Will self on the hijab

[Plain Talker]

No fear of that and some of use appear to know far more about Islam than some of the members that claim to be Muslims.

 

No, they simply know a smattering of verses that they have been fed, in order to quote out of context, with no reference to either the exegesis or hemeneutics of the verse, or the chapter in which is is contained.

[SpikeMac]

It's an interesting observation though isn't it, no one batted an eyelid when they saw a nun walking down the street in full habit and wimple, it never created any hostility in fact most of us admired their sacrifice, even though when put under analysis they're pretty odd individuals.

 

My Mum, and many of her friends wore veils whilst attending mass in the late 1960s.

 

They were very nice lace veils, but the intention of modesty was the same.

 

They've pretty much gone now. The hijab will go too, eventually.

[Waldo]

I used to think that Nuns looked like bats, with their black clothes flapping about them even in a breeze, and that made me laugh.

 

Maybe its because I see life from the perspective of the "kings New Clothes" where the absurd is absurd, and I am not so conditioned by superficial cultural values.

 

So when the plethora of nuns were replaced by something more absurd, but also worn in the name of piety, I am most glad, as it makes me smile, and what is wrong with that. I am not laughing at the person, but at what they consider to be used in the public sphere, to project a specific image.

 

If it was Ok to Laugh a hippies, punks, and the rest of the fashions people regard as their tribal identity, and all the world is a stage, then why should not an audience react to the show displayed.

 

One is fair game in public, but I am not saying that what one is born with should be ridiculed, as all of us did not choose the parents, or body we inherited, just what crap they have clothed themselves with culturally, visually, psychologically in the attempt to be grow up adults. We are all actors, just look at your costumes, and just because it fits with some tribal group does not mean it is the answer the only answer to PLAYING JUST ONE SMALL PART IN THE PLAY OF LIFE

 

Quote-o-rama....

 

As men's prayers are a disease of the will, so are their creeds a disease of the intellect. They say with those foolish Israelites, 'Let not God speak to us, lest we die. Speak thou, speak any man with us, and we will obey.' Everywhere I am hindered of meeting God in my brother, because he has shut his own temple doors, and recites fables merely of his brother's, or his brother's brother's God. Every new mind is a new classification. If it prove a mind of uncommon activity and power, a Locke, a Lavoisier, a Hutton, a Bentham, a Fourier, it imposes its classification on other men, and lo! a new system. In proportion to the depth of the thought, and so to the number of the objects it touches and brings within reach of the pupil, is his complacency. But chiefly is this apparent in creeds and churches, which are also classifications of some powerful mind acting on the elemental thought of duty, and man's relation to the Highest. Such is Calvinism, Quakerism, Swedenborgism. The pupil takes the same delight in subordinating every thing to the new terminology, as a girl who has just learned botany in seeing a new earth and new seasons thereby. It will happen for a time, that the pupil will find his intellectual power has grown by the study of his master's mind. But in all unbalanced minds, the classification is idolized, passes for the end, and not for a speedily exhaustible means, so that the walls of the system blend to their eye in the remote horizon with the walls of the universe; the luminaries of heaven seem to them hung on the arch their master built. They cannot imagine how you aliens have any right to see, — how you can see; 'It must be somehow that you stole the light from us.' They do not yet perceive, that light, unsystematic, indomitable, will break into any cabin, even into theirs. Let them chirp awhile and call it their own. If they are honest and do well, presently their neat new pinfold will be too strait and low, will crack, will lean, will rot and vanish, and the immortal light, all young and joyful, million-orbed, million-colored, will beam over the universe as on the first morning.

 

...speaks something of value to me.

[natjack]

Men are in charge of women

...But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them.

 

The word used in this verse (on the type of woman) is nushuz.

 

When it comes to the nushuz of wives, it is interpreted by different well-known translators as disloyalty, ill-conduct, rebellion, desertion, non-compliance, or arrogance.

 

So, the Quran gives steps to deal with it in a manner that will hopefully remove the tension and make the person realize they have made an error.

 

This could be non communication, not sharing the bed etc. It does not recommend you beat them just for the sake of it. And the word beating is not as you would think when looking it up in your general dictionary.

 

The Prophet explained it by "dharban ghayra mubarrih" which means "a light tap that leaves no mark".

 

So if it resorts to that- every effort must be taken to avoid any harm and to avoid the face-

 

I can't get my breath, you're actually advocating this as a way to treat another adult in the 21st c? And anybody who hits another person takes care to avoid the face, if they want to hide what they're doing, seems elementary to me. Are woman allowed to give the men 'a light tap' if they're in error, or refuse to get into bed with them? I'd take bets not. I'd also think that any self respecting woman linked up with a bloke that thinks he's the boss of her, can treat her like she's a little child, and even hit her by divine right, would be glad if he 'forsaked' her bed ... not a good way to go about getting her to want you, seriously. I really can't believe you're even discussing this stuff in a serious manner. It's crazy talk.

 

---------- Post added 18-11-2013 at 02:18 ----------

 

Sometimes it is worth to really do your research.

I suppose it's one way of avoiding being violently murdered by extremists for your opinions? Maybe he thinks it's better to live the rest of his life as a Muslim, than not at all.

[angos]

No, they simply know a smattering of verses that they have been fed, in order to quote out of context, with no reference to either the exegesis or hemeneutics of the verse, or the chapter in which is is contained.

 

And it must follow that millions of Muslims round the world must also just know a smattering of verses that they have been fed in order to act in inappropriate ways.

Its couldn't possibly be you that just ignores large junks of the book because you find sections of it morally repulsive.

[boyfriday]

My Mum, and many of her friends wore veils whilst attending mass in the late 1960s.

 

They were very nice lace veils, but the intention of modesty was the same.

When I lasted visited the Catholic cathedral in Liverpool there were many women who had 'veil's on as you describe.

They've pretty much gone now. The hijab will go too, eventually.

 

Sage observation SpikeMac. It baffles me why the Islamophobes aren't able to process the thought that what we see now is a snapshot of life and not necessarily how things will be in the future.

 

Over time and with integration, western influences will be of more relevance to Muslims than anything, we can see it happening now already.

[angos]

Sage observation SpikeMac. It baffles me why the Islamophobes aren't able to process the thought that what we see now is a snapshot of life and not necessarily how things will be in the future.

 

Over time and with integration, western influences will be of more relevance to Muslims than anything, we can see it happening now already.

 

The flaw in your argument is that many of the people you talk about aren't Islamophobes, and they can see that how things are now is necessarily how things will be in the future. The evidence from Islamic countries clearly shows that as the percentage of Muslims increase the life of non Muslims become less tolerable.

[boyfriday]

The flaw in your argument is that many of the people you talk about aren't Islamophobes, and they can see that how things are now is necessarily how things will be in the future.

The flaw in yours was that I was referring specifically to Islamophobes.

The evidence from Islamic countries clearly shows that as the percentage of Muslims increase the life of non Muslims become less tolerable.

 

Clearly the Muslims I was referring to were the ones exposed to 'western influences' commonsense might dictate they don't reside in Islamic countries.

[angos]

The flaw in yours was that I was referring specifically to Islamophobes.

How many of them do you actual know, I don't know any.

 

Clearly the Muslims I was referring to were the ones exposed to 'western influences' commonsense might dictate they don't reside in Islamic countries.

All the countries that are now Islamic, were once not Islamic, and the more Islamic they become, the more people suffer.

[Zamo]

It baffles me why the Islamophobes aren't able to process the thought that what we see now is a snapshot of life and not necessarily how things will be in the future.

 

Come now BF... the Muslims have had more than a millenia to iron out the creases. We are not judging Islamic cultural practices based on a snapshot but on hundreds of years of fine-tuning. And the result is in (drum roll)... it is crap.

 

There is no such thing as Islamophobia because it is completely rational to reject Islam.