dialamah

So you support the shooting of unarmed children.

1. Do those places offer a real choice to women to wear the hijab as part of their devotion to Islam or Allah? Or do they wear modest dress because they have to as a result of laws or extreme social pressure? 2. So then do Sunni and Shia practice Islam identically, and are equally "correct"?

Hadn't heard of her before, so I looked her up. She is at war with Isreal, which explains her target. I condemn her actions of course. I found nothing confirming your claim that she was flown to Mecca as a reward. I saw nothing confirming your claim that not a single Muslim objected to either the attack or her release. I didn't look on Anti-Islamic sites, though, so that could be why. In the meantime; "An Israeli general has confirmed that when snipers stationed along Israel’s boundary with Gaza shoot at children, they are doing so deliberately, under clear and specific orders." Shooting unarmed children under direct orders. How does this not outrage Jews and Westerners alike? But I can find no evidence of Jews condemning this, or even of the West condemning it. To use your logic with the crimes of Muslims, based on this incident alone, it's clear that Jews and Westerners everywhere support the deliberate killing of children. /s

Or maybe, don't wage war on children.

Here's an article purporting to explain the history of covering for Muslim women. Basically it says that Muhammed borrowed it from a custom followed by Byzantine Christians and instituted it for only his wives only, after poor behavior by some of his followers. Do you think this is a reasonably accurate explanation of the origins of the hijab? Here is another article, saying that the command for women to cover is explicit in the Quran. Would you agree this is accurate? This is also an interesting article in that it lays out requirements for male modesty as well, yet it is women's attire that is under scrutiny in some Islamic countries. A third article, about the controversy of a thesis by Sheikh Mustapha Mohamed Rashed of Al Azhar University that disputed the claim of hijab being mandatory. Do you think this thesis reflects the teaching of Islam and the Quran?

From your link: "UPDATE: A correction has been issued for this article regarding the claim that 160 children have died in Hamas tunnels. The figure is inaccurate. The figure represents the total number of deaths in the tunnels recorded by Hamas authorities as of 2012. The full text has been corrected, but the error remains in the PDF. " In fact, 9 kids died in the tunnels, while the total death toll was 235. In the meantime: Isreali forces kill 56 Palestinian kids in 2018. 11 more kids die at the hands of Isreal in first three months of 2019. 1500 Palestinian kids killed, 10,000 arrested by Isreal since 2000. In the graph below, the red represents Palestinian children and the blue represents Israeli children. Source.

Ok, then how would Muslims describe the process of study and analysis of the Quran and hadiths that results in these different sects within Islam? Sunni and Shia. They fight each other, both convinced they are correct. Where is it about faith rather than fashion?

So, Pew research asks Muslims in Muslim countries: "Can a person be homosexual and Muslim?" Most Muslims say "No." Argus decides this means that this means most Muslims would kill gay people because there was a widely shared news stories about ISIS extremists who killed Muslims. Pew research asks Muslims if they think Sharia law should be the law of the land *in their country*; most say yes. Pew research says "Should Sharia apply to everyone, or just Muslims" Most say - just Muslims. Argus decides this means that Muslims want to chop off heads, stone women, kill non-believers even though Sharia varies widely in it's practices and implementation and the most extreme form is the rarest, and often not even enforced. Environics surveys Muslims in Canada, asking questions like "Do you go to Mosque" and "Do you wear a headscarf" and "Do you think men and women are equal" and "Do you think homosexuality should be allowed in society". The survey results indicate that younger women go to Mosque more than their mothers, that younger women are more likely to wear a headscarf than their mothers, that younger Muslims are more accepting of homosexuality in society than their parents, and that the majority of younger Muslims believe in gender equality. Argus decides this means that young Muslims in Canada are becoming more extreme, and less accepting of gender equality and homosexuality. You have no logic, Argus. Oh ... so when you insulted MH and I with your "Live in Afghanastan" rant, you'd lost the argument already? Good to know.

Of course there is. To claim otherwise is to ignore the reality of Sunni, Shia, Sufi, Salafists, Wahhabism and other sects. It's the same in Christianity; one Bible supports Protestant beliefs, Catholic beliefs, Mormons, Evangelicals and many others. Most people believe that their particular beliefs are the "right" ones, based on the teachings of their holy book and/or prophets, whilst all others are wrong. You are no different. I do not believe terrorism is supported by any sect of Islam, other than the terror groups themselves. Of course, they can find Quranic scripture and Hadiths to legitimize their claims, but to say they represent Islam is like claiming the group The Lord's Resistance Army represents Christianity. Hijab; my sister (converted to Islam around 20 years ago) has 4 Muslim sisters-in-law, all raised in Egypt as Muslims. One of them wears the hijab in public sometimes; two always wear it in public, but not in front of male family members - their hair is covered, but I wouldn't say invisible. The last one is very conservative; you cannot see any of her hair and her dress is also much more conservatively styled. As well, she feels it appropriate to wear hijab in front of male family members. Quite different interpretations of how/when to wear Hijab, wouldn't you agree? Of course, you may not find this "significant", and perhaps it is not. I am not well versed enough in Islam or it's many different sects to analyze how and why they are different. The mere existence of multiple groups all claiming to adhere to Islam is enough to prove that Islam is as open to interpretation as any other religion. I do not expect you to understand this or accept it; most religious people have great difficulty in acknowledging that someone else's beliefs might be just as valid, genuine and acceptable as their own. Somehow religious people seem to think that God is as ego-driven, jealous and exclusionary as imperfect people are. One thing I prefer about Islam over Christianity is that there is some support for allowing non-Islamic people the right to God's love and entry into heaven, even if they are Jews or Christians. Sadly, too many Muslims forget this little detail and feel justified in attacking those of a different faith, figuratively and literally.

I prefer Canada, where even assholes can express opinion and people are free to express their faith - except in Quebec. Shall we talk about your totalitarian utopia, where capitalism reigns supreme, there are two classes - rich and poor - with the poor restricted from full participation in society because they are poor, and where anyone not white, rich and male is a second class citizen, subject to deportation if brown, or follows a non-Christian religion.

It wasn't 90% when I was there, and its still not 90%. It is more than half, maybe 70% of the women she sees, according to my sister. Some women wear niqabs and some women do not cover at all. According to the law in Egypt, women are free to choose. Socially, wearing hijab is more acceptable than either niqabs or being uncovered. You continue to say moronic things, Argus. My point isn't that Muslims don't believe in Islam, but that just like Chriatianity, there are multiple beliefs and practices, depending on how each individual Muslim interprets Islam. You and others claiming that only the most extreme acts of cruelty or oppression represents Islam and Muslims is what I take issue with. Marocc's assertion that there is only one way to interpret Islam and all the rest are "wrong" is as false as your assertion that ISIS members throwing gays off roofs means Muslims want to kill gays.

Why? Also, I am assuming you are male although your profile doesn't say. It would be interesting to know if my assumption is correct. 1. Agreed that the reasons vary greatly. 2. Do not agree that Islam "demands" it. 3. As you said, it varies. To some degree it seems that men are more interested in women wearing hijab than women themselves. Personal experience tells me that women will wear it at the behest of their husbands, rather than of their own volition. Sometimes this is women accommodating their husbands, which is is part of married life naturally and can go both ways. Too often it's on threat of violence or rejection, which is wrong, even in Islam. Islam, just like Christianity, puts men in authority over women, making it very easy for women to become victimized by the very people God also commands to take care of them. While Western Christianity has made great strides in protecting women from that mindset, Islamic countries are still disturbingly lax when it comes to protecting women. 5. Does it not mean "covering" or "veil"? 6. This is the only reason a women should wear it, imo.

Sad for you, perhaps, if your preference is that women cover. But as far as I am concerned, women should have the freedom to choose. As I understand it, they do have that freedom in Egypt and in most Western countries. I agree with this. The Canadians who think some purpose is served by criticizing hijab, or making laws against it, are working against themselves. Which delusion is that exactly? The idea that the headscarf is representative of male oppression?

Yeah you did. Your exact words were: "too many people ... believe that there is nothing to be afraid of from mass Muslim migration. I wouldn't look good in a Burkha." It is designed to identify fear-mongering idiocy. Shutting it down would be a bonus, but as we see you are still posting.

Anti-carbon tax logic:

If you don't want to be considered Islamophobic, don't make hyperbolic statements like "We're going to overrun by Muslims and I'll have to wear a burka". Fear-mongering idiocy deserves to be shut down.

My Egyptian BIL sent me a pic of a university grad class, almost half whom were women (41 females). Not a single female was wearing a burka and 23 of them weren't wearing a headscarf. Your statement here is pure Islamophobia.

So f*cking simpleminded.

Ya it is. You continue to refuse to see how *this* thread is all about demonizing Muslims. Instead, you continue to pretend DoP, Goddess, Argus, scribblet etc., think their slurs only apply to "those who deserve it". They think "Muslims" are cruel, barbaric, killers - with maybe a few nice ones scattered about so then they can say "Oh, we don't mean all of them", but as far as they are concerned the 'nice ones' are as rare as hen's teeth and probably just waiting their chance to beat up a woman or kill a non-believer.

Your deliberate obtuseness is getting pretty old.

The point, which I am sure you are merely pretending not to get, is that you and DoP decided to use 'cruelty to animals' to even further demonize Muslims and Islam, even though we - as non-Muslims - are equally as cruel. Maybe more so, if one considers raising livestock inhumanely before electrocuting them to unconsciousness prior to cutting their throats to bleed them out vs. raising them outside in natural conditions before cutting their throats and allowing them to bleed out. Not to mention, Jews follow the same process as Muslims for kosher meat - that is, cutting their throats so they bleed out. Why are you not all over Jews for their animal cruelty? Oh, hypocrisy: If Muslims do it, it is more proof of their religious-barbarity. If non-Muslims do it, it's unremarkable.

Nope. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of you and DoP who pretend that Muslims' cruelty to animals is worse than our own cruelty to animals.

Hypocrites. Humans around the world kill animals, for food and sport, often brutally. In the West, we torture animals for months or years before we kill them for food, or just because they've outlived their usefulness. We lock chickens in boxes to turn them into egg-making machines. We imprison animals in overcrowded facilities, refuse them access to grass and sunshine. We take their babies and leave them crying with grief. Criticizing Islam for their slaughtering practices is the height of hypocrisy.

I agree. It's the culture in the ME and North Africa to treat women poorly, whether Christian or Muslim or something else. Honor killings, FGM, plural marriage, child marriage, female oppression and homophobia exists in all groups. That is why, when you check out NGOs dedicated to helping women in these countries, they make the point that such behaviors cut across all religious and ethnic groups. It's only people who want to demonize Muslims who keep insisting that these behaviors are primarily the result of Islamic belief, instead of understanding the historical and cultural context under which these practices have become entrenched, whether an Egyptian Muslim or Coptic Christian, a Catholic in Burkina Faso, or an animist in a Nigerian village.

If you get that its "not all Muslims", why do you always assume that any misbehavior by an individual Muslim is religiously motivated and generalize that to all Muslims? A Saudi guy gets drunk and hits a waitress: "oh it's their religion, that's what Muslim men do!" crows Goddess. A Syrian is charged with murder; "OMG" cries Goddess, "Look what we're bringing into Canada - these Muslim men kill young girls because of their religion!" You clearly believe that "Muslims" are just misogynistic killers. Your 'we get that it's not all Muslims' is merely lip service so you don't look quite so extreme.