-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
ISIS Enshrines a Theology of Rape (NYT)
- Thread starter entremet
- Start date
- Status
Mr. Giggles
Member
Is there any answer I can give that won't immediately be disregarded as bullshit?
I know you're hardcore atheist and treat all religions the same so I'm just trying to save us both time
I'm just gonna re-post what I already posted in another thread.
On Slavery
Islam did not initiate slavery but did permit it. It was already a common practice in 7th Century Arabia and was deeply embedded practice in society. From my perspective, at least, Islam addressed a lot of societal issues through gradual elimination rather than an outright ban (e.g. alcohol).
Anyway, the end goal seems to be the elimination of slavery.
Firstly, the legality of slavery today (from the BBC):
On Treatment of Slaves:
On Slaves requesting freedom:
Freeing Slaves:
On Racism:
It's clear from multiple instances that this practice was already embedded in society and not something Islam introduced into society. The goal was to eventually eradicate it with multiple sources suggesting "equality of slaves," "good treatment of slaves," and eventual "freedom of slaves" as expiation for sins.
On Slavery
Islam did not initiate slavery but did permit it. It was already a common practice in 7th Century Arabia and was deeply embedded practice in society. From my perspective, at least, Islam addressed a lot of societal issues through gradual elimination rather than an outright ban (e.g. alcohol).
Anyway, the end goal seems to be the elimination of slavery.
Firstly, the legality of slavery today (from the BBC):
On Treatment of Slaves:
On Slaves requesting freedom:
Freeing Slaves:
On Racism:
It's clear from multiple instances that this practice was already embedded in society and not something Islam introduced into society. The goal was to eventually eradicate it with multiple sources suggesting "equality of slaves," "good treatment of slaves," and eventual "freedom of slaves" as expiation for sins.
Chinese Cartoons
Banned
I love it when religious people don't have a clue about their own religion guess reading the first few pages is not enough, cherrypicking.avi.
Backwards as fuck.
Backwards as fuck.
I hear this a lot, and it always sounds very convenient. Is there anything to back it up?
Pretty hard to interpret in a way that is totally peaceful and doesn't in any way advocate violence, though...
Pays better than most of the internships I've applied for.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Probably not, no. Nobody in the history of mankind has ever managed to present an argument that makes all this seem the least bit reasonable (at least from what I've seen), so it seems unlikely that you would be the first.
Yes of course, there are plenty of historical writings describing how slaves were well-treated and actually pretty happy, how they cheerfully sang as they worked the fields, how really they were better off as slaves anyway and freeing them would've practically been a punishment.
Wait sorry, are we talking about self-serving defenses of slavery in the American South or self-serving defenses of slavery in the medieval Islamic world? It's so easy to get confused.
Mr. Giggles
Member
absolutely sickening. the only reason they don't do this to christian and shia women is because there would be hell to pay. they would invite a whole shitstorm on themselves by western and shia countries/groups. yazidis on the other hand are pretty much defenseless with no large group representing them anywhere else... so sad.
dragonzdogma
Member
Sure,
It's a long read...tho
http://rzim.org/a-slice-of-infinity/does-the-bible-condone-slavery
rzim.org is a really well respected Christian site
Ravi Zacharias is the founder.
I'm pretty sure most of those verses have a historical context.
Good post, cleared up a few things.
SecretSphere
Member
"for a century"? More like 50 years. Islamic countries were the last to end slavery. Abolition of slavery in:
Mauritania - 1981
Oman - 1970
United Arab Emirates - 1964
Yemen - 1962
Saudi Arabia - 1962
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_slavery_timeline#1900.E2.80.93present
It seems to have made a few leaps of faith in the reasoning.
It assumes that the bible rejects slavery due to the odd verse stating that people are all equal, but without the bible stating it explicitly, it's hard to take it as anything other than one of the many contradictions in the book.
RageWaffles
Member
The Koran also forbids pre-marital sex, but it doesn't forbid sex with slaves. I'd assumed that Biblical slaves were viewed similarly.
And that "peace proposal"?
Giving people the choice of "peacefully" becoming slaves or going to war doesn't seem like much of a choice to me.
If they're merely using them as hired hands, then why only take the women and children? Why not enslave all of the survivors?
God himself ordering tand ordaining the complete genocide, pillaging, and yes, raping unless you happen to be one of those types that believes women to be property and having no rights, literally litters the bible. Everything following egypt is chock full of it. What bible are you reading?
It's more about theology than retribution. I'm sure many Christian, Shia, and even some Sunni women are raped by ISIS militants, but Wahhabist theology holds that Yazidis are heretics at best and devil-worshippers at worst, meaning that they aren't people of the book and ought to be eradicated and treated as non-humans.
The rape of Yazidis (or Hindus, or Zoroastrians) is acceptable, according to some scholars, because their pagan-ness means that restrictions against premarital sex don't apply to them.
We only have Allah to thank for being explicitly clear on issues such as alcohol, witchcraft, adultery, etc but sort of beating around the bush when dealing with less important issues like slavery.
Actually, their doctrine explicitly allows for Christians to live among them, so long as they offer submission and pay a special tax called jizya (same goes for Jews). And they don't rape Shiites because they would rather kill them for the crime of modifying, thereby defacing the original perfection of Islam. The rest of that video is great for anyone interested in this stuff (no gore).
nelsonroyale
Member
This is unbelievable stupidity and cruelty. These fools would be going to hell if their god was actually real...
I think those responsible for this kind of stuff need to found and corrected or erased.
I think those responsible for this kind of stuff need to found and corrected or erased.
Deuteronomy has plenty off of verses in regards to this off the top of my head. Here's one example from a simple google search.
Deuteronomy 20:10-14 said:
http://www.allaboutgod.com/truth/deuteronomy-20.htm
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
You are both getting confused here because you don't understand the context of what is going on.
WHY FIGHT THESE NATIONS?
God tells Moses the reason he was using them as a nation to fight these specific nations In Deut 9:4
The nations are wicked engaging in child sacrifice, beast and child prostitution and god deems they gots to go. Plus many of them attacked Israel when they were leaving Egypt and in a weakened condition and because they didn't help them they in turn would receive no help.
RULES OF CONDUCT
That said he outlines the rules of engaging in combat with these nations:
Deut 7:1-3
2: You must completely destroy them. Make no treaties with them and show them no mercy.
3: You must not intermarry with them. Do not let your daughters and sons marry their sons and daughters,
The rules continue as you noted in Deuteronomy 20:10-14 but that deals with a nation that surrenders. If they surrender they men were put to forced labor and the women and children sparred.
BUT HOW DO WE KNOW THEY WEREN'T RAPING THE WOMEN?
During the military campaign the only way the war could be holy was by them never engaging in any 'unclean' practice. This included not only sex but a orgasm of any kind:
Deut 23:9-10
Therefore sexual contact with women, even their own wives, was prohibited to them and they voluntarily abstained from it. This was why Uriah who was interesting enough a Hittite, when called in from the field by King David, did not go at night to his home in Jerusalem to be with his wife. When King David, ignoring the sacred requirements of the military campaign, asked Uriah why he had not gone home that night, that loyal soldier replied: “The ark, and Israel, and Judah, abide in booths; and my lord Joab, and the servants of my lord, are encamped in the open field; shall I then go into my house, to eat and to drink, and to lie with my wife? as thou livest, and as thy soul liveth, I will not do this thing.”
Also god outlined what was to be done with women that were brought back to Israel from one of the foreign nations:
Deut 21:10-12
So no raping no dealing with them in any violent way. If they did try and Rape someone Deut 22:25 tells us what would happen:
You rape someone you die. The one time a women is raped in the bible it is so appalling to the rest of the nation that they go to war with the family line that was responsible and almost wipe every single one out.
Plus its not a situation where the bible is just being vague and doesn't acknowledge rape. God tells the Israelites that if they don't worship him and instead worship gods of the other nations and commit child sacrafice that he will not protect them when they go to war and there will be a profound difference between their warfare when god is with them and when he is not. He describes what would happen in Isa 13:
Isa 13:16
So no raping under any circumstances.
Further the Israelites also had strict guidelines with their slaves. They could not harm them in any way nor push them to do any task they weren't willing to do themselves. On top of that they were only slaves for 7 years at which point they were to be released. Evidence that they were not dealt harshly had to do with the law that forbid it but also that many of the nations that surrendered became prominent individuals within the Isrealite court system.
I hope that helps
Monocle
Member
I thought religion was supposed to help people figure out that they shouldn't do this sort of thing.
You almost have to laugh when people ask: "How is it possible for people to be good when they don't believe in God?" "What keeps you from killing and raping people without the moral compass of religion or the fear of God's punishment?"
Um... not wanting to be a murderous child raping barbarian?
You almost have to laugh when people ask: "How is it possible for people to be good when they don't believe in God?" "What keeps you from killing and raping people without the moral compass of religion or the fear of God's punishment?"
Um... not wanting to be a murderous child raping barbarian?
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
It's kind of amazing how ISIS has revived the totally evil organization.
I'm a 90s kid, so some part of me will always have trouble believing groups like that are actually possible. It seemed so over in that era.
I'm a 90s kid, so some part of me will always have trouble believing groups like that are actually possible. It seemed so over in that era.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
I posted that article in the Jeb Bush "not a bad deal" thread, but yeah it's definitely thread-worthy.
In the NY Times article it even mentions ISIS sometimes frees their own slaves, and ISIS's own rulebook says it's a virtue. Yet they enslave thousands of women. Does it make sense? No, because ISIS are brainwashed idiots and assholes, but it's hardly shocking that there would be contradictions in their dogma. The Bible is full of contradictions as well.
How can people not see the blatant flaws in this story and believe this horseshit? Seriously.
It makes way more sense than these stories were made up by believers who thought they had their god on their side and made their own arbitrary rules based on their primitive sense of morality, than god actually laying down those rules. It also explains the large number of contradictions and how pathetically outdated and barbaric these rules are.
When have men ever been punished for premarital sex anyway? These rules are there to punish unmarried women for having sex, not men. Men have "needs", after all.
Yikes, that's one scary website.
I fail to see how these even matter. "Be kind to your slaves" is a really low fucking bar when it comes to supreme divine morality, don't you think?
No. How can you free a slave if there is no such thing as a slave? Also, freeing a slave applies to freeing your own slaves, not being a hero freeing other people's slaves or whatever (how dare you touch other people's property, eh).
In the NY Times article it even mentions ISIS sometimes frees their own slaves, and ISIS's own rulebook says it's a virtue. Yet they enslave thousands of women. Does it make sense? No, because ISIS are brainwashed idiots and assholes, but it's hardly shocking that there would be contradictions in their dogma. The Bible is full of contradictions as well.
100% this.
According the link in the OP, they still enslave Jewish and Christian women despite them being "People of the Book". It's just that they need a bit of special pleading to do so, whereas the Yazidi are 100% fair game at all times because, y'know, they're devil worshippers.
And what's stopping him from smiting these evil nations, hmm? He's God. Omnipotent allmighty creator of the universe. He caused the Flood. He can snap his fingers and make things happen, yet now he needs a lowly army of men to get rid of evil people?
How can people not see the blatant flaws in this story and believe this horseshit? Seriously.
It makes way more sense than these stories were made up by believers who thought they had their god on their side and made their own arbitrary rules based on their primitive sense of morality, than god actually laying down those rules. It also explains the large number of contradictions and how pathetically outdated and barbaric these rules are.
Low. Fucking. Bar.
All it helps doing is cementing the fact that scripture is 100% bullshit and completely useless to a modern system of morality.
0.1.1.2.3.5.8.13.21.34.55
Banned
dude prays before and after he rapes a 12 year old?
what's he say during those prayers?
what's he say during those prayers?
Chaplain
Member
All people (atheist, non-atheist, etc.) do good or evil because all people are moral beings created in God's image. Some people use religion to fulfill their desires of self-gratification (committing terrorist acts in Jesus' name). Others have used ideologies like communism (Stalin, Mao, etc.) to kill millions of people in the name of atheism. What Jesus taught is that mankind's heart is corrupt: out of it come the thoughts that lead to actions (if people choose to act upon those thoughts) that are self-centered. That was his diagnosis of all mankind.
For the Christian, Jesus instructed us to make the daily choice (moment by moment sometimes) to focus on loving God and loving others. He then went on to say that Christians that do not do this will continue to live self-centered lives. Its basically a habit that can be cultivated to live a self-centered life or an others-centered life (with His help). Finally, Jesus instructed Christians that those who actually live for God and others would demonstrate their beliefs through visible evidence (their works). Those that continue to behave the opposite of how Jesus behaved are hypocrites (Jesus said this) and just wolves in sheep's clothing (actors that put on a mask).
Hope that helped.
Mr. Giggles
Member
All I wanted to do was show that contradictions exist and its up to the individual on what they wanted to justify.
Although, given the usual players and responses for this kind of thread it was a good exercise in futility - so go ahead, dog pile on, tell me what a fucking idiot I am for following fairy tales and how someone should drop a tactical nuke somewhere
| Praxis |
Banned
Islamic State leader Baghdadi 'raped' Kayla Mueller: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33941913
I hate to add to the horror that is this thread, but I was just reading this
I usually try and keep a level head, and don't believe in capital punishment, but I'd gladly kill these fucks myself.
I hate to add to the horror that is this thread, but I was just reading this
I usually try and keep a level head, and don't believe in capital punishment, but I'd gladly kill these fucks myself.
Pegosaurus
Banned
He is not wrong in the sense that the Quran does allow things like this
he is absolutely wrong though for using it as an excuse and committing the crime in the first place. disgusting.
people still deny that Islam is a religion founded on bloodshed and war, and is pretty dangerous.
Of course I don't think that everyone who practices Islam are bad people, but these extremists aren't really extremists at all, they are just taking the religion seriously, which is obviously very dangerous.
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Rape_in_Islam#Qur.27an
he is absolutely wrong though for using it as an excuse and committing the crime in the first place. disgusting.
people still deny that Islam is a religion founded on bloodshed and war, and is pretty dangerous.
Of course I don't think that everyone who practices Islam are bad people, but these extremists aren't really extremists at all, they are just taking the religion seriously, which is obviously very dangerous.
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Rape_in_Islam#Qur.27an
Man, fuck this.Islamic State leader Baghdadi 'raped' Kayla Mueller: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33941913
I hate to add to the horror that is this thread, but I was just reading this
I usually try and keep a level head, and don't believe in capital punishment, but I'd gladly kill these fucks myself.
As far as ISIS goes;
The Nazi's were just as bad.
So was Pol Pot in Cambodia in the 1970's.
And Stalin and the Communist party in the Soviet Union.
And North Korea.
And Chile under Pinochet.
A lot of countries including the USA live in glass houses. We don't need to get righteous but we need to help stop the current terror.
I was just reading a story about a couple from Starkville, Mississippi who were arrested while on their way to join ISIS.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/disbelief-in-mississippi-at-how-far-isis-message-can-travel.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
This is bad but it will end eventually. We will move on, maybe slower than before but still going forward.
The Nazi's were just as bad.
So was Pol Pot in Cambodia in the 1970's.
And Stalin and the Communist party in the Soviet Union.
And North Korea.
And Chile under Pinochet.
A lot of countries including the USA live in glass houses. We don't need to get righteous but we need to help stop the current terror.
I was just reading a story about a couple from Starkville, Mississippi who were arrested while on their way to join ISIS.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/disbelief-in-mississippi-at-how-far-isis-message-can-travel.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
This is bad but it will end eventually. We will move on, maybe slower than before but still going forward.
la flama blanca
Banned
It's a problem in religion itself.
What about marital rape?
And to be honest it's pretty much the same thing as Islam. Abrahamic religions have a way to dehumanize whoever isn't part of the religion itself, so of course Christianity and Islam talk about being kind, being respectful, honorable etc, etc, but that flies out of the window when you are talking about the "others".
They will do anything to rationalize sex slaves and rape. If they don't do straight up slavery, they will convert the girl to Islam, forcibly marry her, and have a harem of wives. Like that makes any difference.
People like to parrot "historical context" to defend shit in their favourite dusty book. Those pages were written by men for men. Any talk of divine influence is nonsense.
It's all fucked up. Just read about it after trying to look up the name of the caliph. Another article by abcnews : http://abcnews.go.com/International...al-baghdadi-sexually-abused/story?id=33085923
People like to parrot "historical context" to defend shit in their favourite dusty book. Those pages were written by men for men. Any talk of divine influence is nonsense.
Islamic State leader Baghdadi 'raped' Kayla Mueller: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33941913
I hate to add to the horror that is this thread, but I was just reading this
I usually try and keep a level head, and don't believe in capital punishment, but I'd gladly kill these fucks myself.
It's all fucked up. Just read about it after trying to look up the name of the caliph. Another article by abcnews : http://abcnews.go.com/International...al-baghdadi-sexually-abused/story?id=33085923
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
entremet
Member
Well Jesus did say love your enemy, the religion's founder.
For a good moral summary of Christianity read Matthew Chapters 5-7, otherwise known of the Sermon on the Mount. It was a favorite of Ghandi's as well. Dostoevsky was found of the teachings.
Whether Christian groups throughout history obeyed is another story.
Mr. Giggles
Member
I don't think I was abandoning reason or rationality but whatever.
As to the bits you bolded, read the first pages for most of these threads and you'll see what I mean
Anyways, im out of this thread. Peace
NeonZ
Member
There are some parts of the New Testament that pretty much say that the Old Testament law isn't applicable anymore though, which pretty much gets rid of that. It continues in "spirit", due to the promise being fulfilled, but the letter of the law isn't relevant.
Galatians 3; 23-29
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
No I don't see what you mean. I see that someone made this dumb comment, and somehow you're attributing it to me because... I criticized your faith? Yeah, um, why would you do that?
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Masculine, almost toxically so
Captain Tuttle
Member
I don't think we should nuke anyone either but what can we do? Education? Sanctions? I understand his frustration and disgust
PeskyToaster
Member
There were varying degrees of horribleness like anything but if it was so great it wouldn't be pretty universally reviled. Probably heavily dependent on the owner but also the society. The slavery we normally think of is a permanent condition that is also inherited. In America, you were a slave if your mother was a slave (for disgusting but obvious reasons) but a Roman slave had several avenues of getting freedom and many ex-slaves rose to prominence through the military or economically. Like I said, it was never not something you didn't actively seek to get out of but the degrees of horribleness varied invidiually, culturally, and throughout time periods.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked