Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Liberal Muslim AMA Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    How can you be accepting of homosexuality if God himself states it is a transgression against him?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Doesn't the "liberalism" contradict with muslim beliefs? It's seems to be more of picking out what you like from a religion.
    Don't quote me on this not 100%.
    Christians also have alot of sects because of certain groups picking out what they like and don't like from the main christianity religion.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by popo111)
    The idea is to prevent immoral acts between a male and female.
    Which acts do you think are immoral? What is the logical justification for that set of morals?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrIso)
    It's not like Chicago or something, with people getting gunned down all the time, and it's not like Lambeth, which is gang central. The only thing there is is loads of roadmen, and a few people that you need be to be careful about. If you mind your business it's alright. Don't pay attention to articles like this:
    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...-a7687486.html
    It's bs imo.
    S/O you, people fabricate and exaggerate sh*t when it comes to ends. Cool, Lewisham may be a bit dodgy at times compared to other parts of the country but it's not like you go outside and instantly get robbed or shanked.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    Which acts do you think are immoral? What is the logical justification for that set of morals?
    Pre marital (sexual) relations or post marital relations with those other than husband/wife.

    In addition to religion, I disagree with this relationship because it's comparitvely weak and short (to marriage). It also has a higher chance to result in single parents (compared to married families) and therefore is socially problematic. These are my personal beliefs.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by popo111)
    Pre marital (sexual) relations
    People enjoy it. It does no harm, so what's the problem?

    Where do you stand on gay rights?

    In addition to religion, I disagree with this relationship because it's comparitvely weak and short (to marriage). It also has a higher chance to result in single parents (compared to married families) and therefore is socially problematic. These are my personal beliefs.
    Couples separate whether they're married or not. The issue is one of responsibility, not marriage IMO.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    People enjoy it. It does no harm, so what's the problem?
    As previously said, it produces illegitmate children and a higher chance of single parent families, which I oppose.

    Especially with younger teenagers, dating can be damaging and emotionally scarring, and therefore I believe they are not mature enough.

    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    Couples separate whether they're married or not. The issue is one of responsibility, not marriage IMO.
    My point was that married couples are less likely to split, in comparison to un married couples. Therefore, for society, I believe it to be the superior position.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by popo111)
    My point was that married couples are less likely to split, in comparison to un married couples. Therefore, for society, I believe it to be the superior position.
    So there are two issues with that:
    1. Do you have evidence to support your claim?
    2. People do lots of things that are bad, and place a strain on society / support services, e.g. being over-weight, not exercising, drinking too much, smoking etc. We don't try to ban things that are bad, we just make the information available and let people decide for themselves.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Castro Saint)
    S/O you, people fabricate and exaggerate sh*t when it comes to ends. Cool, Lewisham may be a bit dodgy at times compared to other parts of the country but it's not like you go outside and instantly get robbed or shanked.
    Exactly man, it's usually the peoplr that on't live there that make that sh*t up as well.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    So there are two issues with that:
    1. Do you have evidence to support your claim?
    2. People do lots of things that are bad, and place a strain on society / support services, e.g. being over-weight, not exercising, drinking too much, smoking etc. We don't try to ban things that are bad, we just make the information available and let people decide for themselves.
    1. You asked for a logical justifcation and as I have repeatedly stated, it's my opinion. I do not have evidence in support of this because I haven't researched. I used logic.

    2. The issue with single parent families is that it affects the children, which affects their offspring and the repition continues. So we have a strong negative impact on multiple/many generations and therefore I oppose it. Whilst I agree (to an extent) that people have autonomy, I also believe certain acts should be prohibited.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    you're not liberal you're just not an extremist lol

    wtf is "protecting modesty"
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by popo111)
    1. You asked for a logical justifcation and as I have repeatedly stated, it's my opinion. I do not have evidence in support of this because I haven't researched. I used logic.
    A logical argument needs to be based on correct facts. I don't know if unmarried couples are more or less likely to separate, so I'm not disputing it, just asking if you can back-up the assertion.

    2. The issue with single parent families is that it affects the children, which affects their offspring and the repition continues. So we have a strong negative impact on multiple/many generations and therefore I oppose it. Whilst I agree (to an extent) that people have autonomy, I also believe certain acts should be prohibited.
    The divorce rate is very high, although it is falling, which has been attributed to couples cohabiting for longer before marriage.

    Marriage is a commitment. Couples can commit to each other without a marriage, so it really is just down to the individuals being responsible, using contraception, or being committed to the relationship.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    The posts on here show exactly why there's no pointing in pretending to be 'liberal' or trying to appease Western society. Anything we do is not goood enough. They won't stop until we basically live a life as sinful as they do. Integration is, lets face it, just a nice way of saying stop being Muslim.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    A logical argument needs to be based on correct facts. I don't know if unmarried couples are more or less likely to separate, so I'm not disputing it, just asking if you can back-up the assertion.
    Not neccessarily. A logical statement can be proposed without fact, if its reasoning is sound and valid.

    To me, it seems logically plausible that unmarried couples have higher rates of separation than married couples.

    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    The divorce rate is very high, although it is falling, which has been attributed to couples cohabiting for longer before marriage.
    Or perhaps a reduction in marriages leads to a reduction in divorces? Although this is not infallible evidence, but I know of a couple who lived together for 10 years and then married. They divorced after 4 months.

    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    Marriage is a commitment. Couples can commit to each other without a marriage, so it really is just down to the individuals being responsible, using contraception, or being committed to the relationship.
    In my opinion, the commitment is too informal and unfortunately that can correspond to higher rates of cheating.

    Once a formal agreement has taken place, there is much less flexibility to bend the rules.

    Anyway, regardless of all this, this is not my AMA. I merely posted to highlight an error.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by popo111)
    Or perhaps a reduction in marriages leads to a reduction in divorces? Although this is not infallible evidence, but I know of a couple who lived together for 10 years and then married. They divorced after 4 months.
    I'm not sure that this example helps your point.

    Anyway, regardless of all this, this is not my AMA.
    True. Thank you for your answers.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    Really? The Quran is fairly explicit, for example:

    Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male, what is equal to the share of two females.
    4:11


    And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. And if there are not two men [available], then a man and two women from those whom you accept as witnesses - so that if one of the women errs, then the other can remind her.
    2:282

    It blatantly values women less than men. If this is the true word of your god, then he's a misogynist.
    In regards to your first quote, that doesn't mean women are not equal for Men. In islam if the father dies, then the sons have to take care of the house. Thus the oldest son is in line for this duty. This means he has to spend the money on the house, food, bills, gifts for those who live their. He cannot spend it freely on what he wants. But Women, they can spend it on whatever they want to. The males have to spend theirs for them and for the children if any. That way it makes logical sense to give the men more so they have enough to spend on everyone.


    The second quote, back in the day women and men were seperated. They didnt work together at all. So in the quote it says 2 men or 1 man and 2 women. Now 2 men and 2 women, so both of them could correct each other. 1 man, because usually women would be chaperoned and not be alone. 2 women so they correct each other just like the men would.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    I'm not sure that this example helps your point.
    It was not meant to support my contention, but rather address a point you made. Nonetheless, I already made it clear that a single anecdotal example is not sufficient evidence.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aware1)
    In regards to your first quote, that doesn't mean women are not equal for Men. In islam if the father dies, then the sons have to take care of the house. Thus the oldest son is in line for this duty. This means he has to spend the money on the house, food, bills, gifts for those who live their. He cannot spend it freely on what he wants. But Women, they can spend it on whatever they want to. The males have to spend theirs for them and for the children if any. That way it makes logical sense to give the men more so they have enough to spend on everyone.

    The second quote, back in the day women and men were seperated. They didnt work together at all. So in the quote it says 2 men or 1 man and 2 women. Now 2 men and 2 women, so both of them could correct each other. 1 man, because usually women would be chaperoned and not be alone. 2 women so they correct each other just like the men would.
    Your answers just underline the sexism in Islam. It may have been acceptable when the Quran was written, but it is not now. Modern morals are better IMO.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    Your answers just underline the sexism in Islam. It may have been acceptable when the Quran was written, but it is not now. Modern morals are better IMO.
    How does it undermine the sexism? From the way I see it, men have it harder with all the extra responsibilities. I just refuted your earlier comment and you dont have anything valuable to say?

    Modern morals arent better, from what i last heard theres still pay gaps, women got their rights waay later than they did in islam (fighting in wars, property, not being treated like objects, not having to take a last name etc.)
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aware1)
    How does it undermine the sexism?
    I said underlines.

    From the way I see it, men have it harder with all the extra responsibilities.
    Which would be sexist, wouldn't it?! (Not that I agree with you - women get the worse deal IMO)

    Modern morals arent better, from what i last heard theres still pay gaps, women got their rights waay later than they did in islam etc.
    Women are not treated as equal to men in Islam. Modern society isn't perfect, but it does try to constantly improve. Islam doesn't.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
    Useful resources
    AtCTs

    Ask the Community Team

    Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

    Welcome Lounge

    Welcome Lounge

    We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.