Hi humanists

I disagree with your ideologies of islam

Why does islam limit your ability? I rather believe it does the opposite. Islam is a choice being muslim is a choice.

Really? So why did Muhammad write in threats of horrible fires of Hell for non believers in practically each page? Threats of how trinitarians, idolators, non believers in God, or in Hell etc will burn eternally? I know a friend who had the courage to leave Islam recently, she had unfortunately been held back many years due to threats of Hellfire.

Why do you restrict your life with laws, common sense or what your parents teach you?

Your conscious can also be fooled to believe in what is bad as good and what is good as bad.

Where did ?commonsense, morals and education? come from? Just by thinking, living? Ever heard of ?Essentialism?? you seem to take that approach.

Commonsense,morals etc certainly didn't come with Islam, they existed for millennia prior to Islam, indeed many religious books & many people who claimed to be Prophets-like Buddha, Jesus, Zarathushtra etc had taught excellent morals.

And the laws we live in are not 100% the same or equally fair/just. Why is it a man who rapes or kills get charged with different law sentences? 2 man can rape a girl and both men get different sentences, why? Where?s the logic? The fairness? The justice?

Laws bend and change cos of number cos of consensus (even unchallenged consensus) that doesn?t necessarily mean it is right. Even with numbers, if a government wants to do something it will. Such as America going to war. Ok the war wasn?t a law but where is the justice in that? Isn?t that government abusing power? Is that a safe not falling apart society?

Sure, laws bend & change, & religions sooner rather than later accept such changes. Islam is the slowest to adopt most often, but even it does.

Like the abolition of slavery, Muslim nations were the last to abandon slavery-Saudi outlawed it only in 1963, a millennia after USA & at Trinitarian Catholic Kennedy's request, but it finally did.

Positive changes more often than not come last in Islam, but come they do.

Or equal inheritance rights for women, currently Turkey has it, even other modern Muslim nations like Tunisia don't. Many non Muslim nations do.

Islam does retard these progress, but sooner rather than later, they happen.

I skipped a few posts what are you trying to say? That islam is intolerable? You mention why do we need Quran? I'll share my view..Quran is a guide and its underlying message can be found in different ways even without the Quran. However to attain a better level, following the guide would be necessary to further gain God consciousness. If you believe in the Quran and didn?t adhere to it, well I guess that would be a fault.

The Quran is a guide sure, but its incapability to be a good guide is amply demonstrated with all the societies which tried to adhere to it. Thats why we see so many Muslims, even from never colonized nations like Iran, or a past colonizer like Turkey moving to Western nations, thats why we see so many conflicts, & so much backwardness wherever the Quran is applied. Every sort of progress, from the abolition of slavery to equal inheritance of women happens last.

Let me tell you something ?you actually can!?. Why can?t you do it? Who is stopping you? I know a muslim lady who married a non muslim man, I know muslims who drink alcohol though I?m yet to meet a muslim who wishes to eat pork. But if you choose to do an action you have that choice.

No when Quranic laws are enforced, you don't. There are laws in multiple Muslim nations forbidding Muslim women from marrying non Muslim men, laws forbidding alcohol etc. Choice usually exists as long Muslims are not the majority, or if Quran & Islam is suppressed in favor of man made laws by the state.

If you don?t follow the Quran I would ask why? Because you feel it unnecessary because you feel your morals/common sense/ parental guidance are just and right and above all but how do you know that for sure? You seem to repulse Quran and include cultural traditions as part of muslim/Islamic practices, so the question is by what guide/translation/understanding do you know the Quran? You?ve read it and a lot of people have and a lot of people, myself included have misunderstood verses. So what makes you think you read it with the right understanding?

Not "cultural traditions" a common excuse amongst Muslims, but the Quran words itself show its not a great guide. It can always be excused if some people misunderstand verses, but if the majority of people who take up this guide do so, that really proves how poor a guide it is, especially is their non Muslim neighbours in similar circumstances don't.

Everywhere I see places which have tried to read it with the "right understanding" have ended up with messed up societies, only by sufficiently marginalizing it has any progress been made. I can easily compare the Muslims I see in Iran with the Bahais & Zoroastrians & see for myself.

Muslims escape from the poverty, social & economic problems in Islamic nations but still carry Islam with them coz they fail to realize that it was Islam which was responsible for those troubles.

Anyway I?ve asked many questions and you don?t need to answer them but at least think about it.

Thought about it. laugh I'm reminded of all the Muslims I met from various Islamic nations who often try to blame every problem in Islam on "Oh its culture, not religion," or, "They don't understand the real Quran," but conveniently escape to various non Muslim nations to settle down in places which don't follow the Quran as guidance, & try to give dawah to the people who've created these much better societies by not following the Quran! laugh

So, Fawzia, darling is this some news you are bringing us tht we didn't know this thing about what 4.34 should say? Or are you here in order that we repent and tell "oh now that Fawzia says it it must undoubtedly be so"? If it is the latter you ar going to have to bring ut some hard and proper analisys of the thing and refute properly the reasons why d-r-b- is not used in the sense of hit in the truthful Quran, not on 4.34, not anywhere else. You should do that instead instead of throwing tantrums that discredit your arguments.

Salaam

Oh no huruf, darling, right at the beginning of my post, I showed how there're two words, Idriboohunna (&#1606 means beat them (for female plural). Adriboo Anhunna ( &#1606 is the one that means abandon or leave them, plus I gave ample examples, Allah has used Idriboohunna not Adriboo Anhunna. laugh

I don't throw tantrums, simply state bare truths, which seem unpleasant to you, well if you want to follow a Prophet who wanted to marry his daughter in law & so got a convenient revelation from Allah, who used the word for beating rather than the word for leaving, then do so! laugh

My arguments certainly aren't discredited, its your delusions & capacity for continuing self delusion which is exposed. laugh

Actually, the most accurate answer is that it can theoretically mean "leave them" as their is a direct object there (see Lane's Lexicon), thus no need for "An", however, I think you mean to say the majority of examples in Classical Arabic dictionaries use "An". However, this is not a rule as such, more of a common pattern of usage. I recommend asking any Arab linguist.

Good timing though, as I have just finished my article on DaRaBa in The Quran a few days ago, and I am just waiting on some minor aspects of the Arabic to be verified/clarified. I should be able to post it within 2 weeks.

I have asked PLENTY of Arab linguists, Arab scholars, Quran scholars, Islamic scholars & ordinary graduates of Arabic from Saudi Arabia-all agree that this means beat or hit.

The people I asked includes two apostates, one committed Muslim who's also very modern & liberal in his thinking, a regular ole Arabian Sunni-all say that if Muhammad had meant "leave them" the sentence would be grammatically very ill, to say the least.

I admire their honesty.

However, I know you'll continue to pretend to yourself & others that the square's a circle to save your faith, exactly like you believe that the belligerent rant in the Quran is some splendid system for all mankind from the Creator of the Universe! ;D

To give/hit you (idriboohu) with another non literal example

4358
And they said "Are our gods better or He?"
They did not daraboohu (hit you) except arguing, but they are a people disputing.

waidriboohunna refers back to the example set forth or given prior
and abandon them (waohjuroohunna) in the place of lying down

Basically says "and show them (F)" or take an attitude of abandoning/ignoring them thus in the literal sense.

Thanks! You are the perfect example of accepting that the circle's a square! laugh

Allah didn't say what you're desperately trying to prove, He said "Idriboohunna" NOT "Adriboo Anhunna ( &#1606"

Allah could have used the word which exists for leave them but He didn't.

I don't see the Constitution of most of the nations being so confusing & using wrong words for domestic violence, most prohibit it & make it a punishable offence in no uncertain terms! laugh

I know the non Arab Muslims out here, desperate to save their faith, will now ignore all the contradictory evidence, & stick to whatever new interpretations & meanings they're fed to salvage their faith. laugh

I pity your simplistic view of the world. I don't mean that condescendingly. In earnest, I feel sorry for your rather immature view of how human-relations/belief systems operate in society. Your use of blanket terms like "Muslim nations" and "Islam" (as if these were homogenous concepts) belie either your naivete or agenda. I suspect it's a mixture of both.

We are all shaped by our experiences, to an extent. Some of us, though, let our bad experiences (at the hands of authority, religionists, etc.) completely rule our lives and turn us into "angry apostates" at the sacrifice of rationality. The question is why have you resigned to being one of those people?

Things are rarely all or none, black or white. Shades of grey.

(I speak as a fellow Iranian by the way, if that happens to have any currency with you)

Peace.

And I pity your inability to see Islam, the Quran & Islamic ideas for what they are.

Sure there're shades of grey,but extremely varying shades of grey.

Islam tends to take places & people to the extremely dark shades of grey. laugh

Sure we're all shaped by many factors, but Islam is a big factor in many Muslim societies, & the bigger the Islam-ie the more seriously Islam is taken, the more the problems.

Btw, yours is the standard tactic taken by Quranists-ie its others personal bad experiences, bad mullahs etc-not true Islam or not the Quran.

Unfortunately thats not true.

I have read, re read the Quran, & its the root of the problems.

Its simply a war manual, it has a very belligerent tone, it speaks ill of followers of trinitarian & idolatrous religions, on practically every page, it speaks of warfare, violence or threats of hellfire.

No wonder its so dangerous for most who read it.

Peace all

Im glad I have made you laugh .There is no country in the world that is inocent and to blame one is fool hardy but you no that .but at this minute of time you are on a crusade or jihad in your case.We have more than enough hate mongers do not become anothere one .

Peace fawzia

salim

live long and prosper

True, but all places in the world are not in the same appalling state as Muslim nations still are, many have acknowledged their past mistakes & strive to make amends.

Currently, some of the best nations are the pretty irrelegious ones, I don't mean Communist ones, simply irrelegious ones like Scandinavian nations.

Islam hasn't so much as apologized, it continues to indulge in finding faults of others & hiding its own.

Also unlike the West, Muslim nations, even oil rich nations won't let permanent non Muslim immigrants settle there, or enjoy equal rights.

Btw, the Crusades wren't unprovoked, they were a belated reaction to extreme Muslim aggression & stealing of lands by Muslims which happened for centuries, the Muslim jihads which happened right after Muhammad were not for "recovering any stolen lands" simply "spreading" Islam! laugh

Peace all

IM not a religionest but I would like to mention something about Canada ,fawzia following link might be helpfull in your studies
http//canadiangenocide.nativeweb.org/ .

Peace Salim

live long and prosper

Thanks for the laughs again salgan! laugh I believe Islamic sites are the best places for comedy value!

I am aware of all this, yet you seem ignorant about the massive Islamic genocides which started right after Muhammad-in my birthplace Iran, in Iraq, Egypt, North Africa, so much of sub Saharan Africa,Turkey, the Indian sub continent, Afghanistan etc.

Islam spread in all these places when Muslims invaded, conducted multiple genocides & killings, butchered infidels, raped innocent kafir women, carried away innocent people as slaves, often after castrating them!

Yet, unlike Canada, there are few apologies for such abominable past behavior, many of these nations have little freedom to leave Islam, & far from taking in people of other faiths & nationalities, as Canada is doing, Muslims continue to cleanse all these olands of what few non Muslims remain! laugh

After all these genocides of kafirs, Muslims haven't created flourishing societies, let alone multi cultural societies, or managed to have human rights for all!

Yet they remain unapologetic & continue to engage in tu quoque logical fallacies about people who've at least created multi cultural, gender equal & advanced societies! laugh

Thanks again.

Excellent Point Wakas! D

About the "Islam is the only religion accreted by God"
I would like to add to that. I Truly Believe Islam will Dominate the World.
But just like the previous verse and what you mentioned...This is NOT in the way that Sunni/Shia and Kaffirs believe it to be.

Let me Translate that same Phrase.
"Peace/Submission/Oneness/Sincerity Will Dominate the World"
"Peace/Submission/Oneness/Sincerity Will ONLY be Accepted by God.

It is made to Appear that Islam is Equal to Chaos/Destruction/Totalitarianism/etc
so that People will believe that and be Against it.

Simple tactic Switch the Synonyms.

I have a Question What is an "Ex Muslim" and a "Muslim Apostate"?
If Muslim means Submitter/Noun-Person of Peace

Then is an "Ex Muslim" and "Muslim Apostate"
A Person now of Chaos/Destruction/Disorder/Rebellion/non-submission to oneness?

! hmm think about it...

Thanks for the laughs RA786.

Islam is indeed equal to chaos, destruction & totalitarianism wherever it spreads & wherever its taken seriously.

The best places in the world are the Scandinavian nations, Canada,etc. All the most scientifically, technologically advanced nations, the nations with the most gender equality, with the least conflicts have a common factor, they're seldom Muslim majority AND many, if not most have high % of non believers in any religion or in God\s.

These nations have peace & sincerity, Muslims fleeing their troubled, poor & violece prone nations seek shelter & economic opportunity in such nations, yet they still carry the burden of Islam with them & give dawah to gullibles, coz they fail to realise that its Islam which is the root cause of this violence, poverty, inequality & foolishness.

I don't see the advanced nations like Scandinavian nations, New Zealand etc destroyed because many disbelieve in God\s, I see people flourishing.

I see in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights all the values spelled out explicitly, which Muslims try to wring out by twisting & turning the Quran, with little success.

The Quran is helping practically no one & no place solve their ills-rather Muslims are fleeing such nations for better kafir lands, at least nations which have successfully managed to marginalize it are doing better.

peace Fawzia, all,

I actually decided to watch this video, hoping for some intellectual stimulation, but all I found was the same old story.

You say its "about the Quran" which it is, in part, but he clearly uses Tafsir Ibn Kathir and relies upon so-called "scholar" opinion to help form his views for him.

He says verses such as 262 / 569 refer to people BEFORE Muhammad came, citing Ibn Kathir, and whilst this is plausible because it is in the perfect tense, this view is completely destroyed by other verses in The Quran which refute that position. See

http//misconceptions-about-islam.com/muslim-or-hell.htm

Then he quotes a verse about "no deen other than islam will be accepted by God". This just shows his, and many peoples, complete lack of understanding what deen is, and what islam is. This has been discussed in significant detail in this forum, and there many articles about it, and even a basic study into Quranic usage gives us the true meaning.

deen = that which is due ~ system/obligation. It has no religious significance to it.

islam = self-surrender/submission ~ to make peace. It is a mindset, NOT the title/name of a religion.

When words are used in The Quran, they inevitably gain a special place amongst people, and they become religious-ified, and whilst that is ok as long as one remembers their original usage in The Quran, most do not, hence run into problems. Toshihiko Izutsu discusses this a lot in his works.

He then quotes 986 which uses the partitive "min", meaning not all. This is basic Arabic! I know almost zero Arabic, but luckily for me, God has created a system in which knowledge of Arabic is no match for the power of logic/thought.

etc.
etc.

As a side note, the guy in the video was/is a member here, and participated in forum discussion. Perhaps someone can remind me of the username, which you can then use to look up discussion.

If I may offer some advice, the very fact you use words such as "truly excellent video", and make admission such as "compared to angry apostates like myself" shows you are blinkered and have bias.

Let me be blunt you will NEVER see the truth (whatever it is) with such an approach.

The Perfect Way is only difficult
for those who pick and choose;
Do not like, do not dislike;
all will then be clear.
Make a hairbreadth difference,
and Heaven and Earth are set apart;
If you want the truth to stand clear before you,
never be for or against.
The struggle between "for" and "against"
is the mind's worst disease.

You MUST kill this for/against mindset within you, just like I try to kill it within myself, every day, day in day out, and it is a struggle I can assure you. You will never come across a greater enemy, than the enemy within, I can assure you of that.

"A person's worst enemy is found deep within the center of his spirit"

This man, unlike you has studied Islam in extensive detail, studied Arabic in extensive detail in Egypt & realised how vile Islam is.

I too have studied the Quran & the hadiths in detail, forget the hadiths, even the Quran was enough for me to see how God threatens disbelievers, idolators, trinitarian Christians,atheists etc with war in this world & hellfire in the next.

I would certainly not kill my capacity for rational thinking like you have done, to submit to a totalitarian system created by Muhammad.

I certainly have bias, & maybe blinkered, but many Muslims who're incapable to see the warfare, violence & hatred of the Quran are completely deluded.

Thankfully I'm not like that, I have no intention of ever turning like that.

Fawzia, listen, honestly.

That is why many people so depend on the translators. If the translators are ego-maniacs, or even if they are trying to be honest but still did errors, then so many people's decisions are compromised.

Do you think one man's view is enough on translating? No, that's why there must be cooperation and earnest discussion.

That's the very theme of this forum itself.

We don't take current translations as is. We are trying to verify by ourselves, and discuss our views with others who want to cooperate with us. And so far, i have the feeling that we are in the minority, at the time being.

I know that one man's view isn't enough, I have read plenty of translations-mostly in English but also in Farsi.

However, if so many people are incapable of translating the simplest stuff, then that simply shows that there's something majorly wrong in Islamic instructions.

We can't really verfy with others very well, unless we have knowledge of Arabic, if its true that all or most previous translators had it wrong.Also, knowledge of Arabic wouldn't help, we'd need to know Classical Arabic, which would require years of study on Muslims parts, given the demands of modernity, this isn't feasible for a billion plus people.

Than how do we know that what we're accepting is a true translation or some saccharine sweetened translation to appeal to modern tastes???

And asking me won't help either because i'm not one of them.

It is related to justice in general, as you can see, there is already the "fire"warning for those who abuse the orphans. Help me search then. I'm not an expert nor that i have memorized the entire Book.

Again, PLEASE READ YOURSELF WHAT IS THE FATE OF THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE in the Quran's view.

Sure justice in general, but in case of stuff like polygamy, don't you think there needs to be specifics? Sure the US Constitution goes on & on about stuff like liberty equality, but it also has specifics, like prohibiting murder, robbery etc.

Polygamy abuses the first wife & her children, this isn't the same as abusing orphans, the first wife isn't an orphan, nor are her kids, who have both parents living.

Sure, the Quran, to re type what you said, does say that, THE FATE OF THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE will be Hellfire, but then the majority of people aren't Muslims.

The Trinitarian Christians, idolatrous Hindus & Buddhists, the Chinese folk religionists, Japanese Shinto Buddhists, people of no religion, all far outnumber any Muslims or monotheists!

Even without sins like polygamy, the Quran does say that these folks will end up in Hell for disbelief!That would happily make up the majority.

Why should a good atheist or Trinitarian Catholic be criticized more strongly than a polygamist?

The 'perceived' door is still left open. Why ask me? Ask them. It's their perception. And yours too, it seems.

Not the percieved door san, the real door. I can show you the many places where Allah says that He'll burn idolators, Trinitarians & atheists in Hellfire, but nowhere has Allah said that He'll burn other sorts of polygamists in Hellfire who don't meet these exact stipulations.

Asking me won't help because I'm not Muslim anymore, I think polygamy's wrong & I have the law of my country to support me, that law prohibits polygamy in no uncertain terms.It doesn't discourage, it prohibits, & offenders are punished.

However, Muslim men who want to can certainly do as they want under Allah's laws. Okay, nicer men will be discouraged, but Allah is far more reticent on wanton polygamy than he is on idolatry or atheists like me!

Marry one? Reading from the verse 43 and 4129 carefully, and if that man is just and want to be just, then yes. One wife.

san answer one thing honestly, can every non Arab spend years of his\her prime learning Arabic?

Non Arab Muslims are the world's majority Muslims, they have loads to do apart from learning Arabic.

They have to study so many stuff, know science & technology, get jobs, etc.

Even if I learn Arabic, it won't help, I can only tell some stuff to some people, anyone else can misinterpret anything, also even Saudi Arabs don't speak the Quranic Arabic anymore.

All men don't want to be just, however most Muslims do want to be free of Allah's fire.

Allah has threatened Muslims with hellfire for turning non believers or for polytheism, but He did leave a leeway for polygamy.

So a man can well take on a second wife, he might feel that as long as he's sharing time equally between first wife & this one, he's not destined for Hell in the afterlife.

Crimes need to be prohibited, not simply discouraged from this & that verse.

Isn't theft, robbery, pedophilia etc prohibited in most nations, or are they simply discouraged?

So why doesn't Allah prohibit?

What was the bigger neccessity of prohibiting idolatry & polythesm over wanton polygamy?

I have Italian born Catholic neighbours, they pray before statues of Virgin Mary & many saints, they think God is Trinity, I don't think thats evil.

However, walking in with a second wife when someone has a wife & (maybe) kids is evil.

So why isn't other, not neccessary sorts of polygamy forbidden in a similar way?

Good enough Fawzia, looks like 4129 not strong enough indeed for the abusers, or they don't take any attention to it at all. Don't be like them.

Even if I'm not like then san, what is the guarantee that everybody won't be like them? ???

Even if good men ignore it, the door is still left open.

Just read the Quran, see how strongly polytheism & idolatry are discouraged. Why isn't polygamy, except under the rarest of situations, similarly discouraged?

If Allah is so bothered over whether people are bowing down before idols or not, why not similarly worry over other instances of polygamy?

Why is wanton polygamy less of a sin than any idolatry?

Whom does idolatry hurt like polygamy hurts women & children?

An unfortunate Bangladeshi incident, man was desperate for a son, poured acid into his daughter's mouth! Poor child is scarred for life

http//www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=100568

Babli's father wanted to be the "proud parent" of a son, and when a son was not born to him but a daughter, he chose to be a villain.

Bakhtiar Rana, a carpenter by profession in Betagi Thana in Rangunia, Chittagong, took an instant dislike to the fact that his wife "had given him a burden instead of an heir" and made his feelings clear.

The resentment over being stuck with a burden -- as a girl child is still labelled in society -- grew in such proportions in him that things took a turn for the worst when Babli was just seven months old in July 2000.

On the fateful day, Babli's father chose to forget that he was a human being. He took his child in his arms and used a medicine dropper to force acid into her mouth, into her ears and on her feet. He also did not spare her anal passage.

The attack left Babli with a burnt throat, tongue and severe hearing impairment. She also suffered serious damage to knees, feet and anal passage. But the fighter that the little baby was, she kept her struggle to just stay alive and she was lucky enough to draw the attention of people who would help her.

Now eight years later, after sessions of continuous treatments, Babli can now not only eat on her own but also talk and even goes to school.

Bakhtiar Rana was never arrested and her mother Parul Akter still suffers from the trauma of witnessing the heinous attack on her child to kill her.

Parul who lives and works in Dhaka now told The Daily Star yesterday ?Everyone apprehended she would die from the injuries she suffered but my brave daughter held on. She underwent at least six major operations over the last eight years since 2001.

A visiting surgeon from the USA first operated on Babli to try and repair her food pipe and throat. After that surgery she was able to drink liquid food and gradually was able to swallow semi-solid food.

In 2004, one of her damaged toes had to be amputated during surgeries to restore the use of her feet. In 2005, further surgery restored the use of her tongue. Then in January and March 2006, two operations by a visiting plastic surgeon from UK reconstructed her inner mouth.

All these operations were made possible because of the shelter given to the mother and child by the Acid Survivors Foundation since November 2000.

Parul told The Daily Star ?We did not get justice in nine years and I now think that we will never get any justice because the law enforcement agencies say that Bakhtiar is still absconding.

If attacking one South Asian is allowed, why not another? ???

Fawzia, answer honestly about 48-10 and 4127-129

Are you going to cover it?

Are you going to be like those who abuse the Quran? They use their ego. Are you using your ego now to not comment about them?

Or are you going to get back to the same old story, the greedy "muslims" men... it's even there right on the 4128 "men's souls are swayed by greed"!

It's already there! SAME OLD STORY INDEED!

Yes san sure, I understand that we can use alternate verses to show that polygamy is not encouraged, however, as I said it is permitted.

Every human being, man or woman isn't noble, sacrificing as even the Quran says.

If a door is left open even a little bit, there's a leeway.

Under most conditions, polygamy is abusive to women.

So why didn't Allah say, after that orphans & widows, that if there're no numerous war widows all desperate for protection from men, marry one?

This is how even Indonesian men are mis using the law

http//www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/24/ap/asia/main5418276.shtml

Mazhar, thank you for pointing out the different term used in 4127. Clearly there it is yataman-nisa, as opposed to only yataman on the 43, thus this is enough as a warning for those who want to abuse 43.

4127 They ask thy instruction concerning the women say Allah doth instruct you about them And (remember) what hath been rehearsed unto you in the Book, concerning the orphans of women to whom ye give not the portions prescribed, and yet whom ye desire to marry, as also concerning the children who are weak and oppressed that ye stand firm for justice to orphans. There is not a good deed which ye do, but Allah is well-acquainted therewith.

4128 If a wife fears cruelty or desertion on her husband's part, there is no blame on them if they arrange an amicable settlement between themselves; and such settlement is best; even though men's souls are swayed by greed. But if ye do good and practise self-restraint, Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do.

4129 Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire But turn not away (from a woman) altogether, so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding, and practise self-restraint, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Good enough san, but I feel that it'd have been better had Allah mentioned that men who don't marry war widows & mothers of orphans but just taken on a second wife do a grave wrong?

There are all sorts of men & women. If a door is left even a little open, people would want to go in.

Allah prohibits polytheism, idolatry etc in no uncertain terms, why not also prohibit men taking on a second or more wives if there are no poor, incapable mothers of orphans whom they have to look after in equally strong terms too? ???

I did not say any such thing "orgies" etc. I merely said this

I imagine how accurately Allah knows the eventualities.
This too is a taboo in all religions; whether ex-religion or the religion owned by boyfriend & his sister and her boyfriend.

So this is 1732
1732 And do not come near adultery, for it is a sin and an evil path.

Have we come near adultery Mazhar?

When have we done anything of that sort?

How do you assume that we'd be prone to committing adultery anymore than any devout Muslim or Haredi Jew would, or that we are fond of adultery & condone adultery?

Eating bacon & adultery are two very different things.

Atheists, agnostics & other non religious people have morals as well.

13. Sex ratio and sex differential of mortality

The greater longevity of the human female is most clearly manifest in the life of the elderly and translates virtually without exception into a sex ratio of mortality (male rate per female rate) higher than unity. With increasing age, however, this ratio likewise almost universally -declines and this has often led to the mistaken conclusion that at high ages death rates for the two sexes tend to converge and may eventually intersect.

Actually, the declining ratio is nothing more than an inevitable result of arithmetic at young ages the ratio may reach, and often does, values of 2 or 3 but such ratios become increasingly unlikely and finally impossible as mortality reaches higher levels in old age. If, instead of the ratio, we look at the differential of the rates, the picture changes completely instead of converging, the rates maintain their distance.

These two structural features of old age mortality - sex ratio declining but sex differential fairly constant with advancing age - have persisted through the recent momentous development which has been much more beneficial to women than men.

An examination of the sex ratio based on age-standardized death rates at ages 80-99 in the 28 countries with acceptable data (Annex Table 10) confirms, first of all, that the males are subject to considerably higher mortality than the females and that this difference has lately been increasing. The male excess mortality which at these ages in 1960-64 varied between countries from 10 to 33 percent, had by 1985-89 grown to an excess of 24 to 48 percent while the mean had grown from 20 to 36 percent.

The highest levels of excess male mortality in old age are now found in Northwestern Europe and Australia as shown in Table 15 and the lowest generally in Eastern and Central Europe. The very low ratio for Spain is probably due to age overstatement by males whose death rate therefore has a downward bias.

The increase in the sex ratio during this last quarter century, also shown in Table 15, has been remarkably sharp in the Low Countries and Scandinavia where improvement in the mortality of old men has been slight. Although this has not been the case in Switzerland and Finland, the gains were in these countries much larger for women. At the other extreme, the sex ratio has increased only moderately in the former East bloc. The apparent decline in Spain is most likely an artifact. The development is illustrated by age group in Figure 9 which is composed of only the most reliable data. In it an aggregate of eleven Western European countries is compared with a group of three Eastern European countries and with Japan. The actual ratios are given in Annex Table 11.

In both European groups the decline of the sex ratio of mortality with advancing age was very moderate in the 1950s, after which the gradually increasing female advantage has translated into ever steeper slopes as the upper end of the life span has not kept pace with the rapid changes among octogenarians. In Japan the slope was very straight and stable for three decades and approached the European pattern only in the 1980s when it also confirmed the existence of a mortality difference between male and female centenarians.

When, instead of sex ratio, we look at the sex differential in Figure 10, we note its nearly constant size by age. In the European curves there is a tendency for a slow increase of the differential over age which belies the assumption of convergence. As the female advantage has grown over time, the curves have been moving to higher levels while roughly maintaining their slowly ascending form.

Exactly what I was telling you.

Why & how many populations have more women.

Anyway, thanks for this discussion, I learn more about Quranist Muslims like this.

So all the charges of racism only come out if it concerns Muslims, or charges of South Asian bashing, otherwise bashing's fine? bravo

AND Bangladeshi Muslims will freely immigrate to India in millions, after telling people how bad it is?

Like many Muslims in Europe I know, who'll go on & on about how bad Europe is, then say that they're trying to immigrate there! )

.....

Excellent Sarah! bravo bravo bravo

Thanks for showing your true colors!

I was accused of racism or South Asian bashing if I dared mention Bangladesh or Pakistan, however, you freely mention India!

Isn't that the biggest chunk of South Asia?

So "South Asian bashing" is to be avoided if it hurts Muslim sentiments right?

Or its allright?

I face the same when I dare speak agaainst Palestinians, it becomes Muslim bashing, however then the Muslim person follows with Jew bashing! ;D

Will criticizing India make your Bangladesh perfect?

Nope, so why not learn from Sri Lanka?

AND why migrate in millions from Bangladesh to India, if its so bad? ???

I would've bashed Hindus had I been born that, as it happens, I'm not.

http//books.google.com/books?id=XRudk_NcA7cC&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=sex+ratio+in+Europe%3F&source=bl&ots=ybeyiITTbD&sig=H1hnn9uv5FS9zLOH0GoUPh2RvTU&hl=en&ei=Zzb1Srn7Loyf8AaRpoT0CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CCsQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=sex%20ratio%20in%20Europe%3F&f=false

a sex ratio of 1.2-1.3 in Europe in the Middle Ages?

Do you have reading & learning difficulty Sarah?

Still having trouble reading?

Didn't I mention maternal mortality reducing numbers of women?

The book portion mentions that there were more men but fails to pin the causal factor.

It mentions that there were more men because in the crucial years of teens & twenties, women died in large numbers in childbirth.

That would ostensibly happen in Muhammad's time as well, so with women dying in childbirth, if the Muslim claim was true, then there surely Muhammad couldn't be polygamous with his daughter in law or with little Ayesha! ;D