PDA

View Full Version : Crackdown in Iran over dress codes



Uthman
04-27-2007, 04:56 PM

Crackdown in Iran over dress codes
By Frances Harrison
BBC News, Tehran

Thousands of Iranian women have been cautioned over their poor Islamic dress this week and several hundred arrested in the capital Tehran in the most fierce crackdown on what's known as "bad hijab" for more than a decade.

It is the talk of the town. The latest police crackdown on Islamic dress has angered many Iranians - male, female, young and old.

But Iranian TV has reported that an opinion poll conducted in Tehran found 86% of people were in favour of the crackdown - a statistic that is surprising given the strength of feeling against this move.

Police cars are stationed outside major shopping centres in Tehran. They are stopping pedestrians and even cars - warning female drivers not show any hair - and impounding the vehicles and arresting the women if they argue back.

Middle-aged women, foreign tourists and journalists have all been harassed, not just the young and fashionably dressed.

Individual choice

Overnight the standard of what is acceptable dress has slipped back.
I want the whole world to know that they oppress us and all we can do is put up with it
Tofiq, 15

Hard-won freedoms - like the right to wear a colourful headscarf - have been snatched away.

It may sound trivial but Iranian women have found ways of expressing their individuality and returning to drab colours like black, grey and dark blue is not something they will accept easily.

"If we want to do something we will do it anyway, all this is total nonsense," says a young girl, heavily made up and dressed up.

She believes Islamic dress should be something personal - whether you're swathed in a black chador or dressed in what she calls "more normal clothes".

Interestingly many women who choose to wear the all enveloping chador agree - saying it's a personal choice and shouldn't be forced on people.

"This year is much worse than before because the newspapers and the TV have given the issue a lot of coverage compared to last year; it wasn't this bad before," says Shabnam who's out shopping with her friend.

Permission denied

At the start of every summer the police say they will enforce the Islamic dress code, but this year has been unusually harsh.

Thousands of women have been cautioned by police over their dress, some have been obliged to sign statements that they will do better in the future, and some face court cases against them.

Though the authorities want coverage internally to scare women - they don't want the story broadcast abroad.

The BBC's cameraman was detained when he tried to film the police at work and the government denied us permission to go on patrol with the police.

"Really we don't have any security," complains Shabam's friend Leyla.

"Since we came out this morning many people we met have continuously warned us to be careful about our headscarves and to wear them further forward because they are arresting women who are dressed like this," she says.

Boutique owners are furious. Some shops have been sealed - others warned not to sell tight revealing clothing.

One shopkeeper selling evening dresses told us the moral police had ordered him to saw off the breasts of his mannequins because they were too revealing.

He said he wasn't the only shop to receive this strange instruction.

Respect

There's even been less traffic on the streets because some women are not venturing out - fearful they will be harassed.

And it's not even safe in a car. Taxi agencies have received a circular warning them not to carry a "bad hijabi".

"They have said we shouldn't carry passengers who wear bad Islamic dress and if we do we have to warn them to respect the Islamic dress code even inside the car," said one taxi driver.

And it's not just women who are being targeted this year. Young men are being cautioned for wearing short sleeved shirts or for their hairstyles.

Morad - a hairdresser whose gelled hair is made to stand straight up - says it's necessary for him to look like this to attract customers.

"These last few days I don't dare walk down the main roads looking like this case I get arrested," he says.

"I use the side streets and alleys."

Morad is scared because his friends have told him they've seen the police seize young men and forcibly cut their hair if it's too long.

Fifteen-year-old Tofiq who'd also gelled his hair to stand on end said he too was afraid but he wasn't going to change.

"I want the whole world to know that they oppress us and all we can do is put up with it," he said.

Some parents have complained that harassing the young over their clothing will only push them to leave the country.

But one MP has said those Iranians who cannot cope with Islamic laws should leave.

Some commentators have suggested that the government is conducting this crackdown to distract attention from the rising cost of living in Iran and increasing tension with the international community over the nuclear issue.

If so, it's a strategy that risks alienating people who've got used to years of relative social freedom and do not want to return to the early days of the revolution when dress rules were much more tightly enforced.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/h...st/6596933.stm

Published: 2007/04/27 08:28:36 GMT

© BBC MMVII

postamble();
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Zulkiflim
04-28-2007, 12:33 PM
Salaam,

pretty sad,they calim to be muslim but choose to go the secualr way..

It is liken to those"moderate muslim" whom are eager to please the western rule of thumb..

they say iYes i am a muslim and Yes i am to wear modestly but wear a bikini.

to prove that Islam is for peace ,and unoppressive,the break the laws of Islam..just to be 'free"

Sad,,,
Reply

MTAFFI
04-28-2007, 02:02 PM
from a western point of view, I would say that this seems wrong and that people should be able to dress how they wish. From an impartial view I have to say, that these people know where they live and these are the laws of the land. The government has every right to enforce these laws and the people should abide by them, if they dont like it they should leave :D
Reply

guyabano
04-28-2007, 04:01 PM
I call it a breakthrough in Iran. Finally, the women, for several years controlled, taken from every freedom of speech, now have the guts to fight for their rights.
I mentionned that a few posts ago, but my posts have been deleted by a Mod (for whatever reason).
Every iranian woman leaving Iran and landing in Heathrow Airport rush like crazy to Ladies Room to take of their veils/hijabs and come out with the finest GUCCI Dresses they bought in the Tax-free Shops.
A fresh new wind is coming up in Iran and nobody can stop it, also not by policecars on every corner.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Uthman
04-28-2007, 04:07 PM
:sl:

I am curious. Doesn't this crackdown contradict with the following ayah (verse) from the Qur'an (2:256)?

There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût[]and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


Is the government really acting in an Islamic manner here?

:w:
Reply

tomtomsmom
04-28-2007, 04:41 PM
Originally Posted by Osman
:sl:

I am curious. Doesn't this crackdown contradict with the following ayah (verse) from the Qur'an (2:256)?

There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût[]and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


Is the government really acting in an Islamic manner here?

:w:


It seems that way to me too.............

Islam calls for women and men to dress a certain way. But that is for them to decide if they are going to follow those teachings. It should not be forced upon you.
Reply

MTAFFI
04-28-2007, 05:28 PM
Originally Posted by Osman
:sl:

I am curious. Doesn't this crackdown contradict with the following ayah (verse) from the Qur'an (2:256)?

There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût[]and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


Is the government really acting in an Islamic manner here?

:w:
Originally Posted by tomtomsmom
It seems that way to me too.............

Islam calls for women and men to dress a certain way. But that is for them to decide if they are going to follow those teachings. It should not be forced upon you.
This is what I see as a problem for a country that is ruled from a religious standpoint. On one hand you could applaud iran for actually enforcing the laws that it says it institutes in its land. On the other hand there are Muslims who do not wish to dress a certain way. In any case, whether or not there should be any "compulsion" there always will be if you live in a land that is ruled by Shariah or any other religious law. To me democracy is the only way to go, but these people live in Iran knowing full well that they live there by choice and must abide by the rules, if they dont like it they should leave. Same with anyone who comes to my country and doesnt want to live by the law. You have 3 choices, like it, love it or leave
Reply

- Qatada -
04-28-2007, 05:36 PM
Iran isn't an Islamic State, nor does it rule by Sharia'. I think that's been mentioned many times over on the forum.
Reply

Uthman
04-28-2007, 05:47 PM
:sl:

When I said 'I am curious' I wasn't being sarcastic, I was genuinely curious.

I'm confused. As brother Fi_Sabilillah said, the Sharia' is not implemented in Iran.

My question: Under Sharia', would a woman be punished if she does not observe the Hijab?


:w:
Reply

doodlebug
04-29-2007, 03:13 AM
Assalam alaykum,

Iran does a lot of things contrary to Islam. I still remember clearly the parade of dead american bodies at the US Embassy in the late seventies. I have a hard time accepting that our Prophet, saw, would EVER parade a dead body around. (nor would he take civilians hostage but that's another story for another day :) ).

Iran is clearly afraid of women gaining power in that country.

Originally Posted by Osman
:sl:

I am curious. Doesn't this crackdown contradict with the following ayah (verse) from the Qur'an (2:256)?

There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût[]and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


Is the government really acting in an Islamic manner here?

:w:
Reply

AzizMostafa
04-29-2007, 06:30 AM
As Islamic State, Iranian Women have the rights (to the highest level possible) to:
1. go schooling + teaching
2. working + running healthy business.
3. sporting including swimming + driving cars
4. practicing fixed time (temporary) marriage that is not allowed in other lands
on the pretext that the 2nd Caliph made it unlawful leaving what God says:
(4:24) Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed
And there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed.
5. transferable+ non-transferable ownership that is denied even in some western countries.
6. inheretence of Spouse, father, Mother, brothers , sisters ++++

They have NO right to:
1. provoke men with their well-engineered bodies + ?-erecting movements.
2. build many relationships with more than one man at one time.
3. sing and dance in public.

Moreover, they are well-protected: They do not have to work or go (w)hole-selling to live.
They are looked after by the closest relatives first then by God-fearing spouses.

For more details, see the rights of Women in Islam at: ...
________________
There are the Rules of Islam + the Land : No Sex-Shops, No Cheap TV+Cinema, No Bad Hijab.
Peace + Flowers
Reply

England
04-29-2007, 11:26 AM
Originally Posted by AzizMostafa
As Islamic State, Iranian Women have the rights (to the highest level possible) to:
1. go schooling + teaching
2. working + running healthy business.
3. sporting including swimming + driving cars
4. practicing fixed time (temporary) marriage that is not allowed in other lands
on the pretext that the 2nd Caliph made it unlawful leaving what God says:
(4:24) Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed
And there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed.
5. transferable+ non-transferable ownership that is denied even in some western countries.
6. inheretence of Spouse, father, Mother, brothers , sisters ++++

They have NO right to:
1. provoke men with their well-engineered bodies + ?-erecting movements.
2. build many relationships with more than one man at one time.
3. sing and dance in public.

Moreover, they are well-protected: They do not have to work or go (w)hole-selling to live.
They are looked after by the closest relatives first then by God-fearing spouses.

For more details, see the rights of Women in Islam at: ...
________________
There are the Rules of Islam + the Land : No Sex-Shops, No Cheap TV+Cinema, No Bad Hijab.
Peace + Flowers
That's alright then. Let's ban the hijab and niqab and force them to dress the way we dress :) It's alright because they'd still be able to work, go schooling and teaching, run a healthy business, go swimming, drive cars, play football, sing, dance, whatever they desire :)

Who needs to wear the hijab, niqab when you've got all those rights in this country? :D
Reply

AzizMostafa
04-29-2007, 12:13 PM
Well England,
1. We — Human beings walk on 2 legs not 4, i.e marks are not hidden?!
2. Forcing females to go half-naked does not save them from men like me.
3. Females are created lovely+shy, once bitten, twice thrown.
4. Hijab is to encourage healthy sex not to suppress it.
5. All the above-mentioned activities are means not goals.
6. Tell me what happens when a child sees parents (Pin)balls?
7. What is the difference between indoors + outdoors?
_______________________
Forcing the good is good but forcing the bad is bad?!
Peace + Flowers
Reply

England
04-29-2007, 01:11 PM
Originally Posted by AzizMostafa
Well England,
1. We — Human beings walk on 2 legs not 4, i.e marks are not hidden?!
2. Forcing females to go half-naked does not save them from men like me.
3. Females are created lovely+shy, once bitten, twice thrown.
4. Hijab is to encourage healthy sex not to suppress it.
5. All the above-mentioned activities are means not goals.
6. Tell me what happens when a child sees parents (Pin)balls?
7. What is the difference between indoors + outdoors?
_______________________
Forcing the good is good but forcing the bad is bad?!
Peace + Flowers
What you state is what you believe :) We're not muslims. I know alot of women that go out in revealing tops or even a skirt and I don't know ONE that's had been in any problems because of it. None of them have been raped, attacked or anything :rollseyes

In our country the government gives you the freedom to wear what you want. In Iran you don't get a freedom to wear what you want. Whether you're muslim or not you have to cover yourself in a veil even though we don't believe we should. You lot should really stop whining about this Great country of ours. When I look countries like Iran it makes me think of how spoilt people are about this country after emigrating from the middle east. It makes me think "ungrateful...." :)
Reply

Umar001
04-29-2007, 01:31 PM
Just curious Osman am guessing to understand the ayah we turn to the one who recieved it right??

Also, I'd want to say that I think you do get arrested in the UK for walking around naked, so who in reality is to say what level of nudity is allowed.

I know some members iwll think 'Common Sense' others 'Kofy from the UN :p' and others I hope will say the Islamic Faith.

I dont know if what's hapening is supposed to happen but in reality I rather see a place where men and women cover than uncover.
Reply

England
04-29-2007, 01:50 PM
I'd rather see the veils banned...

Way to go the Netherlands for doing so :thumbs_up

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6194032.stm Place your votes here
Reply

doodlebug
04-29-2007, 02:26 PM
Originally Posted by AzizMostafa
As Islamic State, Iranian Women have the rights (to the highest level possible) to:
1. go schooling + teaching
2. working + running healthy business.
3. sporting including swimming + driving cars
4. practicing fixed time (temporary) marriage that is not allowed in other lands
on the pretext that the 2nd Caliph made it unlawful leaving what God says:
(4:24) Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed
And there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed.
5. transferable+ non-transferable ownership that is denied even in some western countries.
6. inheretence of Spouse, father, Mother, brothers , sisters ++++

They have NO right to:
1. provoke men with their well-engineered bodies + ?-erecting movements.
2. build many relationships with more than one man at one time.
3. sing and dance in public.

Moreover, they are well-protected: They do not have to work or go (w)hole-selling to live.
They are looked after by the closest relatives first then by God-fearing spouses.

For more details, see the rights of Women in Islam at: ...
________________
There are the Rules of Islam + the Land : No Sex-Shops, No Cheap TV+Cinema, No Bad Hijab.
Peace + Flowers
So how do you reconcile this crackdown with no compulsion in religion? Aren't our deeds judged by intent? So if these women who have not yet decided to wear hijab are forced to now, how does this help them? They're still judged by their intent. Or is Iran really not taking into consideration what these women's intent is?:?
Reply

AvarAllahNoor
04-29-2007, 02:35 PM
It's fine if men too are dressing modestly and not taking off t-shirts whilst women are draped in cloth. That's fair I think Equalty and that....
Reply

doodlebug
04-29-2007, 03:44 PM
Just out of pure curiosity, does the police go around enforcing that all men have beards as well? If not then they should if they're going to do this to the women.
Reply

islamirama
04-29-2007, 04:00 PM
Originally Posted by AzizMostafa
As Islamic State, Iranian Women have the rights (to the highest level possible) to:
1. go schooling + teaching
2. working + running healthy business.
3. sporting including swimming + driving cars
4. practicing fixed time (temporary) marriage that is not allowed in other lands
on the pretext that the 2nd Caliph made it unlawful leaving what God says:
(4:24) Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed
And there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed.
5. transferable+ non-transferable ownership that is denied even in some western countries.
6. inheretence of Spouse, father, Mother, brothers , sisters ++++

They have NO right to:
1. provoke men with their well-engineered bodies + ?-erecting movements.
2. build many relationships with more than one man at one time.
3. sing and dance in public.

Moreover, they are well-protected: They do not have to work or go (w)hole-selling to live.
They are looked after by the closest relatives first then by God-fearing spouses.

For more details, see the rights of Women in Islam at: ...
________________
There are the Rules of Islam + the Land : No Sex-Shops, No Cheap TV+Cinema, No Bad Hijab.
Peace + Flowers
Some people just don't see the good but are quick to judge for anything they perceive as evil when it is not so. Iran is not the only one, malaysia is enforced proper dress code as well. And they are enforcing it on non-muslims too. Why? becuase it is a muslim country that has the right to protect the decency in their land. They were always open and relaxed but it till them chinese women started wearing see thru and other skanky clothes that were just too inappropriate to be ignored. People get out of hand when you give them freedom, look at nude beaches in france and US and other countries. Laws are made to discipline and protect the society. Those who are crying about this news, what have they done to protect or even cry about the oppression against muslim women in the so called liberated and free kuffar nations like UK, France, turkey and other places where you can't even go to school if you have hijaab on.
Reply

doodlebug
04-29-2007, 04:08 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Some people just don't see the good but are quick to judge for anything they perceive as evil when it is not so. Iran is not the only one, malaysia is enforced proper dress code as well. And they are enforcing it on non-muslims too. Why? becuase it is a muslim country that has the right to protect the decency in their land. They were always open and relaxed but it till them chinese women started wearing see thru and other skanky clothes that were just too inappropriate to be ignored. People get out of hand when you give them freedom, look at nude beaches in france and US and other countries. Laws are made to discipline and protect the society. Those who are crying about this news, what have they done to protect or even cry about the oppression against muslim women in the so called liberated and free kuffar nations like UK, France, turkey and other places where you can't even go to school if you have hijaab on.
I totally am against the schools who are denying the hijaab and think it's ridiculous.

I also agree with enforcing hijaab in an Islamic state since the men have to be protected, but to the point that they seem to be doing it, i.e. if a speck of hair is showing then they are admonished or if it is not the color black, etc. It just is getting very nit picky and that is scarey to me. What is next, enforcing the burkah like the Taliban did? There needs to be a wee bit of wiggle room. Obviously not in the sense of allowing mini skirts, etc. but moderation of the law would be nice. I mean in your example a nonmuslim would have to wear the scarf, right? Well fine they should wear it out of respect for the law but do they have to do it so drastically or can they do it like they do in Pakistan?

The decision to wear the scarf is a personal one and a very difficult one at best. Believe me, I'm in the midst of it myself. I have opted to do it gradually so that it's not such a big shock. I've lived 41 years without putting a scarf on my head and just like tend to ease into a pool with one toe at a time, I am only able to do what I am able to do. If someone right now were to come to my home and tell me it's the law that I need to do it so extremely right this minute I would actually resent it and would probably be put off by it.
Reply

islamirama
04-29-2007, 04:34 PM
Originally Posted by doodlebug
I totally am against the schools who are denying the hijaab and think it's ridiculous.

I also agree with enforcing hijaab in an Islamic state since the men have to be protected, but to the point that they seem to be doing it, i.e. if a speck of hair is showing then they are admonished or if it is not the color black, etc. It just is getting very nit picky and that is scarey to me. What is next, enforcing the burkah like the Taliban did? There needs to be a wee bit of wiggle room. Obviously not in the sense of allowing mini skirts, etc. but moderation of the law would be nice. I mean in your example a nonmuslim would have to wear the scarf, right? Well fine they should wear it out of respect for the law but do they have to do it so drastically or can they do it like they do in Pakistan?

The decision to wear the scarf is a personal one and a very difficult one at best. Believe me, I'm in the midst of it myself. I have opted to do it gradually so that it's not such a big shock. I've lived 41 years without putting a scarf on my head and just like tend to ease into a pool with one toe at a time, I am only able to do what I am able to do. If someone right now were to come to my home and tell me it's the law that I need to do it so extremely right this minute I would actually resent it and would probably be put off by it.
Schools? try the whole society. It's against the law to wear hijaab in france. Many schools kick 12yr old out for wearing niqaab in uk, and in tureky anyone with hijaab on is banned from university and public offices for jobs. Tureky, 90% muslim, is ruled by securlar extremists. The army with generals from the kuffar attaturak era have staged many coups in history to ensure secular gov't, havee you seen the latests elections in there now? army is ready to do coup, many are protesting and against a muslim practicing guy to run for president and will not allow her wife (hijabi) to enter the "attaturak" presidential palace. And they want to kiss europe behind to get into UN when they can't even let a practicing muslim win by democracy.

There is not need to be nit picky or anything, nor is there any relaxation or compromise in Islam. men and women both have their respective hijab ordained for them and they must fulfill all criteria of the hijaab. Malasians are not forcing their non-muslim population to wear hijaab, just that they put some decent clothes on for a change, like saudi asks of the non-muslims there.

No gov't in the world is perfect and so you see all these things that are semi-islamic. We shouldn't need the gov't tell us how to dress and what not if we had initially taken the time to learn (or be taught) from early age what Islam is so that we are keen to do it ourselves and not worry about what the world thinks. Firstly, it is a command of Allah and we do it to please Allah and submit to his will, 2ndly it is for the betterment of society as a whole and helps in keeping society from going corrupt.
Reply

England
04-29-2007, 04:47 PM
I like the Turkish :)
Reply

doodlebug
04-29-2007, 06:44 PM
Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
While it may have been inadvertent, your posting in actuality, it speaks to a blatant and overt bias. For example, I’m always amused at the endless carping engaged in by moslems as they view as discriminatory, the suggested bans on flagrant displays of religious symbols in public schools as proposed by the France not long ago. While this ban would apply to all religious symbols, moslems appear to believe that there are universal rights which they hold, and which don’t apply to others. There were expressions of indignation and shocked surprise as the West was slammed with accusatory epithets of racism and discrimination for infringing on moslems “rights”.

Apparently, discrimination, when applied to favor your particular circumstance is somehow acceptable. Perhaps your professed indignation at the notion of Muslims in the U.S. bearing the scar of discrimination could be equally applied to those of competing faiths in Islamic nations. Will you now champion the cause of Christian churches being constructed in Saudi Arabia? Will you petition Iran to drop it’s retrograde practice of declaring Islam as the State religion? How about Egypt – freedom of religion?

A true Islamic state, such as the one our Prophet, saw, set up would allow Christians/Jews, etc. to practice their beliefs without any threat whatsoever.

The reason we get upset at secular countries such as France banning the hijaab is because it is very very different to ban a hijaab as opposed to say banning the act of someone wearing a cross around their neck. Wearing the cross or any other display of Christianity is not ordained by God, yet wearing the hijaab is. BIG difference. I can't think of a similarity in Christianity at all.
Reply

doodlebug
04-29-2007, 07:11 PM
Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
I can’t speak to what a true Islamic state is or isn’t. I suppose there are many definitions of such a thing but clearly, the non-theoretical examples of Islamic states that we do have are typically nightmares of injustice and ill treatment not just to Moslems but especially to the hated kuffar.

The fact is, the only external example of islam that we have are Moslems. I would suggest to you that the true Islamic state is precisely what we see today.

Let’s remember; Half of the “rightly guided Caliphs” were assassinated by other Muslims. All of them fought civil wars with other Muslims and Muslim rebels.

Exactly WHEN did this wonderful “system” ever really exist?

It never did. It’s just a figment of your imagination.

There is a reason why Islam is in disarray while Western style democracy and capitalism are in the ascendant. Isn’t that why you and many, many others on this board live in the U.S. or the West?




I’m not convinced that wearing the hijaab is mandatory at all. I’ve read arguments claiming it is and emphatic arguments that it is not.

Nevertheless, my argument remains (and you carefully avoided answering it), you need to understand that your perceived entitlements do not supersede the laws and norms of a nation that has had success keeping it’s schools as secular institutions.

So what about the practice of banning competing religions in Moslem nations? A ban on overt religious displays seems like small potatoes compared to Moslems obsession with banning the faiths of others. Are Moslems insecure about their religious convictions? Is that why they have this need to squash other religious convictions?

I didn't ignore your question, I adressed it by saying that a true Islamic state does not exist and if it did it would allow people of other religions to practice their beliefs in peace.

It's not a figment of my imagination it really did exist in Medina and was headed by the Prophet, saw, himself. There were jews and christians who lived there and were absolutely able to practice their religion in peace.

There is no true Islamic state that exists today. The only close call is Saudi Arabia, but they have a long way to go before they're at the state that our Prophet's state was at.

The reason I live in the US is because I was born here. My family goes back about four generations here. I would much rather live in an Islamic state to be honest because I believe the US is way too secularized.

Even the Pope is disgusted the way Europe and other countries are squashing out God. It's really sad if you ask me. :(
Reply

Muezzin
04-29-2007, 07:17 PM
Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
I’m not convinced that wearing the hijaab is mandatory at all. I’ve read arguments claiming it is and emphatic arguments that it is not.

Nevertheless, my argument remains (and you carefully avoided answering it), you need to understand that your perceived entitlements do not supersede the laws and norms of a nation that has had success keeping it’s schools as secular institutions.
Please. Laws can and will be changed according to 'perceived entitlements' which will then become future norms. It's wrong to force people to wear the headscarf, and it's just as wrong to force them not to. The one is forcing people to be Islamic, the other is forcing them to be secular. Both hamper the person's freedom of expression, a quality that I, as a Muslim living in the West, value greatly. If my sister wishes to wear a headscarf in school, is a good student, is not hurting anyone, is not forcing people to convert, then who has the right to tell her she can't? Nobody. It's a fundamental liberty that some people are opposed to simply because on some level the idea of religion rubs them the wrong way. And that right there, trying to ban something because it offends you, is contrary to freedom of expression. It's secularism perverted.

Secularism was intended to prevent one religion becoming dominant, not to justify intolerance of religion.

So what about the practice of banning competing religions in Moslem nations? A ban on overt religious displays seems like small potatoes compared to Moslems obsession with banning the faiths of others. Are Moslems insecure about their religious convictions? Is that why they have this need to squash other religious convictions?
That's like saying, 'I'm not going to clean my room, because look at the guy's next door! His is really dirty!' Avoiding the issue.

But to address what you're saying, banning competing religions in Muslim nations is not Islamic to say the least. Living in harmony with people of all faiths is what Islam teaches. Whether all Muslims learn that is another matter, but you seem to be attributing the flaws of Muslims to Islam itself, which is fallacious, like blaming a car for the mistakes of its driver.
Reply

Uthman
04-29-2007, 07:22 PM
:sl:

An Islamic state ruled by the Sharia' would truly promote a pluralistic society. Please see the article that I posted here. :)

:w:
Reply

AzizMostafa
04-29-2007, 07:25 PM
Whether you are a muslim or not, if you see someone trying to set him/herself on fire, will you:
A. stop him/her by force to save his/her life?
B. let him/her burn for a while then extinguish the fire?
C. watch him/her burn to death as he/she intended?
_______________________________
Let it be known,
1. We never let a mother of 3 kids serve in an army occupying a remote land+violating neighbour's waters?!
2. We do not encourage ladies to live single successfully, and
3. We teach our girls how to choose the strong and trusty man,
by reminding them of the 2 daughters of Prophet Sho'aib (28:23-28),
______________________________________
... and when Moses came to the waters of Midian, he found a company of the people there drawing water,
and he found, apart from them, two women holding back their flocks.
He said, "What is your business?"
They said, "We may not draw water until the shepherds drive off and our father is passing old."
So he drew water for them; then he turned away to the shade, and he said,
""O my Lord, surely I have need of whatever good You have sent down upon me"

Then came one of the two women to him, walking modestly, and said,
My father invites thee, that he may recompense thee with the wage of thy drawing water for us.

So when he came to him and had related to him the story, he said,
" Be not afraid, you have escaped from the people of the evildoers"

Said one of the two women, Father, hire him, surely the best man thou canst hire is the one strong and trusty.
He said, I desire to marry you to one of these my two daughters, on condition that you hire yourself to me for eight years, and If you compelet ten, that shall be of your own accord, I do not desire to press hard upon you
you shall assuredly find me, if God wills, one of the righteous, Said he,
So let it be between me and you, whichever of the two terms I fulfil, it shall be no injustice to me
and God is guardian of what we say....
____________________________________
Peace+Flowers
Reply

KAding
04-29-2007, 07:36 PM
Originally Posted by AzizMostafa
Well England,
1. We — Human beings walk on 2 legs not 4, i.e marks are not hidden?!
2. Forcing females to go half-naked does not save them from men like me.
3. Females are created lovely+shy, once bitten, twice thrown.
4. Hijab is to encourage healthy sex not to suppress it.
5. All the above-mentioned activities are means not goals.
6. Tell me what happens when a child sees parents (Pin)balls?
7. What is the difference between indoors + outdoors?
_______________________
Forcing the good is good but forcing the bad is bad?!
Peace + Flowers
Those are just you beliefs. There are many nudists camps on this planet, where whole families go around completely naked. Yet, these people function just fine. Like many things human it is simply a matter of habituation and culture. The idea that women are by nature lovely and shy is such a cultural construct IMHO.
Reply

Uthman
04-29-2007, 07:46 PM
Greetings Ruggedtouch,

I'm a little busy with coursework at the moment, but I will respond to just a couple of points.

Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
We have no practicable examples to support that statement.
Yes, we do. :) From the 7th Century Umayyad dynasty to the Ottoman dynasty.

Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
Clearly, Moslems have little tolerance for competing faiths. If need be, I can post a litany of Koranic verses to support that claim.
Please do. :)

Regards
Reply

KAding
04-29-2007, 08:09 PM
Originally Posted by Osman
Greetings Ruggedtouch,

I'm a little busy with coursework at the moment, but I will respond to just a couple of points.

Yes, we do. :) From the 7th Century Umayyad dynasty to the Ottoman dynasty.

Please do. :)

Regards
Well, they might have been reasonably tolerant compared to others in that day and age. But in all honesty, Islam did not then and does not now consider non-Muslims equal.

Sure they have some rights, but not the same as Muslims. For example, there testimony is not as valid in court and they pay different taxes. Also there are not allowed to proselytize and there are restrictions on building non-Muslim places of worship.

And all this assumes that you are a 'people of the book', ie. Jewish or Christian. How tolerant is Islam of atheists or polytheists? Will they be allowed to live in this 'pluralistic society'? I've never seen any indication they will be tolerated. And what about different ethnicities or nationalities and their customs, doesn't Islam frown upon non-Islamic practices?

Then there is the issue of alternative lifestyles or sexual orientations. We all know Islam is very strict on what is haram and what is not. It is my understanding that it is the obligation of any Islamic State to make sure nothing haram happens. In other words it is the government task to prevent for example music from being made or pork being eaten, especially in public. I just don't see how you could characterize such a system as 'promoting pluralism'. Unsurprisingly Islamic government promotes Islam not pluralism!
Reply

AzizMostafa
04-29-2007, 08:48 PM
> There is a reason why Islam is in disarray while Western style democracy and capitalism are in the ascendant.

Ruggedtouch, I love your logical analysis+conclusions and hope you stick to it.
When 2 (teams—Muslims or not) fight one another, there are 2 possibilities:
Both of them are wrong. Or one of them is wrong and one is right?! But never both are right?!

Prophet+Messenger Mohammed's grandsons were massacred at Karbala/Iraq by so called Muslims. Just 50 years of Mohammed departure. How and why?!

Just as the democratic US+West fooled Saddam to invade Iran+then Kuwait, and now are backing a group in lebanon against Hizbullah, a group in Palastine against Hamas, and some Iraqis against Muqtada as-Sadr, the Jews had created the theory of the Companions and succeeded in dividing the ignorant Muslims into sections As they created the theory of Democracy and the stories of 9/11 and Holocaust?!
Nothing wrong with Islam, but some Muslims are to blame.
______________
Peace+Flowers
Reply

barney
04-29-2007, 09:22 PM
Originally Posted by doodlebug
Just out of pure curiosity, does the police go around enforcing that all men have beards as well? If not then they should if they're going to do this to the women.
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle...c67682466.html

In states where Sharia law has been fully implemented, it's been unpopular. Somalia/ Afganistan for example. This brings up the question, why would true muslims find it unpopular? It's Gods law, what is there to argue about or find unpopular?

People escaping the regimes that enforce it for western ones that dont must have to consider: Are they fleeing the state or are they fleeing the religion. and dosnt that make them apostates?:enough!:
Reply

Uthman
04-29-2007, 10:02 PM
Greetings KAding, :)

Originally Posted by KAding
Well, they might have been reasonably tolerant compared to others in that day and age. But in all honesty, Islam did not then and does not now consider non-Muslims equal.
We believe that, on the day of Judgement, everybody will be judged on their piety and good deeds. Equally.

Originally Posted by KAding
Sure they have some rights, but not the same as Muslims. For example, there testimony is not as valid in court and they pay different taxes. Also there are not allowed to proselytize and there are restrictions on building non-Muslim places of worship.
True. :)

Originally Posted by KAding
And all this assumes that you are a 'people of the book', ie. Jewish or Christian. How tolerant is Islam of atheists or polytheists? Will they be allowed to live in this 'pluralistic society'? I've never seen any indication they will be tolerated. And what about different ethnicities or nationalities and their customs, doesn't Islam frown upon non-Islamic practices?
Originally, the status of Dhimmi was only granted to the 'people of the book'. Later on, however, the status was extended to include others such as Mandeans, Zoroastrians, Sikhs. Even Hindus and Buddhists in some parts.

Islam does frown upon actions that contradict with it's teachings.

Originally Posted by KAding
Then there is the issue of alternative lifestyles or sexual orientations. We all know Islam is very strict on what is haram and what is not. It is my understanding that it is the obligation of any Islamic State to make sure nothing haram happens. In other words it is the government task to prevent for example music from being made or pork being eaten, especially in public.
With regards to sexual orientations, it must be clear that attraction between two people of the same sex is not forbidden. This cannot be forbidden. It is action that is forbidden. Having said that, I am unsure of the rules with regards to non-Muslims living in the state. I think (not sure) that the eating of pork by the non-Muslims was simply frowned upon but not outrightly forbidden. As for music, the only comment I will make on this is that it is a controversial issue in Islam.

I admit this isn't very well-researched so don't take my word for this.

Originally Posted by KAding
I just don't see how you could characterize such a system as 'promoting pluralism'. Unsurprisingly Islamic government promotes Islam not pluralism!
Well, Princeton defines pluralism as a social organization in which diversity of racial or religious or ethnic or cultural groups is tolerated.

This is definitely promoted under Islamic law.

Regards.
Reply

Uthman
04-29-2007, 10:02 PM
Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
Originally Posted by Osman
Greetings Ruggedtouch,

I'm a little busy with coursework at the moment, but I will respond to just a couple of points.



Yes, we do. :) From the 7th Century Umayyad dynasty to the Ottoman dynasty.
Sorry. Dhimmitude was already established during the 7th century.
You have nothing to apologise for. :) However, what you said does not negate the fact that pluralism existed under Islamic rule.

Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
And besides, why would I want to live under the strictures of a society that is modeled on the precepts of fear and superstition that were prevalant and extant on the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century?
What makes you say that the society was modeled on the precepts of fear and superstition?

Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
I've got to be careful with that. That can be an offense for banning.
No. As far as I am aware, this forum promotes honest and respectful dialogue. You are more than welcome to post these verses from the Qur'an and you would not be violating forum rules. You would only be violating forum rules if you link to an anti-Islamic website.

Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
Bear in mind also, there are as many interpretations of verses as there are interpreters. You and others are free to offer the “but… but… but… but that’s not what that really means… it really means…”

That's fine with me but you're ultimately preaching to the wrong choir.
Are you closed-minded Ruggedtouch? :)

Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
Otherwise, this thread has gone far afield. Mea culpa
That is the nature of discussion. :) I do not feel that you are in error and you have no reason to feel guilty.

Regards
Reply

barney
04-29-2007, 10:13 PM
Originally Posted by Osman
We believe that, on the day of Judgement, everybody will be judged on their piety and good deeds. Equally.]
Just not on earth, where your actions are supposed to matter.




"Sure they have some rights, but not the same as Muslims. For example, there testimony is not as valid in court and they pay different taxes. Also there are not allowed to proselytize and there are restrictions on building non-Muslim places of worship.

True. :) "

It's on reading things like this that make me despair. The guy just said in effect "Non-muslims are second class citizens" and the response is True and a happy smile about it. So much for mankind being created equal.
Reply

Uthman
04-29-2007, 10:16 PM
Greetings,

It wasn't a 'happy smile' as you understood it. I post smilies spontaneously. My posts are practically littered with them.

Anyway, I will respond properly another time. I just felt the need to clarify this. :)

Regards
Reply

noodles
04-29-2007, 10:50 PM
Originally Posted by barney
Just not on earth, where your actions are supposed to matter.




"Sure they have some rights, but not the same as Muslims. For example, there testimony is not as valid in court and they pay different taxes. Also there are not allowed to proselytize and there are restrictions on building non-Muslim places of worship.

True. :) "

It's on reading things like this that make me despair. The guy just said in effect "[I]Non-muslims are second class citizens[/I]" and the response is True and a happy smile about it. So much for mankind being created equal.
That is where you are wrong my friend. It is not upto you to decide who is a "second class" citizen or not. You can very well put up a poll in the targeted areas and come to the conclusion, but you can't very well make that assumption. (I'd regard it just as an opinion).

That said, if you consider a different approach, I can argue that in a democracy, that you value so much, one group or another does feel targeted. For example, Muslims feel targeted because they haven't a choice in the matter concerning the Hijab. Similarly, some christians might feel offended if you shun their open display of their religion. Regardless, even in democracies certain groups are bound to feel targeted because of the vote of the majority.

In comparison, both democracy and the "so-called" sharia that exists today are alike in that manner. Therefore, you have no right to say that only non-muslims are 2nd class citizens in an islamic country, because the very same thing is happening in your country too.
Reply

Sami Zaatari
04-30-2007, 12:05 PM
Originally Posted by Osman
:sl:

I am curious. Doesn't this crackdown contradict with the following ayah (verse) from the Qur'an (2:256)?

There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût[]and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


Is the government really acting in an Islamic manner here?

:w:

your mixing 2 things, no compulsion in religion means we cant force someone to be muslim and believe in Allah, but they will follow the law of sharia, its like saying carrying out sharia punishment is contradicting that passage, for instance the punishment of adultery, if you commit it in an Islamic state, you get stoned, thats the ruling and law, it does not contradict this passage at all.

like in the west, they say you have freedom to do what you want etc, but if you kill someone your gonna get punished! does that contradict freedom? nop. there are rules and laws which you must follow.
Reply

Sami Zaatari
04-30-2007, 12:07 PM
the prophet and his companions said dont immitate the unbelievers, so therefore banning western hair styles and attire is very much in line with the prophet Muhammad's teaching. and when he said dont immitate the unbelievers.
Reply

tomtomsmom
04-30-2007, 12:34 PM
Sorry to sound foolish..........but what exactly is a "western style" hair cut???
Reply

aamirsaab
04-30-2007, 01:56 PM
:sl:
Originally Posted by Sami Zaatari
the prophet and his companions said dont immitate the unbelievers, so therefore banning western hair styles and attire is very much in line with the prophet Muhammad's teaching. and when he said dont immitate the unbelievers.
I believe the concept of that hadith is to not forget your roots and at the same time remember that you are different. (I would go into detail but it is for another thread)

Originally Posted by tomtomsmom
Sorry to sound foolish..........but what exactly is a "western style" hair cut???
I believe in this case, 'western hair style ' is refering to how we say innapropriate, over the top. Again, this is a topic in and of itself so I will not go into detail.
Reply

rania2820
04-30-2007, 02:07 PM
Originally Posted by Osman
:sl:

I am curious. Doesn't this crackdown contradict with the following ayah (verse) from the Qur'an (2:256)?

There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût[]and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


Is the government really acting in an Islamic manner here?

:w:
actually verses 2:256 is referring to that non-muslims don't have to accept islam. but Muslims can be forced to do Islamic rules.this is halaah.what is the point of being Muslims if you don't want to follow the rules?

honestly i have no sympathy for these women. they are supposed to wear hijab. they should be wearing hijab without the goverment telling them to wear it.
no wonder the Muslim ummah is in the condition it is now.

May Allah help us all. Ameen!
Reply

islamirama
04-30-2007, 05:17 PM
....
Reply

islamirama
04-30-2007, 05:18 PM
Originally Posted by tomtomsmom
Sorry to sound foolish..........but what exactly is a "western style" hair cut???
i would say any style is quite apparent in the society as to who it reminds them of. If the first thing that comes to my mind is westerners when looking at you then you are imitating to be like one of them.

I give this country 2 :thumbs_up for all of this. Prophet *S* said do not imitate the kuffars and those who do is one of them, and yet that's all we see muslims of today doing. There was a time when kuffars were imitating the muslims to look like us, my how times have changed.
Reply

doodlebug
05-01-2007, 02:42 AM
Originally Posted by rania2820
actually verses 2:256 is referring to that non-muslims don't have to accept islam. but Muslims can be forced to do Islamic rules.this is halaah.what is the point of being Muslims if you don't want to follow the rules?

honestly i have no sympathy for these women. they are supposed to wear hijab. they should be wearing hijab without the goverment telling them to wear it.
no wonder the Muslim ummah is in the condition it is now.

May Allah help us all. Ameen!
But are the officers discerning who is and who is not muslim when they are taking the women into custody for having hair coming out from under their scarves?

Not all women in Iran are muslim and yet all women are required to wear the scarf. These women are not required to wear it so why should they have to wear it as strictly as the muslim women wear it?
Reply

doodlebug
05-01-2007, 02:47 AM
Originally Posted by Sami Zaatari
your mixing 2 things, no compulsion in religion means we cant force someone to be muslim and believe in Allah, but they will follow the law of sharia, its like saying carrying out sharia punishment is contradicting that passage, for instance the punishment of adultery, if you commit it in an Islamic state, you get stoned, thats the ruling and law, it does not contradict this passage at all.

like in the west, they say you have freedom to do what you want etc, but if you kill someone your gonna get punished! does that contradict freedom? nop. there are rules and laws which you must follow.
You're comparing adultery to a woman who didn't wrap her scarf properly?:?

I agree that we should follow sharia when in an Islamic country, but to what extent and where does one draw the line? Will they next start beating people who do not say their five prayers/day? Will they imprison those that they find sneaking a bite to eat during Ramadan?

Obviously murder, theft, etc. should be cracked down hard on by the police, but seriously.........going around checking women to see if a speck of hair is coming out of her hijab???:rollseyes
Reply

Cognescenti
05-01-2007, 05:49 AM
Regarding the benevolent treatment of minorities in Muslim countries....can someone explain to me why the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul doesnt have a cross in it anymore? Was that an interior decorating decision?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagia_Sophia
Reply

AzizMostafa
05-01-2007, 06:31 AM
In short, We do not allow boys+girls to Rock+Roll. Why?!
____________________________________
Rock and Roll
Drive and Stroll
Go shopping Stalls and Mall
Juggle 1001 and One ball
Get installed and Install
Click and Scroll



As long as there’s soul!
Before going to a windowless hole,
Does on that rotate your goal and role?
Let’s go to Poll
And hang it up the pole!
Reply

rania2820
05-01-2007, 08:57 AM
Originally Posted by doodlebug
But are the officers discerning who is and who is not muslim when they are taking the women into custody for having hair coming out from under their scarves?

Not all women in Iran are muslim and yet all women are required to wear the scarf. These women are not required to wear it so why should they have to wear it as strictly as the muslim women wear it?

well making someone wear a headscarf is the dress code in Iran.i normally don't agree on many of the things Iran does but i do however agree with them on the hijab issue. how hard is it to put a headscarf on your head.

and as for the non-muslim women who don't like wearing headscarf.i say the same thing to them i say to the women who complain about the headscarf in Saudi "if you don't like then get out"
Reply

siFilam
05-01-2007, 09:15 AM
In The Name of Allah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful

:salamext:
and greetings

Originally Posted by Cognescenti
Regarding the benevolent treatment of minorities in Muslim countries....can someone explain to me why the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul doesnt have a cross in it anymore? Was that an interior decorating decision?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagia_Sophia
it was turned into a Mosque from a church. do you expect to see the crescent on a church instead of a cross?

wasalam
-SI-
Reply

Link
05-07-2007, 10:50 PM
Originally Posted by Osman
:sl:

I am curious. Doesn't this crackdown contradict with the following ayah (verse) from the Qur'an (2:256)?

There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût[]and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


Is the government really acting in an Islamic manner here?

:w:
Good thing our scholars don't have tunnel vision like that. If you look at some of the commandments of Quran it shows force, like you do zina and get caught by four, this and this happens. This is force.

This aya has nothing to do with shariah, as you know by shariah, apostates are killed for example, by shariah you steel and you get punished. There is force in all this.

What that aya refers to, is for obedience to be called obedience, or submission to be called submission, it must be out of free-will, hence why mankind is chosen above rest of creation, because we have been entrusted with free-will to an extent no creature has.

For us to serve Allah (swt), worship Allah (swt), it must out of our own will, otherwise, i imagine there would be no neccessity of free-will, and Iblis would never had change to disobey neither would have we been tested for ranks, nor would there be ranks.

In the US some places you can't walk naked. Some beaches you can. School you expected a limit of dress code, can't come walking with bikini on for example. All these standards are man made. Quran rejects legislation of ignorance.

Now, should we allow in IRan everyone to walk naked? ofcourse you will say no, that is redicolous. Then what should be the standard. Now you think of something you think is ok, but you know what, why should anyone give a crap about anyones thoughts of what is ok clothing? Quran has a standard of clothing, and that's the only clothing we gonna accept.

In 300 years, what if it becomes normal for the west to wear nothing, would it be then oppression to force clothes on people.

We seek freedom from Satan and lower self, not from God, the light, and the MEssenger (pbuh) and his perfect successors (as) and Imam's (as) representives may God be pleased with them and protect them.
Reply

Link
05-07-2007, 11:06 PM
Anyone who gives values to Western ignorant opinion for anything regarding social morality is really getting close to the borderline of shirk.

It is the west who have oppressed the serenity and dignity of women and let the dogs out and their society is going the same path as the past destroyed societies. Who let the dogs out? Who who? I will tell you, The FREEMASONS DID.
Reply

Link
05-09-2007, 05:33 AM
Originally Posted by England
I'd rather see the veils banned...

Way to go the Netherlands for doing so :thumbs_up

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6194032.stm Place your votes here
Devil worshippers.
Reply

guyabano
05-09-2007, 09:56 AM
Originally Posted by AzizMostafa
As Islamic State, Iranian Women have the rights (to the highest level possible) to:
1. go schooling + teaching
2. working + running healthy business.
3. sporting including swimming + driving cars
4. practicing fixed time (temporary) marriage that is not allowed in other lands
on the pretext that the 2nd Caliph made it unlawful leaving what God says:
(4:24) Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed
And there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed.
5. transferable+ non-transferable ownership that is denied even in some western countries.
6. inheretence of Spouse, father, Mother, brothers , sisters ++++

They have NO right to:
1. provoke men with their well-engineered bodies + ?-erecting movements.
2. build many relationships with more than one man at one time.
3. sing and dance in public.

Moreover, they are well-protected: They do not have to work or go (w)hole-selling to live.
They are looked after by the closest relatives first then by God-fearing spouses.

For more details, see the rights of Women in Islam at: ...
________________
There are the Rules of Islam + the Land : No Sex-Shops, No Cheap TV+Cinema, No Bad Hijab.
Peace + Flowers


Now, viewing your point 3. They can go swimming. How, what are they then wearing? Just curious !

And besides, what is the problem with a bikini? Women wear a bikini to become suntanned/epose their skin to the sun. Nothing more. If you, as a man cannot resist to watch and become erected, then it is YOUR problem. So don't look and don't go to a beach. Finally, it is your Problem!
Rules made by men can sometimes be so stupid !

And further, you mention, they don't have to work but on other side, they can (I quote) '2. working + running healthy business.'

Now what is that? Isn't that a bit controverse ?
Reply

Link
05-09-2007, 10:55 PM
No how about this. Youths are not perfect, heck yeah I can't control myself which is why I don't go to beaches! Alot of youths are weak. You go ahead and watch your society become Godless disgusting and Satan's minions, we are no way in hell are going to that.

Like anyone gives a **** about your ignorant opinion except polythiestic dummies, all praise belongs to God we submit to his guidance in social, political and spiritual. Our lord, our Master, our Patron and Guardian.
Reply

guyabano
05-10-2007, 07:27 AM
Originally Posted by Link
No how about this. Youths are not perfect, heck yeah I can't control myself which is why I don't go to beaches! Alot of youths are weak. You go ahead and watch your society become Godless disgusting and Satan's minions, we are no way in hell are going to that.

Like anyone gives a **** about your ignorant opinion except polythiestic dummies, all praise belongs to God we submit to his guidance in social, political and spiritual. Our lord, our Master, our Patron and Guardian.
Classical standard answer of a person, who feel concerned and start to bark now like a threatened dog in the corner and then start to become insulting.
You are one of those weak men who cannot resist the temptation, that's why you prefer to ban it.
As I said before: Don't like, don't watch. You can control it. If not, you're WEAK !
This is not only a statement for muslims, but globally. A man has to control his feelings. If he can't, he doesn't belong to the society !

and PLUS, why you annoy me with these words, I just analize, what AzizMostafa said.
Reply

north_malaysian
05-10-2007, 07:38 AM
Originally Posted by Cognescenti
Regarding the benevolent treatment of minorities in Muslim countries....can someone explain to me why the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul doesnt have a cross in it anymore? Was that an interior decorating decision?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagia_Sophia
How about the Grand Mosque of Cordoba and another 1,000 mosques in Cordoba?
Reply

Malaikah
05-10-2007, 07:40 AM
Originally Posted by guyabano
Now, viewing your point 3. They can go swimming. How, what are they then wearing? Just curious !
I don't know abour Iran, but Saudi Arabia actually has beaches that are 100% women only. So women can swim (I doubt they swim in bikinis though), with out worrying about perverted men too.

And besides, what is the problem with a bikini? Women wear a bikini to become suntanned/epose their skin to the sun. Nothing more. If you, as a man cannot resist to watch and become erected, then it is YOUR problem. So don't look and don't go to a beach.
Two points-

1. Have you ever heard of skin cancer? Kills heaps of people where I come from. Bikinis don't solve that problem.

2. By that logic it should be perfect fine to walk around in the streets, and on the play ground, naked. But it isn't. Please explain to why?

Rules made by men can sometimes be so stupid
Yeh, that is why we believe in the divine law, and not man made law.
Reply

guyabano
05-10-2007, 07:52 AM
Originally Posted by Malaikah
I don't know abour Iran, but Saudi Arabia actually has beaches that are 100% women only. So women can swim (I doubt they swim in bikinis though), with out worrying about perverted men too.



Two points-

1. Have you ever heard of skin cancer? Kills heaps of people where I come from. Bikinis don't solve that problem.

2. By that logic it should be perfect fine to walk around in the streets, and on the play ground, naked. But it isn't. Please explain to why?



Yeh, that is why we believe in the divine law, and not man made law.
There do not exist any divine law, every law system has his failures.
If you would really follow this law, you would have no cellphone, as cellphones are made by, what you call, 'unbelievers'.
And yet, nearby every muslim own one, as the stoning video of the iraq girl has shown us. Full of NOKIA's, SAMSUNGS, LG and whatever. :?

Skin Cancer, ok, for sure. This is a point, but that is also again the responsability of the individual person for how long he/she will expose the body to the sun.

What has walking naked to do with the wearing of a bikini?

FYI: There do exist villages were nudism is allowed and were they have their own small villages (communities). So same again, don't like, don't go !
Reply

rania2820
05-10-2007, 09:26 AM
Originally Posted by guyabano
Now, viewing your point 3. They can go swimming. How, what are they then wearing? Just curious !

And besides, what is the problem with a bikini? Women wear a bikini to become suntanned/epose their skin to the sun. Nothing more. If you, as a man cannot resist to watch and become erected, then it is YOUR problem. So don't look and don't go to a beach. Finally, it is your Problem!
Rules made by men can sometimes be so stupid !

And further, you mention, they don't have to work but on other side, they can (I quote) '2. working + running healthy business.'

Now what is that? Isn't that a bit controverse ?

if you don't see the connection between wearing a bikini and walking naked then i don't ever think you will see it. and i don't mean to be crude but men do get erections from seeing a woman in bikinis.and you act as if its a small preenttage of men who get aroused by seeing women in bikinis. why is that sports illusterated has a swim suit edition every year.do you honestly think those men care about the lastest bikini fashions?
no they don't.they buy that issue just to look at women in bikinis.
you are complety naive to think men don't get erections from looking at bikini clad women.

Originally Posted by guyabano
There do not exist any divine law, every law system has his failures.
If you would really follow this law, you would have no cellphone, as cellphones are made by, what you call, 'unbelievers'.
!
you obviously a godless human being so why bother debating with us silly god fearing people? and under islamic law its allowed to buy and sell to non-muslims.the prophet muhammed (pbuh) even use to do business with the jews.
Reply

guyabano
05-10-2007, 09:35 AM
Originally Posted by rania2820
you obviously a godless human being so why bother debating with us silly god fearing people? and under islamic law its allowed to buy and sell to non-muslims.the prophet muhammed (pbuh) even use to do business with the jews.
Errmm, this is what I call 'Bend the laws I obey to my needs' und plus, many times, I read in this forum when so-called 'muslims' call out to boykott west-products. But that is another topic

There is a big difference of seeing a person simply naked or in an erotic posure. But sad to say, muslim will never encounter or experience that, as they prefer to close their eyes. We get born naked, so what is the point. It is a natural thing.
I'm NOT a fan of nudism, I just get allergic against this 'fake hypocrisy', people tend to show off, put the hand to cover their eyes, but still they peep throught the fingers.

For the rest, I'm sorry, but I'm a father of 40 years, have 2 bouncy children and a lovely wife, and I can assure you, I get no special feelings, when I see other women than my wife in a bikini.
Please stop to put all the men to the same category !
Reply

rania2820
05-10-2007, 11:11 AM
Originally Posted by guyabano
Errmm, this is what I call 'Bend the laws I obey to my needs' und plus, many times, I read in this forum when so-called 'muslims' call out to boykott west-products. But that is another topic

There is a big difference of seeing a person simply naked or in an erotic posure. But sad to say, muslim will never encounter or experience that, as they prefer to close their eyes. We get born naked, so what is the point. It is a natural thing.
I'm NOT a fan of nudism, I just get allergic against this 'fake hypocrisy', people tend to show off, put the hand to cover their eyes, but still they peep throught the fingers.

For the rest, I'm sorry, but I'm a father of 40 years, have 2 bouncy children and a lovely wife, and I can assure you, I get no special feelings, when I see other women than my wife in a bikini.
Please stop to put all the men to the same category !
just because some Muslims boycott western products does that mean islam condones it? do you judgement everything a Muslim does according to some of the followers as Islamic?
i didn't say all men were aroused easily.but im talking about many men.
Reply

guyabano
05-10-2007, 11:52 AM
Originally Posted by rania2820
you are complety naive to think men don't get erections from looking at bikini clad women.

Show me, where is written 'SOME' men ? :?
Reply

aamirsaab
05-10-2007, 01:30 PM
:sl:

I liked this section better when it was closed. It meant I had more time to do other things, like sleeping.

Oh yeah useful hint: try to stay on topic and threads just might not get closed.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-26-2012, 07:29 AM
  2. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-16-2010, 04:54 AM
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-18-2010, 08:42 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-27-2005, 10:01 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!