Woman burnt to death at Islamic school after sexual assault Watch

BlueIndigoViolet
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#81
Report 4 weeks ago
#81
(Original post by ibyghee)
criticism should be welcomed in Islam, like debating about islam and what you say about justification about slavery should be debated so we can show you can that you are wrong or just correct you. But there is a line between insulting and criticising.
Like insulting is saying, your mum is fat.
Criticising is saying your mum is affecting her health with her weight don't you think?
apart from your desperate strawman arguments:

The mainstream view is that the Quran accepts the institution of slavery. The word 'abd' (slave) is rarely used, being more commonly replaced by some periphrasis such as ma malakat aymanukum ("that which your right hands own").

[Quran 4:36], [Quran 9:60], [Quran 24:58] - It does urge kindness towards slaves

[Quran 16:71] - The Quran accepts the distinction between slave and free as part of the natural order and uses this distinction as an example of God's grace

It does address their need for humanity ([Quran 2:221], [Quran 4:25]

And indeed before freeing them, your 'prophet' also owned slaves - The most notable of Muhammad's slaves were: Safiyya bint Huyayy, whom he freed and married; Maria al-Qibtiyya, given to Muhammad by a Sassanid official, whom he freed and who may have become his wife; Sirin, Maria's sister, whom he freed and married to the poet Hassan ibn Thabit and Zayd ibn Harithah, whom Muhammad freed and adopted as a son.

In Islamic jurisprudence :A Muslim slaveholder was entitled by law to the sexual enjoyment of his slave women. While free women might own male slaves, they had no such right.

The property of a slave was owned by his or her master unless a contract of freedom of the slave had been entered into, which allowed the slave to earn money to purchase his or her freedom and similarly to pay bride wealth. The marriage of slaves required the consent of the owner.
Last edited by BlueIndigoViolet; 4 weeks ago
0
reply
AJ126
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#82
Report 4 weeks ago
#82
(Original post by ibyghee)
so the toxicity is not with Islam, it's with the specific people. If both people believe in Islam, but one is toxic and the other is not. I'm pretty sure Islam is not the factor that differs them from each other.
No it means one person takes it less seriously than the other.
0
reply
ibyghee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#83
Report 4 weeks ago
#83
(Original post by AJ126)
It's insulting to say you are stupid.Its not insulting to say your beliefs are stupid.A lot of intelligent people can still believe really stupid things.Take Issac Newton for instance.A genius who redefined physics yet he believed that there were codes hidden in the bible.
Makes sense, I wouldn't mind if all people debated like that. But even saying stupid is like you know kinda insulting. Like I wouldnt say your mom is fat, I'd say your mom is kinda gaining weight. would use the word weight instead of fat to make it seem more respectable.
0
reply
Plantagenet Crown
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#84
Report 4 weeks ago
#84
(Original post by ibyghee)
so the toxicity is not with Islam, it's with the specific people. If both people believe in Islam, but one is toxic and the other is not. I'm pretty sure Islam is not the factor that differs them from each other.
No, no, the toxicity is primarily with Islam. Some Muslims are toxic, some aren't. But the point was that I can call Islam toxic and that does not automatically mean I am calling all Muslims toxic, as Napp was fallaciously suggesting.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#85
Report 4 weeks ago
#85
(Original post by Notoriety)
I mean that when you were trying to look clever by using whom, which you're clearly not comfortable with, you messed it up. Giving the preposition "to" twice. Felt bad, man.

And good one.
Is the best retort you have that of my having a typo on my phone? Oh that is sweet 😂 Not to mention you think using the word ‘whom’ is somehow clever as opposed to a word anyone who speaks English should know.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Notoriety
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#86
Report 4 weeks ago
#86
(Original post by Napp)
Is the best retort you have that of my having a typo on my phone? Oh that is sweet 😂 Not to mention you think using the word ‘whom’ is somehow clever as opposed to a word anyone who speaks English should know.
Nah, I dished on your using spurious and collective as well. I didn't even mention the pluralising apostrophes, which again should be obvious to any native speaker of English. A lot of typos.

Perhaps stop trying so hard.

EDIT: you weren't even on your phone.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#87
Report 4 weeks ago
#87
(Original post by Notoriety)
Nah, I dished on your using spurious and collective as well. I didn't even mention the pluralising apostrophes, which again should be obvious to any native speaker of English. A lot of typos.

Perhaps stop trying so hard.
Oh this is quite touching that the best you can do is accuse me of grammatical errors 😂. Although given your style and quality of English I’m not sure you’re in a position to talk.
Did you just call me a foreigner?😂
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Notoriety
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#88
Report 4 weeks ago
#88
(Original post by Napp)
Oh this is quite touching that the best you can do is accuse me of grammatical errors 😂. Although given your style and quality of English I’m not sure you’re in a position to talk.
Did you just call me a foreigner?😂
I was accusing you of trying to look clever. Which is obviously the case, given you didn't respond to my point at all and simply came up with some quip about British people being intolerant.
0
reply
Soul Wavel3ngth
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#89
Report 4 weeks ago
#89
(Original post by Napp)
Is the best retort you have that of my having a typo on my phone? Oh that is sweet 😂 Not to mention you think using the word ‘whom’ is somehow clever as opposed to a word anyone who speaks English should know.
I'm still waiting for that list bro...
0
reply
BlueIndigoViolet
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#90
Report 4 weeks ago
#90
(Original post by Napp)
Oh this is quite touching that the best you can do is accuse me of grammatical errors 😂. Although given your style and quality of English I’m not sure you’re in a position to talk.
Did you just call me a foreigner?😂
the desperate strawman arguments continue, he criticised your grammar, so he called you a foreigner?
0
reply
babyshsn786
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#91
Report 4 weeks ago
#91
I find this hard to believe and inaccurate. Where’s the proof? If it happened the papers would plaster it all over . Your statement Pakistanis of Muslim decent shows you have no understanding of that ur talking about. You should spread your racial hate elsewhere.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#92
Report 4 weeks ago
#92
(Original post by Notoriety)
I was accusing you of trying to look clever. Which is obviously the case, given you didn't respond to my point at all and simply came up with some quip about British people being intolerant.
Mmm I guess that’s better than trying to look stupid though isn’t it.
If you’d actually make a point instead of these risible ad hominems I might respond...
No, I called you and your ilk bigots I said nothing of british people writ large.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#93
Report 4 weeks ago
#93
(Original post by BlueIndigoViolet)
the desperate strawman arguments continue, he criticised your grammar, so he called you a foreigner?
Would you kindly read his comment and mine again.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
Last edited by Napp; 4 weeks ago
0
reply
ibyghee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#94
Report 4 weeks ago
#94
(Original post by BlueIndigoViolet)
apart from your desperate strawman arguments:

The mainstream view is that the Quran accepts the institution of slavery. The word 'abd' (slave) is rarely used, being more commonly replaced by some periphrasis such as ma malakat aymanukum ("that which your right hands own").

[Quran 4:36], [Quran 9:60], [Quran 24:58] - It does urge kindness towards slaves

[Quran 16:71] - The Quran accepts the distinction between slave and free as part of the natural order and uses this distinction as an example of God's grace

It does address their need for humanity ([Quran 2:221], [Quran 4:25]

And indeed before freeing them, your 'prophet' also owned slaves - The most notable of Muhammad's slaves were: Safiyya bint Huyayy, whom he freed and married; Maria al-Qibtiyya, given to Muhammad by a Sassanid official, whom he freed and who may have become his wife; Sirin, Maria's sister, whom he freed and married to the poet Hassan ibn Thabit and Zayd ibn Harithah, whom Muhammad freed and adopted as a son.

In Islamic jurisprudence :A Muslim slaveholder was entitled by law to the sexual enjoyment of his slave women. While free women might own male slaves, they had no such right.

The property of a slave was owned by his or her master unless a contract of freedom of the slave had been entered into, which allowed the slave to earn money to purchase his or her freedom and similarly to pay bride wealth. The marriage of slaves required the consent of the owner.
Slavery was accepted in Islam because of the conditions during the period, but Islam aimed to abolish slavery completely. The only way you could get a slave was through buying a slave that was already a slave, or prisoner of war (these people would be slaves for a period of time before being sent back to their people when discussions have been discussed, if not they can ask for freedom from their owners and guarantee that in their life would be freed). It is law of islam that you should free slaves as a form of zakat. This would mean that after time, slavery would be abolished. Now why didn't Islam abolish slavery completely? If you bear in mind 2/3 of Arabia were slaves and freeing all the slaves would mean that you just deflated the economy to such a point that the slaves that you just freed would die from starvation due to the economic hyper-deflation the country just went too.

(Original post by AJ126)
No it means one person takes it less seriously than the other.
It means one person takes it the wrong way than the other, I take islam seriously.
1
reply
ibyghee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#95
Report 4 weeks ago
#95
(Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
No, no, the toxicity is primarily with Islam. Some Muslims are toxic, some aren't. But the point was that I can call Islam toxic and that does not automatically mean I am calling all Muslims toxic, as Napp was fallaciously suggesting.
That's the thing you aint explaining the logic behind your argument. Logically if someone believes in a toxic religion, he is toxic himself.
0
reply
Plantagenet Crown
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#96
Report 4 weeks ago
#96
(Original post by ibyghee)
That's the thing you aint explaining the logic behind your argument. Logically if someone believes in a toxic religion, he is toxic himself.
But that's simply not true. For someone to be toxic, they have to be spouting and doing toxic things. If they act nicely and courteously towards everyone then you can't possibly call them a toxic person. They may have toxic beliefs, but they wouldn't be acting in a toxic fashion.

Someone already gave the example of Isaac Newton. He believed some truly idiotic things (secret codes in Bible), but that didn't make him a stupid person. He was obviously extremely intelligent.
0
reply
Soul Wavel3ngth
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#97
Report 4 weeks ago
#97
(Original post by babyshsn786)
I find this hard to believe and inaccurate. Where’s the proof? If it happened the papers would plaster it all over . Your statement Pakistanis of Muslim decent shows you have no understanding of that ur talking about. You should spread your racial hate elsewhere
Go read it for yourself since in you're such a state of denial.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#98
Report 4 weeks ago
#98
(Original post by Soul Wavel3ngth)
I'm still waiting for that list bro...
Of? Countries that criminalise blasphemy? I’m sure you’re more than capable of googling that?
Not to mention the rather basic fact that buggery is still a sin under Christianity and is treated as such by people, if not de jure anymore in most countries.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
1
reply
HPAG
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#99
Report 4 weeks ago
#99
(Original post by RichPiana)
Some of them are raised in the UK, but that’s besides the point I was making. And someone who is from Bangladesh is known as a Bengali.

I believe it’s more to do with the level of corruption than simply just the culture or religion.
Bengali is a language spoken by the people of Bengal in India and by the people of Bangladesh which was a part of Bengal before independence from the British, at which point it and Pakistan were separated from India. The people of Bangladesh are called Bangladeshi's.

Though the people of the state of Bengal in India are also referred to as Bengali's in India.
Last edited by HPAG; 4 weeks ago
0
reply
ibyghee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#100
Report 4 weeks ago
#100
(Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
But that's simply not true. For someone to be toxic, they have to be spouting and doing toxic things. If they act nicely and courteously towards everyone then you can't possibly call them a toxic person. They may have toxic beliefs, but they wouldn't be acting in a toxic fashion.

Someone already gave the example of Isaac Newton. He believed some truly idiotic things (secret codes in Bible), but that didn't make him a stupid person. He was obviously extremely intelligent.
So your point is that some Muslims practice and take action of Islam differently to other people?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Business Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (44)
16.42%
The paper was reasonable (131)
48.88%
Not feeling great about that exam... (60)
22.39%
It was TERRIBLE (33)
12.31%

Watched Threads

View All