I'm asking if they could do what they believe the first convertors to Islam did. Seeing as they believe it to be true of others. Its a simple, fair and inoffensive question. Stop being offended for other people. It's one of mans worst traits and is actually derogatory.
Once again a sweeping statement. Ofcourse if I said a whole nation were (insert derogatory remark here) then someone might consider that as racist. Up until now, any political criticism of Saudis has been of their ruling classes. The minute you start aplying that to a whole nation, well... I distance myself from it
Yeh I can see you have another bee in your bonnet about Islam. Spurlock answered your question in post #1212, it's there for all to see. And he answered it very well. What he's written is correct based on reported accounts of the time and what the Quran teaches. You just chose to ignore it because it doesn't suit your standpoint. It's like me saying to you that Jesus' first followers including his 12 disciples were forced to convert. The fact Jesus teachings (as stated in the Bible) may have actually appealed to them and convinced them to follow his path, I guess you would ignore. You'll offer no other accounts of what actually happened around Jesus, Mohammed, Abraham, Ram, Sita, Guru Nanak or Budha, so what's the point of debating this with you? As for man's worst traits, well two of the worst in this modern world seem to be divisiveness and xenophobia. You appear to revel in both tbh UIR.
You do realise forced marriage is not a Muslim issue? Its a cultural issue and it happens in non-Muslim society as well. Islam actually states a woman should never be forced in to maariage.
you say this with such conviction that you know for a fact that all saudis are forced to get married or they get killed! Utter nonsence!
Ok. What if you thought it was wrong yet they believed it to be true. Let's assume, in as non violent method as possible, these invaders enforce their superiority on you and others who don't submit?
Oh boy like the little game your trying to play! Not going to entertain you with your little game and agenda!
Why do some always assume you automatically mean everyone? Unless it's a group they don't like or agree with, obviously. Its a bit of a simplistic view, don't you think? I mean when someone says the West is responsible, westerners don't throw their arms in their air and express their huge outrage over such offence.... Do they?
Obviously not. Very few people are really willing to give up their beliefs for another. What's my agenda? Its been mentioned plenty of times but nobody's clarified what it is yet.
Because everyone can see your ulterior motive as you try and do generalisation and blame islam with no evidence, ,contrary to when others provide evidence and prove you wrong!
Listen you cultural delinquent! Do you even know the difference between forced and arranged! Do you even know tgat marriage is a religious institution!
I think you've been the most offensive person in this thread tbh. Will you be stopping it anytime soon?
I've yet to be proved wrong. You believe, based on ancient ideology that you interpret for your own mind, that I am wrong. This doesn't constitute proof. Islams origins are sketchy. Very little information is actually available. Unlike other religions which have an array of historically accurate evidence to support that in part, some of it may have some elements of truth, Islam seems to lack this. Why? It doesn't make sense. The qaran itself is a book of convenience for whoever reads it. For many level headed people it promotes a peaceful and happy existence. Not because of the book. Surely you understand this is because the vast, vast majority of human beings are peaceful, social and friendly people. Religion of any kind doesn't promote this. Have you looked into ancient beliefs, sacrificial practices, religious prostitution etc. A persons beliefs are cherry picked, depending on the time, social acceptances, culture and quite often how much they are suffering. When some ancient Mexican civilisations were sacrificing 100s to appease the gods and gain favour, it was normal at the time. It was socially acceptable within the culture and a part of normal life. So by that definition, Muhammeds apparent behaviour in the 7th century was probably par for the course. It would have fitted nicely into the time. I have no doubt. That doesn't make it acceptable today though. Or off limits to discuss. Sorry.
Ones more ****ed up that the other? Still ****ed up. What happened to freedom of choice? If you can't have it in love, and I mean freedom of choice, free from interference, then where can you have it. And yes, which is why Marriage is also bollocks. But that's another story. Never got why homosexuals wanted it tbh. Its a religious institution that expressly forbids same sex relations. Well at least for the big 3 religions. I suppose it makes quite a point. Did you know prostitution is a religious institution? One of the very oldest in fact. Not so much now though...
