The Religion of PEACE......... (NOT)

[nero_bolt]

Wonderful people from the religion of peace..

It must be so much fun to be a woman in  the religion..... 

Taliban threatens Nobel laureate Malala 

A POWERFUL breakaway faction of the Pakistani Taliban threatened teenage education activist Malala Yousafzai with "sharp and shiny knives", hours after she was declared joint winner of the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize.

JAMAAT ul Ahrar, which in August separated from Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) also known as the Pakistani Taliban - posted its response to the win on Twitter late Saturday.

"Characters like Malala should know that we are not deterred by propaganda of [non-believers]. We have prepared sharp and shiny knives for the enemy of Islam," tweeted spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan.
 
"Malala speaks so much against guns and armed conflicts. Does she not know that the founder of her recent Nobel award was the inventor of explosives," the spokesman said.
 
Malala, a 17-year-old education activist, survived a gunshot wound to the head by a Taliban gunman in 2012.
 
The mainstream TTP, an umbrella organisation of over a dozen groups, has not commented on Malala's accolade.
 
Malala has received praise in Pakistan for becoming the youngest-ever Nobel Peace laureate, with all major newspapers running front page stories on her achievement.

[iapetus_rocks]

Goodnight Martini 🙂

I'm really not interested in the finer distinctions about what constitutes a race.

What really interests me is the point I mentioned above. post #63

"Ok, I am going to disagree strongly with him here on this point he made. . ."A civilised society must not celebrate barbarian values. We should all be capable of respecting others’ beliefs, even if we may disagree."

I refuse to offer any respect to any religion or to any cultural belief which teaches and celebrates barbarian values."

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@iapetus_rocks wrote:

Goodnight Martini 🙂

I'm really not interested in the finer distinctions about what constitutes a race.

What really interests me is the point I mentioned above. post #63

"Ok, I am going to disagree strongly with him here on this point he made. . ."A civilised society must not celebrate barbarian values. We should all be capable of respecting others’ beliefs, even if we may disagree."

I refuse to offer any respect to any religion or to any cultural belief which teaches and celebrates barbarian values."

---

Sorry I was responding specifically to the bit you highlighted in red. I thought that's what you meant and that's why it was highlighted.

Too tired to think about the rest...

'night.

[iapetus_rocks]

Ok, seeya later. Sleep well. 🙂

[iapetus_rocks]

Oh, the bit which was highlighted in red, was done by the orig author , Dr Tim Soutphommasane whose article was quoted by Am*3 above.

[iapetus_rocks]

The point I was trying to make (and hopefully to encourage discussion of) is this . . .

Should we offer respect to any religion or to any culture which espouses ideas which not only suggest, but which teaches . . .

1. That women should be accorded one quarter of a man's cedibility when testifying in a court of law . . .

2. That women should receive one half of the inheritance that a man should expect to receive, just by virtue of their being female.

3. That women are not equal to men, because men have to spend out of their own pockets to look after and manintain the women (all the while discouraging or forbidding the women to go out in society and earn a living).

4. That the women should cover up in public because it is the women who are responsible for inducing the men to uncontrollable lustful violence against them if they don't cover their bodies and even their faces and become as one anonymous in the thronging crowd when they go out.

5. That women should not go out in public at all unless accompanied by a male relative. (even if that relative is a four year old son)

6. That women should submit to FGM because otherwise they might actually enjoy sex so much that they might stray from their husbands,

who, incidentally undergo no such mutilation and are even allowed multiple wives (as many as four, or as many as they can afford to maintain in equal fashion) while the women are only allowed one husband.

Is  a religion or a culture which teaches such stuff worthy of our respect or even of our tolerance in our society?

I say it is not.

What say you?

[nero_bolt]

---

@iapetus_rocks wrote:

The point I was trying to make (and hopefully to encourage discussion of) is this . . .

Should we offer respect to any religion or to any culture which espouses ideas which not only suggest, but which teaches . . .

1. That women should be accorded one quarter of a man's cedibility when testifying in a court of law . . .

2. That women should receive one half of the inheritance that a man should expect to receive, just by virtue of their being female.

3. That women are not equal to men, because men have to spend out of their own pockets to look after and manintain the women (all the while discouraging or forbidding the women to go out in society and earn a living).

4. That the women should cover up in public because it is the women who are responsible for inducing the men to uncontrollable lustful violence against them if they don't cover their bodies and even their faces and become as one anonymous in the thronging crowd when they go out.

5. That women should not go out in public at all unless accompanied by a male relative. (even if that relative is a four year old son)

6. That women should submit to FGM because otherwise they might actually enjoy sex so much that they might stray from their husbands,

who, incidentally undergo no such mutilation and are even allowed multiple wives (as many as four, or as many as they can afford to maintain in equal fashion) while the women are only allowed one husband.

Is  a religion or a culture which teaches such stuff worthy of our respect or even of our tolerance in our society?

I say it is not.

What say you?

---

They never say anything about this and I find that strange.

 The feminists on here and in Labor and Greens are silent on this,... Why is that, seems that they support this 

Very strange just how silent they are 

[polksaladallie]

But you are not silent, and you are a feminist?

[polksaladallie]

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

But you are not silent, and you are a feminist?

---

I recant.  That cannot be, after the comment on the Spurr thread.

[karliandjacko]

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

But you are not silent, and you are a feminist?

---

I recant.  That cannot be, after the comment on the Spurr thread.

---

I don't think some posters read before slagging off other posters. I seem to recall expressing my thought on FGM yesterday and it certainly was not in condonement of the practice.

As for the other  point. I don't see how defending muslim women can be read as defending the quran.  I'm not a fan of religion and I fail to see how demonising a group of women based on their religion is going to solve any problems.

[iapetus_rocks]

iapetus_rocks wrote:

The point I was trying to make (and hopefully to encourage discussion of) is this . . .

Should we offer respect to any religion or to any culture which espouses ideas which not only suggest, but which teaches . . .

1. That women should be accorded one quarter of a man's cedibility when testifying in a court of law . . .

2. That women should receive one half of the inheritance that a man should expect to receive, just by virtue of their being female.

3. That women are not equal to men, because men have to spend out of their own pockets to look after and manintain the women (all the while discouraging or forbidding the women to go out in society and earn a living).

4. That the women should cover up in public because it is the women who are responsible for inducing the men to uncontrollable lustful violence against them if they don't cover their bodies and even their faces and become as one anonymous in the thronging crowd when they go out.

5. That women should not go out in public at all unless accompanied by a male relative. (even if that relative is a four year old son)

6. That women should submit to FGM because otherwise they might actually enjoy sex so much that they might stray from their husbands,

who, incidentally undergo no such mutilation and are even allowed multiple wives (as many as four, or as many as they can afford to maintain in equal fashion) while the women are only allowed one husband.

Is  a religion or a culture which teaches such stuff worthy of our respect or even of our tolerance in our society?

I say it is not.

What say you?

.......................................

And no one has anything relevant to say about my post?

I carefully consider the things i say here, yet i notice that very few people carefully consider what I have written, but just go off on some sort  of tangent, and my posts get buried in the dross.

Ok, so I have qoted myself and posted it again.

Who here will read what I posted and actually reply to what I posted?