The Truth About Islam

[Celine]

I am not a religious person - or rather not any more - but I have been struck by the present cruelty of Islam.

In particular, the practice of female genital mutilation which Islamic societies allow to take place in vast numbers. (Two million Muslim girls mutilated per year). And as a result I feel it my duty to these little girls to speak out.

I have set up a website which discusses this and many other matters of Islamic cruelty - such as hand-severing and stoning-to-death.

I would like to hear from Muslims and non-Muslims alike. I invite you all to view the website:

[ADMIN EDIT: link removed]

"The Truth About Islam: a critical view"

These matters have to be discussed, they cannot simply be brushed under the carpet to spare Muslim feelings.

 

[brian]

Hi Celine -

And welcome to comparative religion.com! There are certainly some issues mentioned on the website that could do with further discussion, and reference to specific topics here could be very constructive. Not only could you be raising awareness among fellow members, but in the ensuing dialogue no doubt there could be constructive comments you yourself could use.

However, the actual website linked to is far too aggressively biased - some would say it's a hate site - to be welcome in itself on this forum. After all, this is a place of neutrality for discussing all religions. Linking to other domains which proclaim in conclusion that Islam is nothing more than a brutal murderous paedophiliac religion does not sit well with the ethos of this place.

There is a general war of ideology between Christian and Islamic fundamentalists on the internet, with hate site countering hate site - but comparative-religion.com will play no part in that.

 

[WHKeith]

Hi, Celine! Welcome!

A couple of points. I agree with the admin decision to drop that link. There is another discussion forum I occasionally attend that recently got into a terrible internal war, Christian fundamentalists versus Mormons. One of the Christians persisted in using as source material a Christian Web site ABOUT the Mormons, quoting Mormon writings but often doing so out of context. Much cleaner to go direct to the source, in this case the Quran or to the words of Muslims on this board, don't you think?

Second. I am Wiccan--a witch--a member of a relatively new iteration of an old religion, and one that fervently champions women's rights. The issues of genital mutilation and of not permitting women basic freedom, rights, and dignity are issues I, personally, take very seriously indeed. In my research, however (I'm a writer, and often my subject matter involves the clash of Islam and the West) I've found that such customs as clitorectomy and refusing even a basic education to females are in fact due to local custom, not something ingrained within Islam itself. There are Islamic countries where women do have a nearly-Western degree of freedom (viz. Iran under the Shah, or, to a lesser extent, modern Turkey). Genital mutilation, especially, is common in places like Ethiopia and the Sudan, where such practices have been socially condoned and even publically enforced enforced for centuries.

As a matter of fact, many students of Islam point out that the Prophet himself was a remarkably open-minded and liberal advocate of what amounted to women's rights in the 7th century. He encouraged women to be educated (the better to read God's word), he limited the number of wives a man might have to four or to the number he could support at once (a definite improvement over common custom at the time!), and I believe he fought against the old custom of allowing the man to divorce the wife by simply stating his intent.

While there are verses of the Quran that clearly reflect 6th-century prejudice against women, as far as I can see the Quran does not endorse such barbarities as genital mutilation. The stoning and hand cutting IS there, yes . . . but then, those same punishments exist in the Old Testament as well. Have a gander at Deuteronomy 25:11-12 if you don't believe me! If such punishments are not part of state-sponsored criminal justice in the West today, it's only because of the separation of church and state, and because extreme Bible-fundamentalists don't make the laws!

 

[brian]

Certainly some of those interesting points are now covered!

For a start, yes, the issue of Biblical punishment is precisely what is being imitated in the case of stoning and mulitalating "wrong-doers". If I remember right it's the Book of Exodus which has a great list.

As to genital mutilation - it appears to be very much a North African issue - isn't is Nigeria which is the main focus? Sorry, perhaps not up on this subject as much as I should.

Funny thing about the women's freedoms - in a previous community I ran I had a particularly vociferous Muslim girl who spoke highly of her life. She saw no oppression, simply a tradition to be proud of. After all, what is there to be proud of in the Western tradition? Do we take pride in the sexual exploitation of women for marketing purposes? That's probably a more specific debate issue for another time.

 

[Celine]

What a Pity! I posted to this messageboard in the hope that it would provide a forum for unfettered discussion - only to find that I have been censored and my web-address deleted. Let me answer this in the best possible way:

Earlier I posted the same message to the Muslim site, 'Understanding Islam'. To the credit of the Muslims who run that site they did not censor me. As a result, a lengthy discussion ensued on their messageboard. Over 400 hundred people viewed my posting and over thirty people replied. What a pity that your messageboard did not show the same courage as the Muslim site did!

I raised the issue of female genital mutilation. This practice has been performed on 100 million Muslim women who are presently alive. Moreover, each year a further 2 million Muslim girls are added to the total. This barbaric practice, performed on such a vast scale, constitutes a Crime Against Humanity and it is right to confront the Islamic world over it. What a pity this messageboard was so wishy-washy about it!

I notice from the correspondents of yours who did reply that there is some confused thinking on this matter. There seems to be the usual tendency to dismiss the matter as some sort of 'African thing' - and thereby to exonerate Islam from any responsibility. This is a device often used by Muslims themselves when in denial over the matter.

IT IS WRONG.

In the territories where this mutilation occurs, Saudi Arabia, the Horn of Africa, etc., it is Islam which is the religion-in-place. For well nigh 1300 years Islam has provided the moral compass for the inhabitants of these regions. Moreover, Islam claims to be the 'true faith' and it claims a Divine Revelation. Clearly then, it ought to have been Islam which put a stop to this barbarous custom. Yet for over a millennium Islam has failed to do this, indeed, at the present time the practice is actually increasing.

It does not matter where the practice originated, nor when, nor whose idea it was originally. As Islam has been the religion-in-place where the practice occurs, it is Islam that ought to have stopped it. Yet for nearly 1300 years Islam has failed in this duty. Can any excuse be made for such a gigantic failure - a failure that has been permitted to continue for nearly 1300 years? A failure of such a 'Divinely-inspired' religion, moreover?

Muslims have a case to answer and to date I have not yet heard a satisfactory reply to the charge I make. I had hoped one might come via this messageboard but with the censoriship in place, this is impossible.

I must also address the matter of paedophilia. My (censored) website quotes Islamic scripture on this matter. I reproduce the quotes below:

-----------------------------------------------------------------


SCRIPTURAL AND DOCTRINAL EVIDENCE FOR CHILD ABUSE IN ISLAM:

The venerated Islamic source, Sahih of the Bukhari narrates the following:

"...Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years." (That is, till his death).
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64

In recent years the most famous Muslim cleric was Ayatolla Khomeini. This is what he has to say about child abuse:

"A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However he should not penetrate, sodomising the child is OK. If the man penetrates and damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister. [...]

It is better for a girl to marry in such a time when she would begin menstruation at her husband's house rather than her father's home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven."

From Khomeini's book, "Tahrirolvasyleh", volume 4

------------------------------------------------------------------

What these quotes say is that in his 53rd year, the Prophet Mohammad had sex with a nine-year-old girl. What else is this but paedophilia? How else could it be described? Please note that this quote is not some concoction of my own. It is Islamic scripture that I am quoting. Moreover, the further quote from the Ayatollah Khomeini shows that nothing much has changed since the time of the Prophet, either!

I am sorry that these Muslim sentiments are too rich for this messageboard's blood, but they happen to be truthful quotes, that is all. What my website does is to confront Muslims with some truths which are no doubt unpalatable to them. But is that any reason why Islam should not face up to its own past - and its present, too? How can such truth, be dismissed as 'Hate'?

These issues are important. They ought not to be dismissed as too uncomfortable to be confronted. And the website raising them should not be dismissed as a 'Hate' site.

Come on 'Comparative Religion'! Show your mettle!

Celine

 

[brian]

Celine, the short answer is that your website is a hate site, and hence why the link was deleted. I was being very diplomatic about that issue.

As to a specifically Muslim site keeping it - through choice or because the admins are missing? There are many forums on the internet that I've seen where the admins are MIA, and riot rules there.

This place has a strict COC in place, but I'm curerntly updating and will post across all boards.

The objections you raise here in the above post are not in themselves objectionable, but real questions. They are far from the tone of the website, which with the brazen use of WTC pics was nothing more than a condemnation of Islam in a hateful manner.

I'll get around to addressnig your points above as aI may later on. There's nothing offensive in discussion.

Do appreciate, though, that multi-faith venues requiere protection from the wreckers of all paths and beliefs. As I've been there and admin'ed it on a previous site, I know that first-hand.

 

[brian]

Celine -

In the territories where this mutilation occurs, Saudi Arabia, the Horn of Africa, etc., it is Islam which is the religion-in-place. For well nigh 1300 years Islam has provided the moral compass for the inhabitants of these regions. Moreover, Islam claims to be the 'true faith' and it claims a Divine Revelation. Clearly then, it ought to have been Islam which put a stop to this barbarous custom. Yet for over a millennium Islam has failed to do this, indeed, at the present time the practice is actually increasing.

Strawman 1. Religions are as much shaped by the regions they spread into, as much as shape them. A cursory look at Christianity, as a case in point, clearly demonstrates this, with major Christian festival dates being used specifically in lieu of original pagan feast days. Easter and the Nativity are blatant cases in point.

Also note that the USA, despite the presence of Christianity, which promotes that killing is wrong, and also of Secular Humanism, that promotes that killing is wrong - are both resident under a secular government with strong Christian influences, that advocates the execution of criminals.

Therefore by your own reasoning, both Christianity and Secularism also have a more serious charge to answer - that of institutionalised murder.

What these quotes say is that in his 53rd year, the Prophet Mohammad had sex with a nine-year-old girl. What else is this but paedophilia? How else could it be described?

Strawman 2.

Sexual laws and customs in the ancient world were deeply different than the modern Western world. It's terribly anachronistic to start making moral value judgements on previous societies based on our own current statute books. Morality remains relativistic, which you suggest you may appreciate by your distancing yourself from faith in the original post.

Two immediately significant instances that come to mind

1/ Mary - mother of Jesus – would have likely been around 14 years of age when she conceived. Some of the last charismatic atheists therefore use that as a basis for claiming that God is therefore a rapist, which is obviously nothing more than an attempt to attack. However, by your reasoning, you treat Islam the same – therefore condemn Christianity also.

2/ The entire intellectual foundations of Western society rest upon the edicts and thinkers of Ancient Greece. If I may remind those not well acquainted with this period, education and learning in Ancient Greece was entirely run on pederasty. Which is a cute name for paedophilia. Therefore by the logic of your arguments, Democracy, Philosophy and Science are all examples of paedophiliac activity. Are you therefore also disgusted by Democracy, Philosophy, and Science?

Btw – even if those quotes regarding Khomeini can be properly attributed. To him, it is still an own goal on your part – he is Shi'a, a minority in the world of Islam, which is predominantly Sunni. And that's before we even get onto the issue of the fact that Khomeini cannot be held to speak for the beliefs of all Shi'as, no matter his military authority in Iran for 10 years.


As for the general censorship issue: the aim is to wholly create and protect an environment here for inter-faith dialogue. For most people that will be enough – it's only a request for common decency that should be prevalent on any moderated messageboard. Same applies here, excepting with a more specific definition of what that decency should be – for the benefit of all concerned.

 

[Celine]

Hello to everyone!

First let me tackle the point about "Understanding Islam". You are quite wrong here. That is most definitely a moderated site so you cannot use the excuse that 'anything goes' there. It doesn't. Muslims moderate it in the same way 'Comparative Religion' is moderated.

And yet these Muslims, having seen my "Truth About Islam" website, accepted it for discussion! They raised no objection. How limp, then, for 'Comparative Religion' to find my site too frank - and to censor it!

My website is blunt and hard-hitting but then it needs to be because it raises the matter of a Crime Against Humanity: the sexual mutilation of little girls.

But bluntly wording a website does not make it a 'hate' site. It's a pity you can't see the difference. I take comfort from the fact that the Muslim moderators could see the difference. I salute their open-mindedness. It is a pity I cannot salute this thread in the same manner!

But don't take my word for it. Have a look yourselves. Go to http://www.understanding-islam.org/forum and follow the links to 'General Discussion'. You'll soon come across my posting. You'll also see that dozens of people have replied to it and that over 500 people have read it. It really is a pity that 'Comparative Religion' is determined to stick its head in the sand.

Actually, on second thoughts why don't I give you the actual link? Here it is - that is unless it, too, is going to be censored!

http://www.understanding-islam.org/forum/FORUM.asp?FORUM_ID=1&whichpage=2&ARCHIVE=

So I think I have pointed out the ridiculousness of censoring my website.

I said my website is blunt because it needs to be. This is because 2 million little girls are being mutilated per year on behalf of their own Muslim parents and Islam itself is blind to this cruelty and permits it to go on.

Islam is the religion-in-place throughout the territories where the practice occurs and so it holds the moral stewardship of the peoples of the region. It cannot therefore wriggle out of responsibility for allowing the mutilation to continue no matter how the practice originated - or when. Islam is in charge in these regions. Islam should stop the abuse but Islam doesn't. I can't make it any clearer than that.

It works out that every 15 seconds a little girl is mutilated at the wish of its Muslim parents. That means two have been abused since I wrote the last paragraph. No wonder I am blunt on my website. This matter is urgent. I need to be blunt.

There are worse things than offending your Muslim readers, you know! There is censoring a website which is trying to expose this horror. Think about it!

There have been a list of Crimes Against Humanity that were not thought much of at the time - until, that is, the world woke up and saw the evil that was occurring. Apartheid was one and slavery was another. Both were accepted by religions till someone tried to wake people up. Think of the Dutch Reformed Church and its support of Apartheid and think of all those slave-owners who went to Church on Sundays in the plantations! And then think of what I am trying to do.

I am trying to wake you all up to the crime that is going on in the Muslim lands of Saudi Arabia and the Horn of Africa. And what is the response of 'Comparative Religion'? To censor the site. Shame on you!

Yes, I raise other matters such as the mass murder at the World Trade Center on September 11th. And I intend to continue to raise it, too. This crime was committed by fanatical Muslims on behalf of Islam. It is right that Muslims should be confronted about it - and a certain unstated support for Al Qaeda, which is often more extensive than you'd think. I have a video-loop which I chose not to show on my website. It shows Palestinian Muslims dancing in the street over the September 11th atrocity.

And it is right that I expose the Muslim references to the Prophet Mohammad's unhealthy sex with a nine-year old girl. We have a right to ask: can we trust the moral leadership of man such as that?

And it is right that I expose the cruelties of hand-severing and of stoning-to-death. Islam should be tackled hard about these matters. It claims a Divine Revelation, after all!

But before you think that I am just a fanatical anti-Mulsim myself let me say that had I the time I would also tackle other religions too.

For example, the Roman Catholic Church needs to be tackled hard about the obscene wealth of the Vatican in the face of world poverty and, indeed, the poverty of its own followers in the Third World. And it could be tackled hard about Pope Pius XII and his dalliance with the Nazis.

And it ought to be pointed out the Church of England was founded by a serial killer. King Henry VIII beheaded more than one of his wives and many other people besides. Morever, the next leader of this Church will be Prince Charles when he becomes king. Yet he is a publicly acknowledged adulterer over his affair with Camilla Parker-Bowles. How hypocritical is that?

And the Hindus ought to be tackled over their iniquitous caste system which condemns Untouchables to a lifetime of exclusion and poverty.

And the Shinto religion ought to be tackled about its veneration of war criminals at its temples in Japan....

The list goes on, but you get my drift, I'm sure.

I don't have the time to tackle all of these religions so I have to concentrate on the worst offender: Islam.

But back to my website. Even though it is only a couple of weeks old it has nevertheless recieved over 800 hits and my e-mail is overflowing as you can imagine. Dozens of people are asking me about the crimes of Islam - and some of them are Muslims disturbed by the truths I have brought to their attention. It is these honest people that I must give my time to.

I do not feel I have to accept the censorship of 'Comparative Religion'. In fact, I feel this censorship is shameful of you. You would not expect me to labour under your yoke, would you? I have my own voice and I refuse to allow it to be silenced by you because of your fear of offending people.

Wake up! There's a Crime Against Humanity going on. What are you doing censoring the site which brings the matter to light!

I reject your censorship and I will leave you now and spend my time instead in genuine discussion with the honest people who e-mail me from my site.

Goodbye, I'm sorry you have proved to be so limp in the face of an atrocity.

Celine

 

[brian]

First let me tackle the point about "Understanding Islam". You are quite wrong here. That is most definitely a moderated site so you cannot use the excuse that 'anything goes' there.

Different sites have different policies on what they will and will not promote. And, personally, I am not interested in what other sites allow and disallow. CR has it's own policy, and that's what is stood by.

I reject your censorship and I will leave you now and spend my time instead in genuine discussion with the honest people who e-mail me from my site.

If you reject my censoring of links to hate sites then why did you sign up to join a community with a clearly displayed COC - that you had to click to agree to - that expressly forbade the promotion of hate? Obviously, because your only intention is to SPAM your hate site link about.

Btw - the link you gave shows very clearly that you never intended to discuss the matter. Although you made a single reply to comment briefly on others, you ignored absolutely every other point raised on that forum to simply rail on about gential mutilation - which is condemned, here and there. Your intention is to simply SPAM sites with your link, nothin more.

Goodbye, I'm sorry you have proved to be so limp in the face of an atrocity.

I love it when hate-mongers and SPAMmers claim a moral prerogative! If you believe Islam is evil then that is your belief. But the promotion of hatred against a specific religious group is unacceptable on this board.

And in my book any website that defines Islam in terms of mass murder, genital mutilation, and paedophilia is promoting hate and prejudice.

So it is hardly a loss to see you leave to SPAM other sites. No doubt you will be equally unwelcome on many more.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Brian,

i came to your site because of your posting on the Understanding-islam.org site.

you may have noted that when pressed about her (if that nick can be taken to be a female moniker) "concern" for the welfare of all people, she did not respond in any fashion whatsoever.

i specifically asked to see her condemnations of the crimes in Uganda, Cambodia, Laos, Tibet, China and so forth... nothing was forthcoming from her. nary a response.

i think that you have the right of it, the posts were meant to be invective attacks on Islam and really nothing more than that.

 

[Elizabeth May]

I would have liked to have seen the link myself, but I guess admins need to set boundaries. I've seen what can happen when talk on religion gets out of hand and its amazing what sort of crap gets posted on the internet just to attack other people.

 

[Dave the Web]

I do not believe that female circumcision is proscribed in the Koran or other Holy Islamic writings. So the issue is African culture, not Islam, I think.
September 11th was committed by a small number of people for political reasons. I do not hold that as indicative of Islam any more than I hold IRA members indicative of Catholicism, or UDA members as indicative of Protestants, or so on.

 

[Ocean_Drop]

I think all your responses to that person were praiseworthy and just.

 

[samabudhi]

There's something lacking in this thread.
Time to put equanimity and sensitivity aside and.......

BRING IN THE ARTILLERY!!!

...............
......./.......
......//.......
.....//........
..../#|........
....|#|------+.
.__/##|__\.....
.OOO====OO.....
...............



Brian:

However, the actual website linked to is far too aggressively biased - some would say it's a hate site - to be welcome in itself on this forum. After all, this is a place of neutrality for discussing all religions. Linking to other domains which proclaim in conclusion that Islam is nothing more than a brutal murderous paedophiliac religion does not sit well with the ethos of this place.

There is a general war of ideology between Christian and Islamic fundamentalists on the internet, with hate site countering hate site - but comparative-religion.com will play no part in that.

Since when does a website take responsibility for what someone posts?
This is so typically a capitalist-culture way of thinking.
LIBERTY, FREEDOM!!! with annals of fine-print and exceptions.
Freedom is a myth...

Back to the subject.

I just don't see how a link to another site implicates the administrator or the web-site where it was found. Perhaps there is some e-law I don't know about, but I consider my posts my own intellectual property. My responsibility anyway. I know the rules are self-imposed here, so maybe you're looking out for the reputation of the web-site and which crowd you're eager to draw. Think I just answered my own question but could you elaborate on this anyway? Thanks in advance.

In my opinion, people should be able to post what they wish, so long as it subject-related. If there's something destructive with the way they are thinking, then a non-partisan, unbiased, liberal forum is just what they need. Instead of stewing in their own world of hatred, let them come out and face a myriad of opinions. The hotter their speech, the shorter lived it'll be. If it's not worth thinking about, people won't reply. It's better than censoring them, which is in a sense, suppresion. Denying their hatred as if it wasn't there is not a good idea. They might try to take their feelings out in other ways! The psyche is a subtle thing.

Hatred is an opinion just like any other. If we are to restrict the forum to facts and figures it would be pretty dry. Maybe this ugly feeling is just what we need to get us thinking. It also shows that the issues we pursue in religion have real consequences, like making people mad enough to make hate speech sites, whatever those are. If we just sit in our own pampered world of philosophising and musing over the intricacies of some ideals, we lose the experiential nature of religions.

This is actually the premise for the cornerstone technique of Buddhism meditation. Insight meditation is about remaining equanimous (equal minded) and aware of the subtle and the gross; the ugly and the beautiful without being pushed or pulled in our emotions over it. See! I've used this deprecated argument to show some good in something else. It's not all bad.

We aren't all babies here at comparative-religions. If someone has something to say, lets hear it.




WHKeith:

I've found that such customs as clitorectomy and refusing even a basic education to females are in fact due to local custom, not something ingrained within Islam itself.

Who are we to judge the customs and traditions of others. If they don't have a problem with it and people are happy then quit imposing your view of what is good and what is bad, (I'm speaking to Celine here.) If, on the other hand, the people are not happy and they themselves, and no other, consider what is being done to be wrong, then by all means, seek an end to these acts. I think the problem is that women are not yet afforded equal rights in Islamic communities, which bars them from speaking out if anything was wrong.




WHKeith:

As a matter of fact, many students of Islam point out that the Prophet himself was a remarkably open-minded and liberal advocate of what amounted to women's rights in the 7th century. He encouraged women to be educated (the better to read God's word), he limited the number of wives a man might have to four or to the number he could support at once (a definite improvement over common custom at the time!), and I believe he fought against the old custom of allowing the man to divorce the wife by simply stating his intent.

What's going on here? I thought Muhammed only preached what Allah told him. You make it sound like he had his own set of requirements. Furthermore, Muhammed himself had 7 wives and forbade up to 4. Hello?!
A definite improvement for it's time indeed. Is this the word of God or not?




Celine:

I raised the issue of female genital mutilation. This practice has been performed on 100 million Muslim women who are presently alive. Moreover, each year a further 2 million Muslim girls are added to the total. This barbaric practice, performed on such a vast scale, constitutes a Crime Against Humanity and it is right to confront the Islamic world over it.

The call must be made from within Islam. You cannot come along with this typical western arrogance and start making demands on other people. It's a long standing pattern of colonialists reforming the savages.

Take for example certain tribes in Papua New Guinea (I think it's New Guinea. Somewhere in the pacific anyway.) After a certain time the warriors of a tribe would get in their boats and sail to the other tribe and wage war. Then, after a certain time, the other tribe would do the same thing. This was seen as barbarism by westerners who were ignorant to it's subtle purpose which was population control. Westerners came in, handed them all a Bible, and told them to stop fighting. The population of the islands rocketed out of control and the entire eco-system was upset. It's just like interferring with nature. We send in some bugs to take care of alien plants we introduced in the past. Once the alien plants are all gone, the bugs move onto indigenous plants and cause more havoc than before.

This attitude of wanting to 'save' people is shrouded in a tedium of psychological complexities.
One would rather fight a visible cause where the subjects are tangible and at a safe distance than handle one's own inner troubles. Think what your motives really are for getting involved in such a cause. The reason your web-site or opinions come across as hateful, because you are personally involved, I'm guessing.

People need to fight their own battles. When they are ready to change they will. Nothing is constant, the bubble will eventually burst.

Celine:

It does not matter where the practice originated, nor when, nor whose idea it was originally. As Islam has been the religion-in-place where the practice occurs, it is Islam that ought to have stopped it. Yet for nearly 1300 years Islam has failed in this duty. Can any excuse be made for such a gigantic failure - a failure that has been permitted to continue for nearly 1300 years? A failure of such a 'Divinely-inspired' religion, moreover?

You assume that the morals of Islam are the same as that of our own Christian-influenced culture. If Islam has something to say against this, then sure, Islam has failed in this regard. As your quotes show however, Islam has a long way to go before it comes close to western and even more so, eastern views on humanity.

Brian:

This place has a strict COC in place

You might want to spell that out in full to avoid further embarressment.

Brian:

Do appreciate, though, that multi-faith venues requiere protection from the wreckers of all paths and beliefs.

Why? If religions can't handle the hecklers who've nothing constructive to say (or no alternative to add after being destructive) then they've made it too far. It's the sign of a good comedian.

Brian:

Religions are as much shaped by the regions they spread into, as much as shape them. A cursory look at Christianity, as a case in point, clearly demonstrates this, with major Christian festival dates being used specifically in lieu of original pagan feast days. Easter and the Nativity are blatant cases in point.

Perhaps this shows the futility of 'revelatory' religions where rules are set in stone. The bigger they are the harder they fall.

Brian:

Therefore by the logic of your arguments, Democracy, Philosophy and Science are all examples of paedophiliac activity. Are you therefore also disgusted by Democracy, Philosophy, and Science?

Democracy, philosophy and science have nothing to do with morality. They are unrelated subjects. Islam however is a religion. It's primary purpose is to lay out what is acceptable and what is not.

Celine:

But bluntly wording a website does not make it a 'hate' site. It's a pity you can't see the difference.

What is the difference? This definition of a hate site is wholly subjective and pointless to argue about.
On this site I once claimed that Islam was illogical. You should have seen the tongue I got given back. It's all a matter of perception.

Celine:

I do not feel I have to accept the censorship of 'Comparative Religion'. In fact, I feel this censorship is shameful of you. You would not expect me to labour under your yoke, would you? I have my own voice and I refuse to allow it to be silenced by you because of your fear of offending people.

Told you this would happen. This isn't a spiritual elitist club... Is it?

Brian:

And in my book any website that defines Islam in terms of mass murder, genital mutilation, and paedophilia is promoting hate and prejudice.

And what if these were true. Then it would simply be a fact. The Greeks commited pederasty. This is a fact. If it was denied within the society at the time then bringing it to light in another country who knew nothing of this would be considered hate and prejudice. Would it not?
The idea of innocent until proven guilty doesn't really play with the case of Islam and abuse since it is accepted that genital mutilation takes place. Celine's complaint is of the condoning of this practice. If this is wrong, then at the very least, we still have the apathy in dealing with it. Admit it, it's simply the tone that the website takes, not the content expressed.

Vaj:

i think that you have the right of it, the posts were meant to be invective attacks on Islam and really nothing more than that.

People, people. Am I the only one who sees more to this than simply what Celine cares to stress.
What is the point of this forum? To encourage religious debate I presume, yes but for what purpose. To grow spiritually/mentally of course. When I see her posts I see cash registers of opportunity. Growth for her to transcend whatever is causing her to piss people off so much. Growth for us to learn to deal with such people constructively. They are, after all, the ones who end up having an effect on the world; not some group of square-eyed pedagogues. Cutting her off like that simply to save the forum was a mistake. Isolate her and her anger will grow causing her to isolate herself. Have compassion for the person inside Celine who is clearly suffering. She's shouting because no-one is listening.

Didn't need the artillery after all.

..........
......\|/.
......-O-.
....../|\.
...._..|..
.....\/...
.....|__..
.....|....
.....|....
..........


Peace

 

[iBrian]

samabudhi, Celine set up a hate site and then sought to use a number of forums to promote it. This will absolutely not be tolerated on CR itself.

The Code of Conduct is posted at the top of all of the major boards here.

This forum absolutely does not advocate any Free Speech philosophy - we merely stress the need for civility and mutal respect.

People who cannot agree to so basic a request are welcome to join other forums instead.

The sad fact is that alot of people really cannot approach religious discussions without becoming abusive. I have run a free speech religious discussion forum before, on MSN. The only people there now are angry US atheists who can't say the word "Christian" without adding an expletive, and insist that it is their consitutional right to post a drawing of a child giving Jesus a *******. Is this what you invite? I do not. None of that will ever happen here while I'm present.

comparative-religion.com is run from the UK - republican US ideals stay across the pond.

And as we are no longer discussing Islam: thread closed.