under an 'acceptable legal precedence under the tool of Sharia',

no more should they be allowed to do so with impunity. They are, in fact, in tolerating and working to collaberate [in the manners in which they do], are committing human right abuses and are in fact by international standards/laws [though we know, international laws on human rights aren't enforced]--and they are committing these acts on the same scale,

that Hitler's Third Reich did. And for that, they should be tried, and held accountable, and stopped. They are--today's, War Crimes Perpetrators--they are, today, the Eichman, that said 'we were just following orders',

the leftists and yes, some rightists [esp for monetary gain & economic-corporatist hegemony], are today's version of

Eichman. And they should be tried at Nuremburg just as Eichman and the others--were,

for

War Crimes Against Humanity.

Its time, to draft up a brief, naming names of those individuals who are catering and/or excusing these crimes, of enslavement, rape, and Sharia laws/including those leaders in Western countries who do so for a twisted fascist political 'correctness', --and bring it forward, to the international community as well as our domestic governments and let them know--we won't be silent,

and they won't get by--with their support, of the crimes they so support, nor will they be allowed to prop up, these Islamists criminals, with impunity.

Sincerely,

Tasha

Posted by: Natasha at September 23, 2007 8:28 PM

Hugh quoted ask-imam:

...gave her master permission to copulate with her. This concession created an atmosphere of love and harmony between the slave girl and her master. Islam thereby raised the status of the war captive-maidens...

Hmm, maybe Islam really is the religion of compassion after all. "We've killed your husband and children, but not to worry, we'll still copulate with you." Very comforting words, I'm sure. Who says chivalry is dead?

Posted by: special_guest at September 23, 2007 11:42 PM

"Asking them to justify the rape of slaves gives legitimacy to the concept of slavery." --PRCS

I don't anyone who challenges Muslims today on the rape of slaves is intentionally or unintentionally giving legitimacy to slavery. Muslims need to be challenged on both (and on the other major issues). This in turn challenges the legitimacy of Islam itself.

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 23, 2007 5:10 PM

I agree with PRCS here. Although one does not mean to rationalize slavery, one ends up implicitly doing it when one asks Mohammedans to justify the rape of slaves. In other words, the question sounds more like, "(Even if you must have slaves,) why do you have to rape them?"

Given that in history, some countries had slavery (Egypt, Rome, Babylon, et al), while some didn't (Persia, Greece, et al), a better approach would be to confront them with the fact that today, no countries outside the OIC practice slavery, but it's still prevailent in the Gulf states and a few other places such as Brunei. So confront them about what they have today, rather than give them the opening to point to America's (probably a favorite example) past sins.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at September 24, 2007 12:19 AM

One more thing - reading that original thread on ummah.com, it's interesting that most of the Mohammedan posters there rationalize slavery by stating that it has a different meaning in Islam than it has in the West. Also, the readiness with which they cite verses 26:1-6 to justify it on a Quranic basis was just as interesting - not the slightest attempt to bury it under the rug.

Of course, in a real debate where Infidels were involved, we'd probably hear that 'it's the fault of Muslims, not Islam' - just as they do in this thread while discussing rape and castration.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at September 24, 2007 2:00 AM

The absurdity of this (the third posting at that thread) is noteworthy:

GothiKa
Odan
Re: sexual relations between a female slave and a male master

It is true. A man can have sexual relations with his own slave woman.
__________________
The definition of courage is to fight to the death in defense of religion, in defense of womanhood, of ill treated neighbours, of the oppressed who seek protection, or in defense of a lost fortune, honour which has been attacked, and other rights, against all adversaries, whether they be few or many.

Notice, too, 'in defense of religion'.

Posted by: PRCS at September 24, 2007 3:01 AM

"I'm going to pull a few lines out of that website and pass them on to my congressman and both senators." Posted by: PRCS

Good stuff.

Posted by: Josephine at September 24, 2007 7:45 AM

PRCS, IP,

This seems like another one of those occasional and rather strange awkward conversations where posters tie themselves in knots in trying not to be misunderstood. I understand the "No slavery; no mistreatment of slaves" point, but in Islam these are not separate issues, as the title of this thread indicates ('Sexual relations between a female slave and a Muslim master'). Moreover, given that Islam also permits the Muslim husband to "enjoy a wife by force," this particular form of mistreatment is not limited to slavery. Hence, "no slavery" would not mean the abolition of this particular type of mistreatment (i.e., rape) in Islam.

My point is that one can, and should, criticize both slavery and the especially egregious forms of mistreatment of slaves under Islamic rule or custom. One cannot and should not overlook that one of the major forms of mistreatment was (and still is) rape. Rape is tied to slavery in Islam because of the (allegedly) divine permission given to the practice. One cannot provide a comprehensive discussion about slavery in Islam without talking about rape, and vice versa. In Islam, rape took place primarily in the context of slavery (though also in the context of marriage). It is indeed through the institution of slavery, and the powerful coercion it entails, that Islam perpetuated rape of non-Muslim females.

When one discusses this issue with Islam apologists, they inevitably raise the point that slavery was not uniquely an Islamic institution. While in tu quoque form that is not a valid argument, it need not be put in tu quoque form. The issue is raised as to why Islam is being singled out for criticism. And the Islam critic can respond by citing not only the fact that slavery is still practiced in Islam, but can investigate the various ways in which slavery under Islam was more onerous or egregious than under other systems. According to Anwar Shaikh
http://www.freeman.org/m_online/may98/shaikh.htm
“While the Roman Law during the times of Muhammad prescribed death for the master if he indulged in carnal relationship with his slave-girl, Islam permitted sexual intercourse with her at will, but did not allow marriage with her unless she embraced Islam.”

If Shaikh is correct, then Islamic slavery is worse than at least one other form of slavery, with regard to rape or sexual abuse of female captives and slaves. This criticism could be raised in the context of criticising Islam over slavery, or rape, or both. It doesn't matter to me. The case is against Islam, and all its problematic aspects should be targetted and discussed publicly.

Anyways, this seems to me a very funny-strange conversation we are having! We all agree that both rape and slavery are wrong. I think we all agree that Islam should be criticized on both counts, right?

Let me look at this...

PRCS: "Let's cut to the chase.
Today, in the twenty-first century, is the treatment of slaves really the issue?"

Now, I am not a mind-reader, and I figured PRCS has been around JW long enough to know that slavery is still a relevant issue in Islam. Therefore I saw an opportunity to post a "yes," with some evidence to back it up, because, after all, Islam apologists often deny the existence of slavery in today's world.

"This issue isn't the treatment of slaves, but is, rather, slavery itself.
No slavery; no mistreatment of slaves."

Again, the issue, as stated, referred to both slavery and the mistreatment of slaves (forced sex/rape). This does not deny that slavery itself is problem; rather the issue of slavery and the mistreatment (rape) of slaves is raised.

"Asking them to justify the rape of slaves gives legitimacy to the concept of slavery."
Posted by: PRCS at September 23, 2007 4:38 PM

No it doesn't. Suppose a Saudi Muslim today comes to the U.S. and has a female slave. (This is not a far-fetched example, either). Suppose further that he rapes that slave. Suppose he gets caught by the authorities and there is solid evidence for both the slavery and rape. He is then charged and convicted for slavery. He is also charged and convicted for rape. The fact that he is charged with rape does not exonerate him on the charge of slavery. He charged with both, and must face penalties for both crimes.

Likewise viz Islam, slavery, and rape. The case against Islam is stronger, and the total penalty toward it more severe, when both charges are made.

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 24, 2007 1:13 PM

Thanks to the contributors of this thread for the substantive posts. Very educational!

Posted by: alexon at September 24, 2007 5:05 PM

Given that in history, some countries had slavery (Egypt, Rome, Babylon, et al), while some didn't (Persia, Greece, et al),

Huh? Greece didn't have slavery?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Greece

Posted by: Seamus at September 24, 2007 6:40 PM

In order to enable those who've gotten themselves tied up in ornamental marlinspike, I'll repeat my original question:

Today, in the twenty-first century, is the treatment of slaves really the issue?

Posted by: PRCS at September 24, 2007 11:19 PM

PRCS,

I'll repeat my answer to your original question: Yes. For supportive evidence, see above.

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 25, 2007 7:54 AM

Some seem fixated on slavery in Muslim society.

Others see a larger problem, without regard to where it occurs or who perpetrates it or upon what authority; slavery.

The question, "Today, in the twenty-first century, is the treatment of slaves really the issue?" is not specific to Islam.

Answers specific to 'Muslim' slavery miss the point of my question.

Posted by: PRCS at September 25, 2007 2:01 PM

"Some seem fixated on slavery in Muslim society.
Others see a larger problem, without regard to where it occurs or who perpetrates it or upon what authority; slavery."

Slavery is not unique to Islam. It is merely one of the problems associated with Islam. The fact that slavery and rape were addressed in this thread helps document the extent of the larger problem viz Islam.

"The question, "Today, in the twenty-first century, is the treatment of slaves really the issue?" is not specific to Islam."

True; but this site deals with problems associated with Islam.

"Answers specific to 'Muslim' slavery miss the point of my question."

In that case, maybe you should explain this elusive point of your question. (Preemptive note: I have already addressed your unsupported claim about criticisms of rape under slavery as somehow justifying slavery).

In any case, in the evidence that I had presented, there are some articles which deal with the problem of slavery in the modern world in general, with slavery under Islam regimes being one example. However, overall, the evidence that I cited deals primarily with Islam. This thread focuses on Islamic slavery because that is the focus of this website.

Are you saying that it is somehow inappropriate or wrong to present evidence on (a) Islamic slavery today, and (b) rape within Islamic slavery? And if you believe that such evidence should not be presented in making the case against Islam, what do you suggest that we actually do with such evidence? Ignore it?

I find that there is no practical significance to what you have suggested thus far. It will not affect my presentation of evidence for (a) and (b) in illustrating the many-faceted extent of the Islam problem.

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 26, 2007 8:18 AM