The Ultimate Betrayal

Miriam,

The effort has to be many pronged and at all levels.

The example of African Americans is interesting because, as you know, enslaved people from very specific African communities were not considered human, or considered subhuman. The philosophical framework on which the system of slavery operated was based on the idea that the minds, abilities, bodies and capacities of black people were not as developed as white euros, or developed differently than white euros. That apparently was enough for antebellum North America.

I`m sure that reasoning sounds familliar to some of us.

Re: # 110
HP - the girl in this story is a pre-pubescent daughter awaiting her father`s nocturnal visit with dread in her heart. She then gets her period and listens to her father shuffle into her little sister`s room.

This is CSA not adult consensual incest [which is a whole another story as you say]. Most people on this board are cognizant of the difference and have either mentioned that understanding specifically or have mentioned CSA when posting links.

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: # 149
Now the question is:

how could anyone implement the values acquired/borrowed from religion and yet reject/modify the religion simultaneously?
This question is rhetorical.Why not?
In my value system, it is necessary to not have a dogmatic view of religion, or of anything. An iterative process for modification and review is vital. Please note that I am not rejecting religion, but the ``religiosity`` of religion.But thats just me.
Coming back to the issue of csa, I think interactors have given enough reasons why it is wrong even with the pain and risk of pregnancy removed.

Rahul – I was hoping you’d show up! nt sahib touched upon a post of yours that I thought was really appropriate and didn’t respond to because I thought it pretty much said whatever I wanted to say on the subject and besides by then we’d moved on to the actual topic at hand.

Still, it appears t’s need to be crossed and I’s need to be dotted. So here are my two cents, in continuation…

First of all, religion has been around for a really looong time. So it is to be expected that it has affected all of us directly or indirectly. When we talk of a secular society, we are not talking of a society alienated from God. That is the single greatest mistake some people make.

A secular society is one that does not enforce theological law as the law of the land.

As such, it can draw inspiration from manifold sources – for example, it is not illegal to work on Sundays nor can the government punish you for being rude to your father but it still frowns upon robbery and murder.

Secular law can also derive its ideas from non-religious philosophies. The French Revolution, for example, and its war cry of Liberte, Egalite et Fraternite inspired democracies – including the United States. You can say that these people must have derived it from Jesus Christ and the argument can thus go on but those inspired by the FR are not thinking of Christ, they are thinking of those words in particular and what it could mean for them. Similarly the big religious bugbear of Communism.

As a theist, I would credit God with everything in the end because everything was made by him [and pls, before anybody seeks to use my words to further some quasi fight of theirs, pls try and understand the following words as well] but my idea of God need not necessarily be someone else’s and I don’t wish another person to live according to my ideas of Him – everyone should be allowed their own.

Secular society grants you this freedom. You are absolutely free to practice the word of any higher power that speaks to your heart – but there are some basic rules of life in that society, culled from different sources, and you must abide by those.

These rules are formulated so that anarchy might not prevail and so that the temporal [there’s that word!!!] rights of wo/man are protected. So perhaps they might not allow you to practice all the rituals of your religion – you can’t ask your wife to climb on your funeral pyre, you can’t stone someone to death because they committed adultery, you can’t kill someone because they grew two different kinds of crop on the same land, etc. But they will protect your right not to be murdered, to stop a car-jacking, etc.

[Once in a while, secular society allows specific groups to retain some of their laws. In India, for example, Christians have a different inheritance law and of course, much is made of the law allowing Muslims to practice polygamy so you might know that from before. You can say that in such a case, the society is not thoroughly secular. But that is another topic – and this one is enough of a tangent in my opinion. So can we please leave that aside for now? Thank you.]

Now, lets explore the full implications of Urstruly’s contention [as posited by nt] and that of nt as well – which finally comes down to: (1) if you’re not actively religious you have no morals and (2) the best religion is Islam.

There are dozens of people in this world who are a. atheists b. agnostics and c. not Muslims. None of these people act immorally because of these reasons as should be abundantly clear to everyone. There are Muslims who rape, murder, commit CSA and there are atheists who do not and vice versa.

Just as it would be silly to discount the effect of religion on society, it would be equally asinine to discount all those billions who fall outside categories 1 and 2 above.

PS – the “you” as and where it occurs is a general “you”. :)

Re: # 122 by rahul_capri

I don`t think anyone caught on to RC`s post #122:

If somebody makes a cursory glance of secular jurisprudence ,(not that it is labelled in this way, but just to differentiate from Islamic jurisprudence of Quran and Sunnah) , religion,custom,tradition and norms are actually the biggest source of laws. So, the basic mistake being made here is thinking of secular value system as totally exclusive from religion.

I think that`s what Urstruly asked, i.e. why does one feel disgusted at such acts and labels it vile?

Then, as Ustruly and HP clarified that if the anguish and physical pain are removed from the equation, then there shouldn`t be anything wrong with incest or sex with consenting children.

They also aptly pointed out that these reactions are not innate, rather they are acquired. For example, recently there was a sex scandal in Pictairn Island. Six men (including the mayor) were ``charged with a string of sex offences, including rape and indecent assault, on girls as young as 12.``
But
``Their supporters had condemned the prosecutions, saying consensual sex with young girls was commonplace.``

Later they were convicted by a court, primarily based on Christian beliefs and laws.

Also, if one studies anthropology, even in 20th century there were (and may still exist) tribes in Africa where the tribal leaders assign young boys to married men in order to control the population growth of a hunter-gatherer society.

That is, it`s not a big deal in those two cultures. Rather it`s a ``normal`` part of their lives.

So the reason WE, as in ALL of us, feel outraged on this issue is because we`ve been trained to feel that way.

However, In their infinite arrogant ignorance, the self-proclaimed enlightened liberals are either completely oblivious to it,

or

failed to make this connection deliberately to defend their liberal/secular/enlightened/whatever-else-kind-of-stupid moral high ground they feel they may be on.

Now the question is who trained us and why?

Some (not amongst the usual suspects, and they know who they are) have already pointed it out that most of us learn these values from our cultures, and cultures are heavily influenced by religions, even the atheist ones.

Because,

before any of the sciences and scientists evolved, GOD told us that such things are wrong....through His messengers (peace be upon them all) - the ones these ``brain-washed dumbos, the aSSpiring neocons`` wantonly discredit whenever it suits their agenda.

The secularly numbed lot CANNOT recognize the reality that the values they claim to hold as ``ENLIGHTENED SECULARISM`` are acquired/borrowed from the very RELIGIONS they denounce as the ``biggest hoax``. And that`s because they understand/project religion as a set of rituals that vary from place to place, not as a WAY OF LIFE.

Read the history for yourselves.

If it wasn`t for the God-sent religion, i.e. Islam – the perfect and most natural way of life from Adam to Mohammad (peace be upon them),

Most, if not ALL, of the women would still be possessions of their sexual masters – MEN of wealth and power.

Some of those women would have a little bit more to spend on themselves but they would have no power whatsoever, except that of their vaginal prowess while they’re young.

If I remember correctly, in the ancient Greek culture, a woman`s age did not start until the day her vagina was bought by a man.

Children and common Man wouldn`t be better off either, and most of them would be expendable slaves – sub-humans if considered human at all.

Men would molest, rape, abuse children with impunity.

Racism and caste systems would still be strong.

In fact these things are happening today, as we speak. The only reason such abhorant situation is rapidly worsening today in every society is due to minimization of faith and religion. The perpetrators, legislators, judiciary, and law-enforcement forget/deny the Existence of God and His Ultimate Justice. They entice the self-proclaimed ``educated liberals`` with wealth and physical comfort to propagate separation of religion and state, when it can`t be. Consequently, the masses are forced to into illiteracy and destitution through various means and into following the man-made laws that benefit the top few and the left-overs are distributed amongst their propagandists who claim to be ``westernized and educated liberals``.

Interestingly, the latter first assists in de-valuing the society by denouncing the religion as too prohibitive, and when the crap hits the fans, this same group tries to bring back those very values albeit as ``non-religious liberal`` ones..........LOL

Anyway, they only kid themselves that they - the seculars or liberals or atheists - are more enlightened than religiously inclined people because the latter appreciates the 7th century Arabian Islam for its practicality. At the end of the day, THE FORMER SHARES THE THE LATTER`S VALUES that BOTH OF THEM learned from prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him). That`s the cause of the knots forming in the former`s stomachs when they read/her about child abuse, molestation, incest, etc. The only difference is that they deny where they learned it from.

For crying out loud, even on this portal they`re afraid to call a spade as what it is. They only know religion-bashing. That`s all. Other than that if one of them says something wrong, their ilk becomes accomplice with their silence. Similarly, they never have the conscience or the guts to applaud whenever a religiously inclined person says something right, which is more often the case.

Now the question is:

how could anyone implement the values acquired/borrowed from religion and yet reject/modify the religion simultaneously?

Does it make sense?

What would be thier point of reference to legislate the laws?

Can they take the “I/we said so” approach?”

The moment that approach is taken, EVERY one is going to try to have his/her ideas imposed on the masses...........as is the case today.

Meanwhile the plight of common person worsens...............as is the case today with this incessant bickering.

That`s exactly my problem with the AJ`s of the Liberal gutter. Everyone is up in arms about her shirt being ripped while NONE, NO ONE...NADA...ZILCH...ZERO of the liberals had anything to say about 12 and 15yo girls being ripped apart by gang-rapists with impunity.

Why?

Because these news are brought here by ``abdul-hates``? And then they have the audacity to berate the abdul hates because they`re not yapping on and on about the delusional remedial thoughts of the liberal kind?

Talk about resurgence of Jahiliya!

True Islam is the ONLY WAY out of this mess.

The wise will believe it and work to solve the problems.

The perpetually lost - maghdhoob and dhualleen - will continue YappING and keep getting even more lost in their abysmal misery they call ``enlightened philosophy/ideology``.


:-)~~

A word about the value systems. If somebody makes a cursory glance of secular jurisprudence ,(not that it is labelled in this way, but just to differentiate from Islamic jurisprudence of Quran and Sunnah) , religion,custom,tradition and norms are actually the biggest source of laws. So, the basic mistake being made here is thinking of secular value system as totally exclusive from religion. Secular value systems are more concerned about equity, that is ironing out those aspects of religion from its canon that differentiate between followers of different religion or different sexes. So, it will more be concerned with the deltas rather than the core mesage of a religion, that is, if the core issue of a religion is not misogyny or differentiating from other religions.

In my one of my posts I asked whether there is any word for Incest in any subcontinent language. A few languages that I know pretty well don’t seem to address the issue of Incest and that can mean two things:
1. Incest either does not exist or it is such a minor problem that there is no word for it in the Subcontinent lexis.
2. People wanna gloss over the issue as it can legitimately tear the society apart.

I think child molestation and incest are closely related yet entirely separate issues. Child molestation is no doubt a serious crime but it impacts the individuals affected by it. Incest can bring down the whole family. Adult incest is too heinous a crime and it would be a major effort to discuss it without losing sanity. The reality is that consenting adults in an incestuous relationship can only draw scorn form the community and I believe that the law would be completely helpless there.

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. Before we talk about daughter’s room, how many in Pakistan have separate rooms for daughters? A very tiny percentage has this option and that percentage is well aware of social responsibilities and boundaries when it comes to relationship with daughters and sisters.

If I may say so here the major problem in Pakistan is parent having sex in the same room where their children are sleeping too. From big cities to small villages a good portion of population has access to only one room for all family members to sleep. In situation like this, a father daughter incest is pretty much out of the question but little kids watching their parents having sex is a huge possibility and to me a major problem.

Why authors from Pakistan, who, I am sure, are aware of our social and economic structure chose to ignore a real problem of our society and instead concentrate on some thing which is mostly an issue in the West and that too on a web forum that is visited by only people from the subcontinent?

There are no stats to prove that father daughter or brother sister incest is a major issue in Pakistan as it is not, and people trying to mix stats from child moletation to incest are clearly clouding the issue because of their ignorance our own culture.

amrita,

policy, absolutely. But you as well as I know that misogyny is the most basic and ingrained form of discrimination within patriarchal cultures. (The West and East both)

... i think you people... the `modern` ones are picking on urstruly, echoboom and nuttysyed just becoz they are mullahs or wannabe mullahs... it`s none of your goddamn business if they want to sleep with their daughters...

HP,

With all due respect, well meaning ``uncles`` are the most widespread and pervasive form of incest AND molestation in sa communities.

Re: # 151 by ShoreSahib

I never initiate violation of peace, and never reject it when it is offered in good faith.

Your gesture is appreciated just as much as Ana`s non-partisan comments.

Thank you Ana.
Thank you SS.

May Allah bless you all.

M`as-salaam

Re: # 150
Mr NtFakeSyed, Your attempts at humor as always fall flat and are predictably pathetic.
Nevertheless, I have decided to make peace with you especially in light of Ana`s post.

I offer Peace, and hope civility will reign supreme between us.

Wa alikum us Salam, I wont callyou NtfakeSyed any more.

Re: # 143 & 144 by ShoreSahib

Your desperate brethren in the Madrassahs are fond of the equine variety as well, as well as Bovine asses, and whatever else they can get their grubby paws on.

I see you`ve been taking care of the desperation in some Madrassahs of the devaint mullahs in many costumes and enjoying every inch of it too.

Good for you

LOL

:-)~~

Re: # 143
Actually, correction:

Your desperate brethren in the Madrassahs are fond of the equine variety as well, as well as Bovine asses, and whatever else they can get their grubby paws on.

LOL

Ta Ta

Re: # 141

Mr NtFakeSyed,

Since you are enjoying the idea so much of things blowing up my ass, you better come out of the closet.

and dont give me the Schpeel on you being married and blah blah blah.

Your brethren in the Madrassahs everywhere are very fond of asses, and I am not talking about the equine variety.

Shalom