The Student Room Group

Feminists Vs Islam (women are disrespected in islam?)

Scroll to see replies

Original post by WBZ144
Oh boy, not Zakir Naik :colonhash:

I have a feeling I know what he's going to say and have refuted these arguments previously. Will get back to you once I can stomach sitting through that video....

Okay, what's wrong with zakir?
Original post by Squishy•
Okay, what's wrong with zakir?


For one thing he has some very intolerant and backwards views such as supporting the execution of apostates, being against religious freedom in Muslim countries and referring to women who would rather remain single than be in polygamous marriages as "public property". For another he is very rude to people who disagree with him and likes to shout over them to prevent them from making their points, I can't respect such a man. I do wonder where he got his medical degree from because he comes out with some very absurd things sometimes.
Original post by WBZ144
For one thing he has some very intolerant and backwards views such as supporting the execution of apostates, being against religious freedom in Muslim countries and referring to women who would rather remain single than be in polygamous marriages as "public property". For another he is very rude to people who disagree with him and likes to shout over them to prevent them from making their points, I can't respect such a man. I do wonder where he got his medical degree from because he comes out with some very absurd things sometimes.


I'm not really for Zakir Naik but I don't think he's in line with that point^^^ (No idea about the rest since I don't really listen to him)
Original post by WBZ144
For one thing he has some very intolerant and backwards views such as supporting the execution of apostates, being against religious freedom in Muslim countries and referring to women who would rather remain single than be in polygamous marriages as "public property". For another he is very rude to people who disagree with him and likes to shout over them to prevent them from making their points, I can't respect such a man. I do wonder where he got his medical degree from because he comes out with some very absurd things sometimes.


I haven't heard him say them things and when he is in a debate he is very respectful and patient when listening to what the other offers.
Even still, when analysing a argument you have to remain a neutral position in order to take it on board, so disregarding all that he has offended with his arguments are very valid.
All I have to say is Lol, the ignorance, misinformation, misinterpretations, distortions, misrepresentations and cherry picked quotes and self-serving facts is quite astonishing. All this from a non-muslim btw...
Original post by champ_mc99
I'm not really for Zakir Naik but I don't think he's in line with that point^^^ (No idea about the rest since I don't really listen to him)


He is in line with that. He compares apostasy to ppl like Edward Snowden selling state secrets... and hence justifies their killing

Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by chemting
He is in line with that. He compares apostasy to ppl like Edward Snowden selling state secrets... and hence justifies their killing

Posted from TSR Mobile


What about when he was asked whether Islam condone's killing apostates during the Oxford Union talk a few years back and he rejected it.
Original post by WBZ144
For one thing he has some very intolerant and backwards views such as supporting the execution of apostates, being against religious freedom in Muslim countries and referring to women who would rather remain single than be in polygamous marriages as "public property". For another he is very rude to people who disagree with him and likes to shout over them to prevent them from making their points, I can't respect such a man. I do wonder where he got his medical degree from because he comes out with some very absurd things sometimes.


All this aside, the worst thing about him is that he's intellectually dishonest, hoping that he can bluff his way through any argument by citing Koranic or Biblical verses from memory, which, unfortunately, is almost always enough to impress his usual audiences. Nobody but his flock takes him seriously, and for good reason.

I agree with your last point about his medical degree, too. :holmes:
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by champ_mc99
What about when he was asked whether Islam condone's killing apostates during the Oxford Union talk a few years back and he rejected it.


From what I know of Naik, his position is that it's permissible to kill apostates if they speak out against Islam after leaving it or try to convince other Muslims to apostasise. Some people think that's a huge improvement on apostasy being punishable by death in and of itself; I disagree.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Butternuts96
1. Good for you that you've seen these people. But majority of the time, burglars are dangerous. Doesn't even matter though because it's natural thinking for everyone that men protect the family. Look at human beings all over the world. Fact.

2. Islam never said that people "jump each other's bones" as soon as they make eye contact. And Islam does say how people should deal with attraction; get married or do some fasting outside of ramadan. Mate how on Earth do child abusers and paedos come outta this? You just made a pretty hefty claim which is completely baseless. (A. Where's your evidence that these crimes are high within religious communities? B. Even if they were extremely high, that's their sin. Doing another sin to stay away from a different sin doesn't make it allowed.)

3. What on Earth is your point?

However I must point out that you're trying to point out general issues that you have with the religion when the whole point of this thread is to address feminism and Islam. Ergo, I would normally tell you to get outta here but you're clearly lost.


Yes, burglars are dangerous... but women can protect their families without the presence of a man. Islam thinks that the female population is physically weaker than the male population when there are countless families that have gotten hurt because the male wasn't strong enough to defend the family because "they froze". What about single mothers who were left to provide for their children, bring them up, keep them safe? Are you saying that these people don't exist? Patriarchal society doesn't naturally exist in nature, therefore suggesting it's an idea suggested by someone and no one has that power to give the whole world that illusion unless people involved an alleged deity. Look at lions. It's the lioness who provides food for their cubs, protects them and are more dangerous than the male when protecting their cubs.
Religions before Abraham were matriarchal. They worshipped a goddess because the female body was capable of giving life and the goddess gave birth to the universe. My point is men didn't like the idea at the time that women were thought to be more important than men in society thousands of years ago and thought it was time to throw a power play and get rid of any matriarchal religion, suppress any outspoken woman by labeling them as devil worshippers, so along came the story depicted of prophet Abraham or Ibrahim, which ever suits you, that the idol worshippers threw him into the fire that didn't burn him to throw any belief that there were multiply god's or, well that was the excuse, many of the idols inside the kabbah are actually of female goddesses. And guess where Judaism, Christianity, Islam all originated from? They're not called Abrahamic religions for no reason.

Evidence?! Really? You're really unaware of world history...

http://m.huffpost.com/us/news/vatican-sex-abuse-scandal

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/15/anti-pedophilia-bill-rejected-in-pakistan-as-anti-islamic/

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4017/uk-muslim-underage-marriage

http://www.vice.com/read/child-abuse-and-the-church-666

Girls these days are getting younger in the age where they hit puberty. Is it still right if it is islamic?

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/puberty-start-early-experts/story?id=21603265

www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/04/why-is-puberty-starting-younger-precocious

I have no issues with Islam, I have issues with religion itself because it suppresses natural morality, humanity and people only do what they think pleases God and is acceptable in god's eyes and not looking at what's right and wrong. That's my only problem. I don't hate Muslims or Islam or are in any way targeting any other religion so please don't think I'm saying all this in spite.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by champ_mc99
What about when he was asked whether Islam condone's killing apostates during the Oxford Union talk a few years back and he rejected it.


Well he needs to decide which is True Islam™

https://youtu.be/p4Kjx3moqxk



Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Hydeman
From what I know of Naik, his position is that it's permissible to kill apostates if they speak out against Islam after leaving it or try to convince other Muslims to apostasise. Some people think that's a huge improvement on apostasy being punishable by death in and of itself; I disagree.


Probably yeah. I guess that's what @chemting was referring to (ie. selling secrets). I'm not his representative or anything so I don't really know much about him lol.
Original post by chemting
Well he needs to decide which is True Islam™

https://youtu.be/p4Kjx3moqxk



Posted from TSR Mobile


I don't think it would be too much of a stretch to compare him to Trump in terms of how much of a charlatan he is. :holmes:
Original post by WBZ144
For one thing he has some very intolerant and backwards views such as supporting the execution of apostates, being against religious freedom in Muslim countries and referring to women who would rather remain single than be in polygamous marriages as "public property". For another he is very rude to people who disagree with him and likes to shout over them to prevent them from making their points, I can't respect such a man. I do wonder where he got his medical degree from because he comes out with some very absurd things sometimes.


he got his degree from mumbai. in terms of his ethnic indian state, he is marathi / konkani (read from maharashtra /goa)
Original post by Plantagenet Crown
Well of course Muslims would believe that, Muhammad was hardly going to admit that Jesus was actually God, was he?

But the Bible being distorted =/= the verses about Jesus claiming divinity being distorted, if that is your assertion then the burden is on you to prove in in regards to those specific verses.

When Muslims say this, what they're really saying of course, is "the bits of the Bible that don't agree with the Qur'an have been distorted, but the bits that do haven't".


So if the Bible says Jesus claimed to be the Son of God and some Non-Christians (ie. yourself) seem to approve of this, then why disapprove of the Bible claiming Jesus can cure the blind... or did these disciples just "pluck that out of thin air" :wink:?

Also, I think there's too much ambiguity on the verses where Jesus claims to be God, which is a pinnacle in the Christian belief (the Trinity). There are actually some Christians that say Jesus only claimed he was the son of God, rather than God.
Original post by champ_mc99
So if the Bible says Jesus claimed to be the Son of God and some Non-Christians (ie. yourself) seem to approve of this, then why disapprove of the Bible claiming Jesus can cure the blind... or did these disciples just "pluck that out of thin air" :wink:?

Also, I think there's too much ambiguity on the verses where Jesus claims to be God, which is a pinnacle in the Christian belief (the Trinity). There are actually some Christians that say Jesus only claimed he was the son of God, rather than God.


What do you mean approve of it? All I'm saying is that verses where he claims to be divine are in the Bible as are the verses of him performing the miracles. Admitting these things are written and believing they happened are two very different things.

I don't think him claiming divinity is that ambiguous at all, but this is clearly just something that we'll have to agree to disagree about.

The majority of Christians don't believe this and even in mainstream dogma "son of God" is not in reference to a literal, biological son.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Plantagenet Crown
What do you mean approve of it? All I'm saying is that verses where he claims to be divine are in the Bible as are the verses of him performing the miracles. Admitting these things are written and believing they happened are two very different things.

I don't think him claiming divinity is that ambiguous at all, but this is clearly just something that we'll have to agree to disagree about.

The majority of Christians don't believe this and even in mainstream dogma "son of God" is not in reference to a literal, biological son.


Well yeah, by approve of I assumed you believed Jesus claimed to be the son of God rather than just believing they were written:

Original post by Plantagenet Crown
There is, there are tonnes of verses from the gospels where Jesus indirectly and directly claims his own divinity. Whether one accepts and believes that is another matter, but no serious historian would deny that Jesus never said these things, he did.

I agree, there's no denying they were written in the New Testament. There's no argument if that was what you meant.
Original post by SuperStar#7
x


Your posts are so stupid I geninuely believe it lowered my IQ by 50 points.

Theres nothing funnier then a christian trying to criticize the islamic view of women. Please stfu and stop embarrassing yourself. You look like a complete jackass
Original post by Squishy•
I haven't heard him say them things and when he is in a debate he is very respectful and patient when listening to what the other offers.
Even still, when analysing a argument you have to remain a neutral position in order to take it on board, so disregarding all that he has offended with his arguments are very valid.


That's why I said I'll watch the video eventually. I would refuse to watch it at all if I was just going to disregard anything he says, though I have a strong feeling I may already know what it's going to be.

Believe me he has said all of those things and more. Look at the way he behaves in this video:
[video="youtube;B2ySV2mCjVU"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2ySV2mCjVU[/video]
Original post by WBZ144
That's why I said I'll watch the video eventually. I would refuse to watch it at all if I was just going to disregard anything he says, though I have a strong feeling I may already know what it's going to be.

Believe me he has said all of those things and more. Look at the way he behaves in this video:
[video="youtube;B2ySV2mCjVU"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2ySV2mCjVU[/video]

What was wrong with him there? Also the title or description isn't zakir naiks words btw just in case that came across as zakir naik thought the title. The title saying stupid is nothing to do with him.

Quick Reply

Latest