Australian Politics Forum - freedom and women's rights

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49836 At my desk.	Re: freedom and women's rights Reply #30 - Dec 18^th, 2008 at 10:52pm I think tent conveys it much better. Can you imagine wearing one of those things in summer? That's what I want to convey.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Gaybriel Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1191	Re: freedom and women's rights Reply #31 - Dec 18^th, 2008 at 11:06pm ^ good for you. the fact is, it's rude and disrespectful and I'm asking you not to use the term here. your point is easily conveyed just by referencing the clothing worn by their names or in the other ways suggested
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49836 At my desk.	Re: freedom and women's rights Reply #32 - Dec 18^th, 2008 at 11:21pm Are you asking in your capacity as a moderator?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Gaybriel Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1191	Re: freedom and women's rights Reply #33 - Dec 18^th, 2008 at 11:28pm do I have to?
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49836 At my desk.	Re: freedom and women's rights Reply #34 - Dec 19^th, 2008 at 10:18am No, I'm happy to continue arguing the point.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

mantra

Gold Member

Offline

ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female

Re: freedom and women's rights
Reply #35 - Dec 19^th, 2008 at 10:45am

Quote:

there's always an onus on women not to get raped

But not a legal one. You can't punish a woman for being in the wrong place, or wearing the wrong clothes. To do so inevitably diminishes the cultural responsibility of a man for committing rape. The law says both people did something wrong, and now look at the outcome. It is impossible to have such a law nad still maintain na view that it is not a woman's fault if she gets raped, or that she didn;t deserve it.

It's really only the last few years that "rape" has been a legal issue and it's about time.

So many women have been raped and mostly they placed the blame fully on themselves which until the last decade or so meant that men were excused, but women weren't and had to accept full responsibility for this emotional and physical violation of rights.

It's about time males took responsibility for their actions.

The new consensual sex/rape laws will make a big difference to how some males view sex and maybe they'll think twice before they force themselves onto some unsuspecting female who is in a vulnerable situation and hasn't the ability to push them off.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Dec 19^th, 2008 at 10:51am by mantra »

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: freedom and women's rights
Reply #36 - Dec 28^th, 2008 at 4:34pm

Gaybriel wrote on Dec 18^th, 2008 at 11:06pm:

^ good for you. the fact is, it's rude and disrespectful and I'm asking you not to use the term here.

your point is easily conveyed just by referencing the clothing worn by their names or in the other ways suggested

It is essential, in a free society, to be ablee to express contempt and ridicule. Hurting feelings is not forbidden.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49836
At my desk.

Re: freedom and women's rights
Reply #37 - Aug 6^th, 2013 at 7:12pm

Does Islam grant women the right to vote?

True Colours wrote on Aug 6^th, 2013 at 4:03am:

At the time ordinary women had no rights; no right to own property, run businesses, inherit, or choose a husband. Islam made all these rights law.

Didn't Muhammed start his carer by marrying one of the richest women in Arabia? How is that even possible if women had no rights?

Why do you use the term "ordinary"? Is this to distinguish the rights Islam grants to women, so long as they convert to Islam? What rights does Islam proscribe for pagan women?

Do sex slaves count as "ordinary" women? What rights do they have in choosing a husband, given that you describe the ownership of them as being like marriage?

Is it true that Islam considers sex to be a husband's right and a wive's responsibility?

Here is a Muslim explaining that sex slavery is actually a path to liberation for women:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1335479654

Take note Gandalf - this is one of those examples I gave of why I needed the wiki to keep track of all the spin and BS from Muslims.

Here is a Muslim showing how people should be free to openly discuss the dress standards imposed on women:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1233804327

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

True Colours

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2837
Gender: male

Re: freedom and women's rights
Reply #38 - Aug 7^th, 2013 at 12:21am

freediver wrote on Aug 6^th, 2013 at 7:12pm:

Does Islam grant women the right to vote?

True Colours wrote on Aug 6^th, 2013 at 4:03am:

At the time ordinary women had no rights; no right to own property, run businesses, inherit, or choose a husband. Islam made all these rights law.

Didn't Muhammed start his carer by marrying one of the richest women in Arabia? How is that even possible if women had no rights?

You might notice that I qualified the statement with 'ordinary' women. In pagan society, the super-rich and the aristocracy got treated differently.

freediver wrote on Aug 6^th, 2013 at 7:12pm:

Why do you use the term "ordinary"?

Because in pagan society ordinary poor women were treated differently to the rich and the aristocracy.

freediver wrote on Aug 6^th, 2013 at 7:12pm:

Do sex slaves count as "ordinary" women?

Islam does not have sex slaves.

...do not compel your slave girls to sexual servitude...

- the Quran, an-Noor, v.33

[/quote]

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: freedom and women's rights
Reply #39 - Aug 7^th, 2013 at 2:09pm

freediver wrote on Aug 6^th, 2013 at 7:12pm:

Take note Gandalf - this is one of those examples I gave of why I needed the wiki to keep track of all the spin and BS from Muslims.

"spin" and "BS" implies willful dishonesty by muslims. Why would you imply this? All I see is falah expressing an honest opinion in good faith.

Clearly FD you have a problem with muslims expressing an honest opinion that you disagree with - such that you must label it dishonest "spin". Intentionally or not, you are baiting muslims - and not in a constructive way.

Its been interesting you doing all this necroposting (which by standard forum etiquette is recognised as a form of spamming) - which confirms that your standard approach to muslims is, and always has been, to troll and bait muslims until you get the rise out of them you seek, provoke them into trolling back - and then proudly declare "see? I told you muslims are unreasonable jerks!"

I see now I was unfair on Abu when I first joined, and he was still posting. I accused him of trolling - yet its clear from the history of his time here that he has been severely provoked. Previously he made a genuine effort to post constructively, and in good faith. In return he got abuse and trolling. So there is little wonder that in the end he threw up his hands and thought "why bother?" - and eventually left. I'm pretty sure thats been the pattern for all muslim posters here.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Torpedo Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 867 Sydney Gender:	Re: freedom and women's rights Reply #40 - Aug 7^th, 2013 at 5:15pm polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 2:09pm: So there is little wonder that in the end he threw up his hands and thought "why bother?" - and eventually left. I'm pretty sure thats been the pattern for all muslim posters here. silence is gold, but it's priceless especially when it replaces stupidity
Back to top	If GST rises by 5%, then your income must also rise by 5%. Which means you will either become unemployed or underpaid. Choose wisely IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49836
At my desk.

Re: freedom and women's rights
Reply #41 - Aug 7^th, 2013 at 8:17pm

Quote:

You might notice that I qualified the statement with 'ordinary' women. In pagan society, the super-rich and the aristocracy got treated differently.

And in Islam, Muslims get treated differently. Big difference eh?

Quote:

Islam does not have sex slaves.

Does it have "slaves you can have sex with"?

Quote:

"spin" and "BS" implies willful dishonesty by muslims. Why would you imply this?

Because they are so good at it. You don't get that good at something by accident.

Quote:

Clearly FD you have a problem with muslims expressing an honest opinion that you disagree with - such that you must label it dishonest "spin".

Sure. I think it is pretty low to try to pass off sex slavery as consensual sex. I think it is pretty low to pass off state endorsed wife beating as 'discouraging' wife beating. I think it is pretty low to describe the serial rape of a woman and forcing her to bear you a child as a path to liberation for her. I think it is spin, and the more I see Muslims doing it, the more repulsive it gets.

Quote:

Intentionally or not, you are baiting muslims - and not in a constructive way.

Yet you are unwilling to suggest what a constructive way would be, even when I started a new thread asking you. My guess is the only thing you would accept is constructive is something that legitimises all the spin around rape, slavery, slaughter etc.

Quote:

Its been interesting you doing all this necroposting (which by standard forum etiquette is recognised as a form of spamming)

No it isn't.

Quote:

which confirms that your standard approach to muslims is, and always has been, to troll and bait muslims until you get the rise out of them you seek, provoke them into trolling back - and then proudly declare "see?

Either I am necroposting, or Muslims could not possibly have said all the nasty things I attribute to them. You can't have it both ways Gandalf. If you deny Muslims said all these things, I am going to dredge them up for you until you stop denying it.

Quote:

I see now I was unfair on Abu when I first joined, and he was still posting. I accused him of trolling

LOL

Quote:

yet its clear from the history of his time here that he has been severely provoked

Into what? Admitting the truth about Islam? God forbid.

Quote:

Previously he made a genuine effort to post constructively

You mean he stuck to the approved one liners and vacuous platitudes about Islam?

Quote:

So there is little wonder that in the end he threw up his hands and thought "why bother?" - and eventually left.

He actually tried to create a pretty big scene on his way out, but no-one noticed.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 22052
A cat with a view

Re: freedom and women's rights
Reply #42 - Aug 7^th, 2013 at 8:28pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 2:09pm:

I see now I was unfair on Abu when I first joined, and he was still posting. I accused him of trolling - yet its clear from the history of his time here that he has been severely provoked. Previously he made a genuine effort to post constructively, and in good faith. In return he got abuse and trolling. So there is little wonder that in the end he threw up his hands and thought "why bother?" - and eventually left.

I'm pretty sure thats been the pattern for all muslim posters here.

The pattern for all moslem posters here in OzPol, and on all other forums,

is to 'deny', and to refuse to acknowledge the truth about the form of the relationship between moslems and non-moslems, that ISLAM mandates.

A relationship that is predicated upon deception and lies, wherever the non-moslems are politically stronger than the moslem community.

And relationship of vicious oppression, wherever the moslem community are stronger than the non-moslems.

gandalf,

When have the moslem posters in this forum ever acknowledged the reprehensible and deceitful attitude of moslems, towards non-moslems ?

NEVER!

The reprehensible and deceitful attitude of moslems, clearly evidenced in, for example, these three news reports;

EXAMPLE #1,

The Muslim Council of Britain [which represents all British 'mainstream' moslems] declares on its website that the moslem community, condemns extremism and violence....

Quote:

Rejecting Terror
Thursday, 11 April 2013

Muslims everywhere consider all acts of terrorism that aims to murder and maim innocent human beings utterly reprehensible and abhorrent. There is no theological basis whatsoever for such acts in our faith. The very meaning of the word 'Islam' is peace. It rejects terror and promotes peace and harmony.

http://www.mcb.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2307:mcbnewst...
http://www.mcb.org.uk/article_detail.php?article=announcement-656

YET, FROM ISLAM'S PRIMARY THEOLOGICAL TEXT.....

"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111iEXAMPLE #2,

Speaking in the UK, publicly, AND THEN PRIVATELY, regarding the London 7/7 bombing victims.

Quote:

"......In public interviews Bakri condemned the killing of all innocent civilians.

Later when he addressed his own followers he explained that he had in fact been referring only to Muslims as only they were innocent:

Yes I condemn killing any innocent people, but not any kuffar."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1724541,00.html

n.b.

This moslem declared to the broader community that moslems condemned the killing of all innocent civilians.
BUT LATER IT WAS REVEALED, that that moslem omitted to declare that moslems in the UK, DO NOT regard the members of the broader UK community as innocent civilians.

EXAMPLE #3,

a deceit, that is endorsed by 'mainstream' ISLAM, as per revealed by this moslem scholar......

Quote:

Live in peace till strong enough to wage jihad, says UK Deoband scholar to Muslims
London, Sept.8 [2007]
A Deobandi scholar believes Muslims should preach peace till they are strong enough to undertake a jihad, or a holy war.
Justice Muhammad Taqi Usmani was quoted by the BBC as saying that Muslims should live peacefully in countries such as Britain, where they have the freedom to practise Islam, only until they gain enough power to engage in battle.
A former Sharia judge in Pakistan's Supreme Court, 64-year-old Usmani, is...a regular visitor to Britain.
Polite and softly spoken....
He agreed that it was wrong to suggest that the entire non-Muslim world was intent on destroying Islam, but justifies an aggressive military jihad as a means of establishing global Islamic supremacy.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2409833.ece

n.b.

Moslems are permitted to declare to non-moslems, that moslems/ISLAM intends to always have a peaceful relationship with non-moslem host communities [e.g. 'Muslims should preach peace'
] - when all of the time, ALL moslems KNOW that what they are declaring, IS A LIE.

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: freedom and women's rights
Reply #43 - Aug 7^th, 2013 at 11:58pm

freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 8:17pm:

Either I am necroposting, or Muslims could not possibly have said all the nasty things I attribute to them. You can't have it both ways Gandalf. If you deny Muslims said all these things, I am going to dredge them up for you until you stop denying it.

Yet the funny thing is, every time you dredge something up, it shows the muslims presenting their case patiently and in good faith. But as the thread goes on, and the baiting continues, they eventually start responding in kind.

And they usually don't say the things you claim. The "rape is permitted" nonsense is a case in point. You quote the post where Falah says rape in marriage is not a punishable offense - but neglect the countless other posts he made pointing out that rape (in any form) is not permitted anywhere in islamic law - and repeatedly challenges you to show him the passage where it does say it is permitted. You simply put words into his mouth - that rape in marriage not punishable = rape is permitted. But that is clearly not what he was arguing. And as Annie Anthrax and I have pointed out, there are plenty of other things we know is prohibited in islam - that also are not punishable - like alcohol.

freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 8:17pm:

Yet you are unwilling to suggest what a constructive way would be, even when I started a new thread asking you. My guess is the only thing you would accept is constructive is something that legitimises all the spin around rape, slavery, slaughter etc.

Your question in the first sentence is answered in the second sentence. Ie - a constructive way to approach this is not to come with predetermined views (islam = rape, slaughter etc), and merely use the discussion to solidify those predetermined views.

You have been doing it in the last little while with nonsense claims like rape, warmongering and (the most ridiculous) "scorched earth" - being assumed as accepted truths to form the basis of your "discussions" ("if islam is so peaceful, how come they have a warmongering prophet who went around doing scorched earth and rape?")

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49836
At my desk.

Re: freedom and women's rights
Reply #44 - Aug 8^th, 2013 at 2:45pm

Quote:

Yet the funny thing is, every time you dredge something up, it shows the muslims presenting their case patiently and in good faith.

Like a patient nazi explaining that he wants to build ghettos to protect jews. Or a rapist patiently explaining why no really means yes.

Quote:

but neglect the countless other posts he made pointing out that rape (in any form) is not permitted anywhere in islamic law

You mean "not emphasised". Saying that women are to be treated "properly" is not the same thing as saying that rape is forbidden. Pretending it is the same thing is not an argument made in good faith. On the other hand, saying that rape is not a punishable offence means that rape is permitted. This is reinforced by Islams stance on the duty to perform sexually, wife beating etc.

Quote:

and repeatedly challenges you to show him the passage where it does say it is permitted

Another argument that is not made in good faith. It's like me demanding that you show me the legal statute saying that chocolate is permitted, otherwise we must assume it is forbidden because you found a government statement encouraging healthy eating practices. How anyone could be so deluded to argue that a religion that considers sex a man's right and a woman's obligation, permits wife beating, polygamy, sex slavery etc also forbids rape, in the absence of anything specifically forbidding rape, and in the absence of any conviction ever for rape, and even after acknowledging that it is not a punishable offence, is beyond rational. Saying that rape is not nice does not in any way change the fact that it is legal. Of course I will not find anything specifically permitting rape, because Islam does not even recognise the need for the woman's consent - as explained (patiently and in good faith) by Muslims on this board.

Quote:

You simply put words into his mouth - that rape in marriage not punishable = rape is permitted.

Yes Gandalf that is the same thing.

Quote:

But that is clearly not what he was arguing.

Of course not. He was arguing that rape is permitted, but considered not nice, therefor it is not actually permitted.

Quote:

Your question in the first sentence is answered in the second sentence. Ie - a constructive way to approach this is not to come with predetermined views (islam = rape, slaughter etc), and merely use the discussion to solidify those predetermined views.

I did not come to it with predetermined views. It is what Muslims said about Islam that swayed me. The history is there if you care to read it. If not, don't invent your own version instead.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged