Blasphemy Law: An Academic Investigation

Hobbes,

I don`t understand; no one is denying that govt., economic, political, social and religious policy can be adversely affected by interpretation. If you are aware that there is a great deal of Islamic interpretation that does a great injustice to the MAJORITY of its followers and non followers, what makes you think that those benefiting from this misogyny and bigotry will willingly accept reform. Do you think a hypocritical creep like farangi kush is going to seriously entertain the idea of ``discussing`` and ``reasoning`` why interpretations that have made women prisoners and third class citizens in their own lives should be reconsidered? No; he`s going to dig his heels deeper in his mudhole and bay about ``baabaablacksheep`` while Afghanistan regresses to a time when men rape their sisters. Oh dear-is it that time now in Punjab? Oh well....I guess its because thats the way it is....

The absolute INABILITY of several Islamic govts. to even concede that women are equal to men and have labored under an injustice that the rest of the world uses as an illustation of misogyny and barbarity-these are the courts you want the concept of ``sexism`` to be debated in?

Throw the whole mess and the lot of criminals out and start all over. Or as Sylvia writes, ``Daddy you ba$tard, I`m through.``

DRUMZ #429

So you want to be ShahJehan.

Who is interested in getting answers from you.

There are lot of resources everywhere including Chowk to satisfy my curiosity.

Qasid Ke Aane Se Pehle Ek Khut Aur Likh Rakhoon

Mein Janta Hoon kia Woh Likhen Ge Jawab Mein.

PREM #412

Let me point out.

Reread your post.

On the one hand you are telling all paths are same.

On the other you are accepting pillage, rape murder, suffering of mainly poor.

I have come out of idealism of Jibran long time back. (And who has more humanistic ideal than Jibran?).

I don`t see the world what I think it should be. I see it as it presents.

It would have been good on part of God to create all human equal and fulfil all their needs without problem.

But HE has created man who has to struggle from the caves to iron, and other stages. This path of progress will continue.

The different path do not necessarily hinder progress. They may be complementary for the progress of society.

Progress of West is not limited to West. But its fruits are eaten by all.

I think the only constant which I take is progress and its distribution to all humanity.

Rest of the things. Fight wars, crime, resistance, group mentality etc are part of this struggle.

You cannot eliminate greed, cannot eliminate power struggle and all the bad things. Until by some experimentation, people start to behave in certain way for the benefit of few.

PM #410

Gora Saheb Ki Kia Baat Hai.

Nokri Bhi Deta Hai. Chokri Bhi.

It is just a joke, I heard way back in Pakistan.

Hobbes: ``Curious you do not argue that, to not admit the role of interpretation of religious propositions and history, is an attempt to muddy the topic???``

Who said im not admitting that? U may admit it if u like, ur just arguing a moot point. Of course im analyzing the past through the present. Thats a GIVEN. How else can i interpret it? And Everything is an INTERPRETATION.

``Islam and or Quran can be interpreted as Sexist`` - would be a statement that is balanced, that takes into account the role of interpretation of religious propositions and of history.``

ANYTHING can be INTERPRETED as sexist. That statment is saying nothing. IM about saying a thesis and backing it up, simple. If u wanna say that my evidence involves my personal interpretation, then fine go ahead. I dont disagree with that because ITS A FACT (not worth talking about). Everyones opinions are based on their personal interpretations. Of course im using a modern term ``sexist`` to describe some aspects of Islam.

The Question is how is the evidence wrong? Is there an inequity between the ways men and women are treated in Islam (YES). Can this be described by the word ``sexist`` (YES).

PS: If u ever find urself in a courtroom... i would cut my arm off to read the transcripts.

Krashid: I am not interested in ur vocation. Here, try this, make a decent sentence which involves a question and ill answer it. If u wanna keep answering ur own questions ill understand.

786786, literary critics, good spellers, assorted minor luninaries and big fish in little ponds

Temporal will not allow this to pass without examination and I am grateful to him.

hamidm ask [...i thought islam transcends time and space...] -- temporal adds:

``does it or doesn`t it?...this is the dilemma for the pathetic sticklers...``

Pathetic or not - we ought to examine this question of the transcendence. Is Islam and Islamic knowledge or understanding of Islam, the same thing? Is Islam, the Eternal word of God, the same as the temporal, evolving, changing, human understanding of that Eternal word, the same thing? Have the ideas, the understandings which we have used and use to comprehend Guidance, remained static in history? Between the eternal word of God and the evolving understanding of that word, Which may aspire to, is amenable to, ``transcendence`` ?

A simple message - Be ``good``

Hobbes #428

Probably you are referring to the oath God had taken in the beginning of Universe.

I have no other clue why you wrote God has created everyone Muslim.

Quran is a mercy and message from God. But it is a guide to those who are pious.

All creatures submit to the will of God. My reading suggest it to be laws of nature.

Devil is a reality. But what is devil?

I think conceptualization starts with ``There is no god but Allah``

If Allah has created different varieties of people and world is as it is .

The question remains who will leave the worldly benefit and give ``Debt`` to Allah. For which there is a high reward.

Wassalam

DRUMZ #416

Lanat Ho Mugh Pur

If I take hug from an irrational idiot like you.

People like you come from my pocket dime a dozen and call me Sir.

Krashid

As you know, God created all men and women as Muslims, even agnostics, aethesists, Buddhist, even Hindus, everyone, as Muslims. As a mercy to all humanity, he has sent guidance in Quran. Islam, then is the incorporation of all the messages of God to humanity. And, at the core of all persons everywhere, but binds them is that as creatures of God, they join together in submission to the will of Allah. Yet, the devil is a reality and he shows himself in rebellion and selfishness.

Now what of these persons who are argue that Islam is not the only path ?

Some people say, as if it is a great discovery, that we are all human, we have the same aches and pains and joys - therefore we are all one - that we see God in our own ways, but that all the paths are the same - You want to see them with their tail between their legs? Tell them exactly what I have written in the first para - then hear the objections, then hear out different paths, then hear about good people and bad people - guess which category the idea I present in para one will be in?

Machars - they present the same idea except without Islam or God.

hamidm #418:

cc: well,never mind!

this is the key query...and all kudos to you for asking it...would like to see the professor and lesser mortals like that hateful little twit of a farangi hydra---aka---progressive, hamzad, and 786-420 whatever! among others...

[...i thought islam transcends time and space...]

does it or doesn`t it?...this is the dilemma for the pathetic sticklers...

and forget any reminders of doctors and lawyers(for medical opinions you do not visit a lawyer!)...those idiots so conveniently forget that the simple message of simple islam...`be good`...came for simpleton bedoin arabs that is so ornamentally woven into our social psyche now...

prayers,

...t

It has been on record that most ardent converts to Islam have been the christian clergy, rabbis, pandits and avowed atheists.

They all began as seemingly-innocent enquirers about Islam with the sole purpose of furthering their missionary work or to bring damage to the muslim world.

Some of them happened to be from the elite, the nobility and the royal class.

Those interested in learning more MUST visit a mosque and see a maulana. Also a great way to test your own IQ. Never ever fool yourself that simply because you know english you have exorcised ignorance completely.

Ask those who made the switch . Life is not elastic enough to accomodate unnecessary mistakes.

__________________________________________________

Former Christian Priests and Missionaries who have Embraced Islam

{details of each converts story at www.thetruereligion.org/priests.htm

And thou wilt find the nearest of them in affection to those who believe (to be) those who say:



Lo! We are Christians. That is because there are among them priests and monks, and because they are not proud. When they listen to that which hath been revealed unto the messengers, thou seest their eyes overflow with tears because of their recognition of the Truth.

They say: Our Lord, we believe. Inscribe us as among the witnesses

[Qur`an 5:82-83]



Why are Christian priests and missionaries embracing Islam ? Join our discussion forums and share your views ! You can find many converts from Christianity to Islam there, as well as Christians who are learning more about Islam. If you are a former Christian priest or missionary who has embraced Islam, please email your testimony to us at submission@thetruereligion.org

Dr. Jerald F. Dirks - Former minister (deacon) of the United Methodist Church. He holds a Master`s degree in Divinity from Harvard University and a Doctorate in Psychology from the University of Denver. Author of The Cross and the Crescent: An Interfaith Dialogue between Christianity and Islam (ISBN 1-59008-002-5 - Amana Publications, 2001). He has published over 60 articles in the field of clinical psychology, and over 150 articles on Arabian horses

Abdullah al-Faruq - Formerly Kenneth L. Jenkins, minister and elder of the Pentecostal Church

Viacheslav Polosin - Former Archpriest of the Russian Orthodox Church

Anselm Tormeeda - 14th century CE scholar and priest

Khadijah `Sue` Watson - Former pastor, missionary, professor. Master`s degree in Divinity

Ibrahim Khalil - Former Egyptian Coptic priest

Anonymous Female Missionary - Former Catholic missionary

Martin John Mwaipopo - Former Lutheran Archbishop

Raphael - Former Jehovah`s Witness minister

George Anthony - Former Catholic priest

Dr. Gary Miller (Abdul-Ahad Omar) - Former

missionary

__________________________________________________

Details at www.thetruereligion.org

PM

Chowk is so full of literary geniuses, sadly, I am not among them - what they can`t refute by argument, they demean by criticism of style; this bed is too hard, this one is too soft., too long, too short - just one more way of saying, ``I don`t buy it`` - of course as far as I am concerned, it`s Ok to not buy it, I don`t buy what I am not convinced makes sense, and I have been wrong when I thought things did make sense. Of course you do not mention that dealing with the 5 justifications and their errors does not even encompass 100 words - are you quite sure you have counted? counted correctly?

Any way, to substance:

``But none of this verbiage really addresses the issue of sexism w.r.t to (interpreted or uninterpreted) scripture.``

You cannot avoid the issue by saying that it does not address the issue of sexism on one hand and on the other hand saying, we ``must be mindful of judging others by our current standards?`` We don`t deny that we judge as ``sexist`` - we add that we must be concious that there existed no understanding of ``sexism`` prior to our present day understandings of it. - You see the difference? in one stance we are emphatic, in the other we realize we do not have the grounds to be emphatic.

``Where are values/principle that condradict the misogynistics ones?``

The values to choose to describe as ``misogyniostic`` are a reflection of the interpretation YOU give those values. ``Beat yor wife`` or ``Pray five times`` are infused by our understanding, our values. They are not of themselves, infused with any value. Once again, those same values were not understood to be misogynistic, untill our present interpretation. Abortion was considered a sin, values that supported this view were that life was a gift from God - today abortion is not generally thought of as sin, but life style choices in most cases - the values that support these ``choices`` are not biblical or text derived, they are however; informed by notions of what a good and worthy life is - are they not? Will you ask the same question, where the values that contradict? Not so possible to be emphatic, is it?

``At least Krashid

is more honest when he states that the wife-beating was recommended as a last resort, and used to deter potential community disintegration. But it is still, by virute of being a Quranic edict, a valid doctrine, and affords little, if any, interpretation.``

This is precisely the kind of case being made by the lawsuit against UNC. How have you arrived at the contention that it ``affords little, if any interpretation``? How ``honest is that? I am unable to agree, that to me, a understanding of Islam and Quran as ``sexist`` or misogynistic, is possible without the agreement on interpreation of history.

If one were to say Islam and Quran are ``modern`` - would it be unfair to ask if the concept of, understanding of, ``modern`` even existed, other than in the present?? Would it be unfair to ask which by which ideas, we can justify the use of the word ``modern``? And what if those ideas did not exist, in a time other than in the present? Would it be fair to say, that we had interpreted a religious propositon using ideas that did not exist until the present? Will we then not have interpreted the religious propositon? And will we not also have interpreted history? - You indicate you understand this, but are unwilling to take the next step - which of course means tempering the propositions of ``sexist``and misogynistic``. ``Islam and Quan can be interpreted as sexist, misogynistic`` is a more accurate statement - your thoughts?

Once again your need to elicit agreement for your point of view overrides the need to acknowledge, interpretation of the proposition and of history. On these boards we refer to the verses in question as ``sexist and ``misogynistic`` - on other boards, the kinds of values that allow us to make judgments such as ``sexist, etc., are seen as dangers to authority, family and organization - if we choose to see these as confrontations, we will miss the point I am trying to make, namely, that which you already acknolwedge but refuse to inform your argument - ``mindful of judging others by our current standards``

``please tell us, preferrably in simpler language, whether the Quran is or isn`t the literal word of God, for all decisions of interpretion and rejection of particulars in favour of higher values hinge on that question.``

Quran is most certainly the literal word of God and it is also the figuerative word of God, TO ME. You follow the implications of ``to me``?

``Why? Becasue at the end of the day, you have to answer the street mullah who is

going to ask you the same question that dost-mittar put to you.``

Why not replace the street Mullah, with a ignoramus, to whom one will once again have to explain that while we judge the past with present day values, we can only do so, by acknowledging that we interpret religious propositions and history, when we choose to make emphatic judgments of understanding of the past. At the end of the day, it is oneself to whom one will owe an answer - To the street mullah and the ignoramus, one can owe nothing, well, perhaps a education.

Regards

Hobbes:

Your toe-hold & firm-footedness with grace & elegance could be a beacon to many here. Please be steadfast and continue your polite but firm onslaughts.

It is getting increasingly enjoyable to see them writhe & wriggle in masochistic delirium. Continue relentlessly in your inimicable style.Give them what they want.

There are many more in the gallery watching the show.My e-mail boxes(yes--boxes!) are getting full too fast. There is a very silent & determined constituency out there. They read!-----they watch!-----they wait!

HamidM #418

So you take weekly bath.

Just to point out the fact when bath becomes mandatory.

It is a curse that when somebody would start to bath often, Christians would start calling him

Muslim.

And Muslim do Wudu five times a day, occasionally with dirt.

Anyway I fail to understand that what is ``Sexist`` about Islam.

Is it some form of McCarthyism to put a dogma. Now burden of proof is on guilty until proven innocent.

DRUMZ

``To try and get philosophical by saying ``what is sexism`` or ``what is equality`` is an attempt to muddy the topic. Sexism and equality are defined by our mutual understandings of the word. They are temporary and finite concepts``

Curious you do not argue that, to not admit the role of interpretation of religious propositions and history, is an attempt to muddy the topic??? why is it so difficult to acknowledge that if we effect one side of the equation, we must also allow the same for the other side of the equation.

``Islam and or Quran can be interpreted as Sexist`` - would be a statement that is balanced, that takes into account the role of interpretation of religious propositions and of history. ``Islam or Quran IS sexist``, is entirely too emphatic and unreasonable a statement because it fails to seperate Islam or Quran from it`s understanding.

Hamidm

Did you read post 210? What`s between Mr Hamid. and Mrs Hamid is their business, see how interpretation and understandings, values change thru time?? Did God not know the future? That`s not the issue, man does not know the future. Did the scholars and sages imagine that we may come to a set of values in society where a concept such as ``sexism`` might exist? How could they possibly? how can anyone?

Hobbes:

I revisited your #210 t osee what I might have missed in skimming through it the first time. I`d have to say, if there was an award for excessive verbiage, it would go to you hands down. Baba, why 500 words to simply say that we must be mindful of judging others by our current standards (of course, judging their systems is a different matter)? And why another 500 to say what we already know-- when there is a seeming contradiction in values or principles, we order them, and one or other prevail.

But none of this verbiage really address the issue of sexism wrt to (interpreted or uninterpreted) scripture. Where are values/principle that condradict the misogynistics ones? At least Krashid is more honest when he states that the wife-beating was recommended as a last resort, and used to deter potential community disintegration. But it is still, by virute of being a Quranic edict, a valid doctrine, and affords little, if any, interpretation. Moreover, it is hardly a value. It is a particular, and hence, no value may override it. In any case, please point out what eternal scriptural value could take precedence over it.

But more importantly, please tell us, preferrably in simpler language, whether the Quran is or isn`t the literal word of God, for all decisions of interpretion and rejection of particulars in favour of higher values hinge on that question. Why? Becasue at the end of the day, you ahve to answer the street mullah who is going to ask you the same question that dost-mittar put to you.

Regards,

PM