Afghan Lawmaker refuses to look at HBO's Isobel Yeung during interview

He never said it was ok to disrespect women. You are arguing two different things.

Obviously the cleric was being awful to that reporter. Not making eye contact was the least of the issues. An interviewee not respecting a reporter isn't the issues, the issue is that cleric suggesting she should be sexually abused.

My contention with trustme is how his words are being spun by ATW. You guys then come back with a strawman.

And sadly, no one is talking about the horrible thing this cleric said, and what to actually do about it. Instead it's focused on another let's condemn Islam and attack anyone who disagrees with us thread.

 

He claimed that a behavior that is objectively disrespectful was "a sign of respect". He then went on to the usual "poor Muslim men" bull****.

By saying that a behavior that is objectively disrespectful is a sign of respect, he is, in fact, saying that it is ok to disrespect women. Except that he does not view it as disrespect.

 

What sort of crazy interpretation is that?

He says not looking at a woman in that part of a world is actually a sign of respect. How is that saying it is ok to disrespect women.

It is possible that in that part of the world you are not suppose to look a single woman in the eyes - that's considered immodest on the man's part - lascivious. I disagree that is what was happening here - I think the cleric was being hostile in his answers and downright threatening, and yes clearly in this case his lack of eye contact was not a show of modesty for this woman but rather hostility.

But if trustme saying not making eye contact is a sign of respect in some parts of the world = trustme saying it's ok to disrespect women is quite a stretch.

Furthermore, the fact is he still never stated it which you claimed he did - it's still your interpretation and you still falsely assigning something to him that he never said. You do that a lot.

You lied about what he said so you could make a stronger point. That's what you did plain and simple. That's how you operate.

 

lets assume Dr. Phil had an opinion on this topic ( and did not shift his thought toward Sweet_lou) , he would say :there is no way to know, i had the impression that he was annoyed+ feared something due to some serious personal issues , Yung maybe not a part of it. respect /disrespect can/cant be related

btw, she 6 out of 10 (.5) more or less depend on other factors , but seems very sincner person

 

Yes.

Nope, it is not, because trustme was actually referring specifically to the Afghan guy in the video.

But just responding to you is pointless, as most people know, because you are just posting to get attention. It's kind of sad and pitiful.

 

The problem with Islam is that it was intended to be political. It was intended so that the Ummah spread by any means necessary. There are explicit guidelines in Islam on how the state should govern. It was intended in Islam for the state to pass religious laws. Even though I don't believe the character named Jesus existed, his lore and his teachings are the opposite of that. The New Testament was all about 'personal relationships with God'.

The Church reformed because of the printing press allowing commoners to read the New Testament in their native tongue in mass and discover for themselves that this giant entity called the Catholic Church was never part of what Jesus wanted. There is nothing like that for Islam that can make Islam magically reform. The Quran and the hadith WANT political Islam.

 

Says the child with 38k posts to the man with 16k!

 

I think you are the one trolling me here with this absurd comment.

Speaking of attention seeker - If ATW's comments applies to anyone other than himself, it would be you.

 

There's nothing to explain. The only people who purport the so called Satanic verses as being valid are Islamophobic websites. The vast majority of exegesis on the subject have determined that the Satanic verses were fabricated and do not hold up to the science of hadith that has been used for a thousand years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_Verses

he Satanic Verses incident is reported in the tafsir and the sira-maghazi literature dating from the first two centuries of Islam, and is reported in the respective tafsīr corpuses transmitted from almost every Qur'anic commentator of note in the first two centuries of the hijra. It is generally considered a fabricated incident as the chains of narration are weak.

Ibn Kathir points out in his commentary that the various isnads available to him by which the story was transmitted were almost all mursal, or without a companion of Muhammad in their chain.

Quoting something out of context is not a trap. It is a fallacious straw man argument. It would be no different than using Jesus and the sword verse out of context. Only people like Julius Streicher engage in those kind of tactics.

 

I'm not sure what physical attractiveness has to do with any of this...

But I will say that every instance a man treats a woman like s**t because of age-old creeds is a big L

 

The key to reforming the Muslim world is to end Sharia law wherever possible. Separating political power from clerics is key. That is how Christianity reformed, as well as Judaism.

Once Religious zealots are removed from law their power is contained and reform can happen. Not until then.

I am not sure what other approach you are advocating here.

 

I'm just stating that the way Christianity reformed cannot be the same way Islam reformed. I think I explained it pretty clearly. You are just regurgitating without even attempting to discuss anything I stated in my previous post.

 

So was the prophet owning sex slaves out of context? Was the prophet's order to assassinate and execute many different individuals because they were vocal about believing that he was a false prophet out of context? Was him fornicating with a 9 year old when he was 50+ years of age out of context?

 

the weird thing about Satanic verses , many people judged the book by it's title, a few actually read it ..by the still applause it

the author within his book wrote: all Westerner Son of ***., all White women are ****, insulted everyone approached the author mind , including the Jews, Hindus ..not only Muslims

 

I am not a religious studies scholar so I can't really go beyond what I know from a historical perspective. Once you get into the teachings of each religion I can only read what you say and accept it as a perspective.

I am not sure what you would like to discuss.

I can only bring things back to what you propose being done as a solution.

 

that's what i call block 0, it had been tried,almost across entire ME and it gave birth to all radicals

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ba'ath_Party

(Saddam ,Assad, Jamal,Ghadafi etc.)

the only solution is to empower the rational and moderate , by leaving them alone actually, it seems like an elephant in china store all-over when a foreign intervention took place