The Ultimate Betrayal

ntsyed sahib:
This was Priceless!
--
``Firstly, everything exceptional (as per the prevalent customs, norm, mores, etc) that the Prophet (PBUH) did is addressed and clarified in the Quran:

- permission for him to take more wives than four
- the arrangement between him and his second wife Lady Saudah bint Zama’tun (R.A)
- his marriage with Zaid bin Haritha’s (R.A) ex-wife Lady Zainab bint Jahsh (R.A)
- etc
``
--

Quran - the alter ego of Mohammad - giving the Prophet Mohammad, a blank cheque to populate his harem with even more Wives that a True Momin can only dream for in his next life. Brilliant!

My personal favorite is Surah e Kausar though, when it delivers a one-two knock out punch to infidels who were peeing Prophet Mohammad off - cos he got no male offspring.

I thank you for standing up to the cause of Quran ul Hakeem Furqan ul Majeed.

regards.

In one of previous posts (#110) I said,” I think incest is not a huge issue in the subcontinent or at least in Pakistan. With such closely knit family structure, a father sleeping in a daughter’s room would raise huge eyebrows.”

Samina did try and answer that and I wasn’t also sure of my position, so, I decided to do a little digging around and here are some quotes that clearly show that I was wrong. I think these stats show that it is a widespread problem in the India and by extension must be in Pakistan too.

“Close-knit family life in India masks an alarming amount of sexual abuse of children and teenage girls by family members, a new report suggests. Daniel Lak spoke to women who have suffered rape at the hands of male relatives Delhi organisation RAHI reports 76% of respondents to its survey had been abused when they were children - 40% of those by a family member. The report suggests that disbelief, denial and cover-up to preserve the family reputation is often put before the individual child.

Family facts of the abused
68% were living in nuclear families
16% in semi-joint families (nuclear and grandparents)
15% in extended (joint) family systems

The report, Voices from the Silent Zone, suggests that nearly three-quarters of upper and middle class Indian women are abused by a family member - more than often an uncle, a cousin or an elder brother.

RAHI founder Anjua Gupta said she set up the organization because she believed sexual abuse was rampant in Indian families and no one was doing anything about it. ``When I started working in this area people used to say `Where are the Indian statistics?`. It was thought of as a Western phenomenon. ``One of the reasons there hasn`t been any data collection is because it is not considered to be an Indian problem.``

I too considered it an exclusively western problem and now I can see how wrong I was.

urstruly:

and my contention, and the contention of others has been that ``moral`` values without religion are not impossible. and no, rational thinking is NOT anathema to all religion. explain what you think rational thinking is?

we have mostly been concentrating on the physical and psychological harm done to a child. again, you choose to see it from the prism of religion. we`ve already talked about the fact that religion has been in the world long enough not to have an effect on us. and the very same religions that prohibit incest and sexual abuse have its own ``leaders`` committing it. how do you explain that by saying that this is a social construct of morality based on religion?

i am all for celebrating bodies, but there are other ways to ``merely`` celebrate bodies other than incest but incest has not been the ONLY topic of discussion here. you have completely ignored and twisted the point that a child is fully developed and aware of what is going on with his or her body, you continue to insist that a child is capable of consent and incapable of being manipulated (manipulation is something you are not entirely unfamiliar with yourself). and you tell me to think rationally?:) hasn`t your disregard of what a child goes through when a parent or any other person wants to ``celebrate`` his or her body, been ``merely`` to prove a point that nothing is possible without religion, be it moral values or anything, and to give back what rational thinkers have given to your religion and you as a believer? where is the concern for the damage done to a child here, urstruly? if rational thinking is indeed anathema to religion, then look for the answer elsewhere. . .think about it.

Re: # 182

``Anais Nin entered into one with her father (and even that choice is fraught with issues regarding her relationship to him as a child), but the issue here is one of consent. we are talking about children here. pre-pubescent children``

Is this issue entirely about consent,then why cant we call it molestation,rape,child sexual abuse.Why coin a seperate term `incest` for it? because it violates not just consent but some thing more which makes it more more shameful,and that some thing is morality not logic.If it were just logic then what say to adult incestous relationship(no one had an answer for my earlier post).Morality is not etched in our genes,it is a conditioned behavior,conditioned by religion and society.
About the `genetic reasoning` what about , incest without aiming for off springs,they could always come from other realtions.And even if it is considered for the sake of argument,the transmission rate of HIV,HBV,HCV is much higher in homosexuals,plus a host of other maedical conditions.Now rationalise homosexuality.

50 yrs ago taking of homosexuality was taboo,now gay mairages are legalised.In another ?? years some one will file a law suit seeking rights of incestous couples.And (God forbid) our children will grow up in that kind of environment.

In his quest for reasoning,man is only trying to eat the forbidden fruit all over again.

Re: # 182 ana

The points that you have raised have been discussed and rebutted throughout the article including Amrita`s list.

Basically, you have reiterated three poits.

1. Social & Psychological stygma:

The point has been answered before that the reason for psychological and social stygma is social construct of morality based on religion. Take the rational approach and throw out the religion as voices in people`s head by hobgoblins, fairies and angels and there remains nothing to worry about.

2. Gene Pool:

There is no medical evidence supporting that; not even the statistical one. If it were true whole of southern United States and Muslim world, and hindus would have been drooling idiots. Lets think rationally. I am proposing incest for mere celebration of two bodies I am not propsing it as a mean to start a family. Family again is a religious concept. Be rational. What if we discover a gene therapy that takes away ythe risk of gene pool malignancy then would the incest be ok, medically.


3. Physical harm

the issue has been addressed.

In short my contention is that moral vlues without religion are impossible and rational thinking is anathema to all religion and morality.

The interesting thing here is that religion leads some people to rationalize and actively defend incest, pedophilia, murder of innocent people and gods know what else...

Re #182

ana answers well #181 and Urstruly`s argument is a silly one. I was going to reply but it this answers well.

Re #162

Thanks for the praise Hamid.

conflating various issues with incest and childhood sex abuse is not necessarily rational thinking either. can someone please explain how saying the quran is just ink on paper rationalizes the absence of consent on the part of a child? and the quran is not just ink on paper. nor is das kapital, or shakespeare for that matter.

the prohibition on incest goes beyond various codes such as the levitical one. the prohibition on incest also has to do with the corruption and weakening of the gene pool resulting in blood diseases, among other health effects. this issue has been raised already. and as many have ``rationally`` pointed out here, it is one thing if an adult chooses to enter an incestuous relationship. Anais Nin entered into one with her father (and even that choice is fraught with issues regarding her relationship to him as a child), but the issue here is one of consent. we are talking about children here. pre-pubescent children. this story dealt with that. and i don`t know that that can be compared to one man laying on top of or underneath another. ``harm`` is an issue that affects children and adults in various ways, physically, mentally, emotionally, spiritually. . .and as much as we want to prove that if doing a) is okay than b) must be too, that is simply not the case.

amrita posted this earlier, and i hope she doesn`t mind me reposting it. . . but i think it bears repeating:

1. adult
2. child
3. consent
4. rape
5. abuse
6. sex

once you`ve looked that up [and pls get your doubts, if any, clarified] try to see the difference between 1 & 2, 3 & 4, 4 & 6, 3 & 5, and also the relation between 1 & 2, 3 & 6, 1 & 3, 2 & 3.

thank you.

Re: # 178 kisan

you haven`t said anything different. THe points that you have raised as rebuttal, have been raised by 30 other people throughout the thread specifically emphasizing the issue of ``harm``. They were adequately answered by using rational analysis and thinking, which resulted in the emotional outbursts and irrational behavior by many on this thread. THese are the very people who spare no effort to give surmons on rationality and now they are rolling on the floor like beat up brats. Just a week ago these people were telling us that Qran is nothing but ink and paper and calling someone a dog is an expression of love and they were condescendingly telling us to be rational and where is their rationality now.

As for the issue of harm goes, if there is no harm caused by one man laying underneath the other then what harm in the world could come by a father making love to his daughter. It is just flesh rubbing with flush just as Quran is just ink and paper. Let me tell them that it is all in your head. A case can be rationalized here that if both father and daughter (or son) have used a diaphragm, preferrably, chery flavored, then no transaction even took place. As a matter of fact we can ratinalize and put our diaphragm of morality anywhere we want, now can`t we?

Re: Various

While some mean well, and others are downright anti-Islam belligerents without a rationale, it is apparent that most of the respondents to my views have:

- never read the Quran and Authentic Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) in entirety
- never read the pre-Islamic history of Arabia and the rest of the world
- never read about other prophets/messengers sent by Allah throughout the history of mankind
- maintain a myopic view of the global geo-political environment as per mainstream media

Thus, have formed their opinions based on unsubstantiated hearsay, text, articles, etc. Their impressions have been reinforced by deviant clerics/scholars, corrupt leader of the Muslim nations and misguided masses, to the point that they equate Islam with prevalent Muslim behavior.

If they had studied Islam as much as they have studied other systems, I can guarantee their responses could not be classified as outbursts at the mere mention of the word “Islam”.

They would notice the difference between my consistent use of the term True Islam and its current corrupted and politicized interpretations.

They would know that True Islam:

- does not encourage slavery, and eliminated it methodically with examples set by the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and his companions (R.A) of setting their slaves free, and often marrying them themselves or to some other believers who needed or could take that responsibility

- with its guidelines on sexual behaviors, forbids incest and child sex
- minimizes the capital punishment and allows it in extreme cases
- does not forbid existence of other faiths within an Islamic community, until and unless these threaten the security of the community in any manner – not just physical

They would know that Religion is not just a set of rituals for individuals and communities. That it is a complete Way of Life – more comprehensive than people can collectively fathom at once. That this complete Way of Life addresses our individual, communal, and international aspects of life.

Like Allah commands that seeking education is every man and woman is an obligation, a sincere study of Quran and Authentic Sunnah is a Must to understand it.

Simultaneously, if they had studied general human behavior, they would know that religious faith cannot be separated from state. It is simply impossible, because people are running governments and they have their own definitions of faith as the guiding principles of their individual lives. Every one, with only rarely exceptions like the Prophets and some leaders, seeks his/her benefits before anyone else`s. And no matter how hard they try not to be dogmatic, they always DO influence the outcome as per their faiths and beliefs to a varying degree of benefit for themselves.

Therefore, a common yardstick is a MUST to form an Islamic state; in this case in Pakistan since the predominant population is Muslim.

hamidm2’s pathetic and derogatory reference to marrying one’s adopted son’s ex-wife is abundantly clear as per
- guidelines on adoption,
- rules of inheritance,
- and marital eligibility of men and women in the Quran and Authentic Sunnah.

As for Aisha’s (R.A) age when she was married to the Prophet (PBUH): it is almost a 1400yo disinformation.

Firstly, everything exceptional (as per the prevalent customs, norm, mores, etc) that the Prophet (PBUH) did is addressed and clarified in the Quran:

- permission for him to take more wives than four
- the arrangement between him and his second wife Lady Saudah bint Zama’tun (R.A)
- his marriage with Zaid bin Haritha’s (R.A) ex-wife Lady Zainab bint Jahsh (R.A)
- etc

But his marriage to Aisha’s (R.A) is not mentioned in the Quran. If she was as young as per the allegations, which was considered wrong even back then, Allah would have addressed it in the Quran like the aforementioned few instances.

If the allegations have any basis, the question here is: why such an exception was excluded from Quran?

According to my studies, her age to be 6 or so has been reported by someone in Basra or present day Syria. According to historians, this gentleman had never been to Makkah and/or Madinah himself. He mostly narrated his father who had lived in Madinah, but was perhaps among the Tabi’een at best, i.e. not among the Companions (R.A) of the Prophet (PBUH). Allah knows best. Therefore, the narration appears pretty weak.

Now, let’s look at some facts on this issue:

- Aisha (R.A) was 10 years younger than her sister Asma bint Abu Bakr (R.A)
- Asma (R.A) died at the age of 100 in 73 Hijri
- which means, she was more or less 27yo when Muslims migrated to Madinah
- which means, Aisha (R.A) was more or less 17 at the time of migration – 1st Hijri
- which means, Aisha (R.A) was a grown woman at the time of her marriage

Furthermore, it has been narrated by various Sahaba (companions of the Prophet – PBUH) that Aisah (R.A) participated in initial battles by collecting and bringing arrows, food, water, etc to the Mujahideen or nursing the wounded. How could a child ``girl`` be allowed in a battle field? Does it make sense?

If she was even 10yo at the time of her marriage to the Prophet (PBUH), she would have been in her mid-twenties at the time of his (PBUH) death. She could not have been regarded as one of authentic exegetes of Islam at that age, when his (PBUH) other wives and his daughters (R.A) were more mature and experienced and had spent substantial amount of time with him. Therefore, she could not have been consulted by the Sahaba for Ahadith.

I hope you can figure out the rest here.

Frankly, I haven’t been able to confirm it, but I’m pretty sure that this disinformation has been perpetrated and perpetuated by the hypocrites – the kind of people who slandered Aisha (R.A) during the Prophet (PBUH)’s life; the kind of people who refused to pay Zakat immediately after the Prophet’s (PBUH) death; the kind of people who continue to seek changes in Islam to suit their selfish agenda, oblivious to or with deliberate disregard for the masses.

Unfortunately, today even a lot of Muslims believe it to be true, because they have forgotten the basic difference between the Mustanad (authentic) and Dha’eef (weak) narrations of Ahadith.

Speaking of slandering Aisha (RA), if she was allegedly just a little girl, how could the all-wise and intelligent hypocrites accuse a little girl of adultery?

As I’ve said, it’s mainly about Islam-bashing with unsubstantiated claims and comments, based on ill-conceived notions of Islam as per the mainstream media; mainly for the sake of Islam-bashing, perhaps because the current environment fosters such behavior by tolerating or encouraging deviance under the false pretexts of “freedom”. Ask the unfortunate masses of the world – mostly 3rd world – about “freedom” and they’ll give you a million times more gut-wrenching response than this article.

Can anyone tell me how long has it been since the separation of “church and state” in Islamic countries and the direction general societies have been moving since then?

For that matter, in non-Muslim countries, aside from technological advances, which way the societies have been moving in terms of personal security, employment, privacy, etc - up or down?

Have the societies at large improved or deteriorated in terms of moral decadence and violent crimes?

Sure, in such communities we may have the right to say anything we want.

We may have a right to walk around naked if we wish to.

We may have a right to practice our individual ideologies as long as it doesn’t conflict with the “state law” (which is no different than a True Islamic state).

But how has it improved the lives of general masses, considering the fact that violent crimes continue to rise; economic gap continues to widen; trading of women & children is on the rise throughout the world; countries are waging wars preemptively with fabricated justifications endorsed by a fraction of voters, resulting in hundreds of thousand of deaths and injuries to all sides, to name just a few things.

Again, if you study the history, you will see that circumstances were similar if not the same as today when Allah raised the Prophets (PBUT) from amongst the people to teach them Islam. Within few short years things got back on track. Then slowly the deviants corrupted the system again until it got to the point where Allah had to either wipe away the entire nation from the face of the earth, or if the situation was correctable He sent another Prophet again. And the circle continues.

Read the history and you`ll see that the secular system most here wish for has been unsuccessfully tried over and over again between the tribes and nations across the globe throughout the history, and ended with bloody revolutions.

The primary flaws of the contemporary “secularism” is that power remains in the hands of few individuals and families – across the board in all countries. Even if these few power wielding individuals and groups mean well, they (as humans) cannot fathom every aspect of human life and the world at large; they are unable to formulate effective laws that stay ahead of the criminal mind for a change. There’s no yardstick as a standard to go by. Thus, there’s ceaseless firefighting at the expense of tax revenues of the masses and their well being; constant bickering and conflicts, resulting in continuous Amendments, which is more often than not abused as we can witness in today’s environment.

I think this post has gotten long enough as it is, so I’ll not go into further details. However, I must stress agains that it behooves all of us to study the history of mankind, Quran, the Authentic Sunnah, etc, before forming an opinion about Islam. Other than that, the selfish deviants and the belligerents will remain so while the world moves on.

Allah hafiz,
ntsyed

Re: # 158, 162, 168 by hamidm2

#158: ``as for incest - temporal has asked a very valid question and if you cannot give a clear yes or no answer to that then you are beyond reprieve``

#162: ...the damned scriptures have often provided support for horrible practices like slavery, incest and child molestation............ as adults we ``know`` that it is our duty to protect the children and we don`t need divine revelation to tell us that ...........

# 168: now, what is your answer ?.... or are you waiting for another revelation - like the one about sex with your adopted son`s wife - that might make it kosher ?....

Being yourself, you never cease to out-dumb yourself with every successive post when it comes to faith, religion, and its proponents.

If you had read my post 38 or 39, you would have seen my answer.

As I`ve pointed out in 149, you categorical ``NO NO`` is a direct result of ``divine relevations``. Otherwise, your forefathers would not have known it to be wrong when they evolved from primates.

The issue of marrying one`s adopted son`s ex-wife is adequately addressed in the Quran, the Book you keep high up on your shelves without ever having the courage to impartially studying it in its entirety.

Needless to say, the matter of reprieval is up to Allah for all of us, whether you believe in Him or not.

I don`t think I need to reciprocate your personal and ideological insults with the same stupidity...you insult your own intelligence pretty well as per your various posts on this board and others.

I think your late arrival amply explains that you could not fathom the question and wanted to avoid making a complete fool out of yourself as your protege temporal did. But how long could one expect you to resist that...lol

ciao :-)~~

Re #177

Urstruly, see post #160 where I did rationalise good and bad without Allah and his Nabis help or any other religions help.

It is based on knowing that something harms you and you don`t like it and then considering that others also wouldn`t like it.

If someone burns you with fire you know that it hurts without reference to Allah and you can extrapolate from that it would hurt others also and therefore is BAD.
When you see abject suffering if you have a heart you feel empathy.

Religion can teach you to override this basic humanity by rationalising slavery etc as Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism etc have all done.

I spent the whole day, saturday, rationalizing that incest was a very bad thing. By the end of the day I was totally convinced that there is no bigger abomination than this act. I went to bed with a clear and guilt free conscience. The next day, on Sunday, when I woke up, I had a clear head, my mind was open, and thought process organized. So I decided to cotemplate and rationalize on the issue a bit more. By the end of the day my thinking had totally changed. Through my rigorous rationalization I had come to the conclusion that there is absolutely nothing wrong with incest if you think rationally.

And now when I am about to go to bed, it has dawned on me that the concepts of good and bad cannot be rationalized. We can only rationalize a certain predicament to understand its aspect, but as humans it is beyond our power to rationalize good and bad.

Re: # 175

duniya ne teri yaad se begaanah kar diya
tujh se bhi dilfaraib haiN gham rozgaar ke

:)

Re: # 169

a lady can`t ever be wrong ...

main vohi hun momin-e-mubtala
tumhen yaad ho no ke yaad ho ;)

Re: # 167

a lady can`t ever be wrong ...

main vohi hun momin-e-mubtala
tumhen yaad ho no ke yaad ho