re Cat Stevens--do you people even know what a fatwa is?

[skjpm]

The people on this list who are so nasty about Cat Stevens are appallingly ignorant about Islam. You can only understand things that are presented to you from a Western Humanist perspective, and you hate anything that comes from another culture. You have no clue as to what a fatwa is, or what the Satanic verses are, or what blasphemy is, and yet you assume you have any idea what someone is thinking. You are full of the Western bigotry that is causing the Middle East to hate us so much.

So, who knows what a fatwa is? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

[skooooo]

1. What's so bad about Western humanism?

That's what the US was founded on.

[Bunny]

2. Why don't you tell us what a fatwa is? n/t

[skooooo]

3. ..and why we should be so accepting of it?

[Fovea]

4. perhaps my understanding is imperfect

but I understand it as a declaration of apostasy. That such and such and individual has placed themselves outside the protection of the community of the faithful.

It would be as though Pope John Paul excommunicated the artist who did 'piss Christ' and somewhat like the Anglo Saxon Warelack in the sense that no one is to offer them asylum or provide them with justice.

How wrong am I?

[DulceDecorum]

8. Meanwhile, in other news...

Instead of assisting Tutsi refugees who sought shelter at the parish, Father Seromba, a Hutu, is alleged to have planned and organised their extermination.
He is alleged to have ordered the Interahamwe and militia to launch attacks to kill the Tutsi.
"The Interahamwe and the militia attacked with traditional arms and poured fuel through the roof of the church, while gendarmes and communal police launched grenades and killed the refugees," the charges state.
After failing to kill all the refugees in the parish, Father Seromba is said to have ordered the demolition of the church building, saying, "The Hutu people are numerous and will build another one." More than 2,000 Tutsi refugees hiding in the church were killed when the roof collapsed as the militia used bulldozers to demolish it. It is alleged that the few survivors were attacked and killed by the Interahamwe.
It is also alleged that Father Seromba ordered the Interahamwe to clean up the "rubbish," following which the bodies of the victims were dumped into mass graves.
After this incident, almost the entire Tutsi population of about 6,000 in the commune were killed.
http://allafrica.com/stories/200409210869.html



BAD.
But not as bad as Cat Stevens.

[6th Borough]

173. You're on to something...people kill people.

BAD.
But not as bad as Cat Stevens.

Also completely unrelated to either Cat Stevens or the topic being discussed.

[jdj]

182. Cat Stevens is dead.

Yusef Islam killed him.

And Yusef Islam is a total jerkoff.

Move ON.

[Violet_Crumble]

191. Yusuf Islam (nee Cat Stevens), Blasphemy, Terror and Truth

For those folk who have trouble digesting something that deals in facts and longish screeds containing biggish words, you can pop over to the author's blog and ask him to slow it down for ya ;)

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

As part of my inexplicable affinity for the futile exercise of confusing issues with facts, in the unlikely event that anyone is interested in such party-pooping when myths are so much more profitable and fun, I will now have the kindness to terrorize you with the following quote from Yusuf Islam (nee Cat Stevens):

back in February 1989 I was delivering a talk about my journey to Islam at Kingston University in London, when somebody (probably a disguised journalist) mischievously posed a question about Islam’s
view on apostates and blasphemers. As a student who had studied the issue for the first time, I simply did my best by answering direct from legal texts which I had read. Instead of reporting my response in context, which I naively expected, suddenly the headline in next day’s paper read “Cat Says Kill Rushdie!” Well, needless to say, all hell then broke loose and my political education had really begun. Thank God the newspaper responsible, Today, has since folded and is now out of circulation; unfortunately the monstrous myth it created still survives.

http://catstevens.com/articles/00236/index.html


Yusuf did not then and does not now claim to be an authority on Islamic Jurisprudence, based as it is on mathematical formulae applied to the massive labyrinth of hadith, the reported sayings of the Prophet, who for those who are unaware, died some time before the availability of videotape.

It is no more required of Muslims that they become experts on hadith any more than it is required of Catholics that they become experts on Canon Law, which though tangled and complicated enough to make Benedictines flee, Jesuits tremble and Franciscans curse, when compared to Sharia on the intellectual headache scale, comes off looking like a Letterman top ten list.

As any serious religious student will tell you, the interpretation of ancient sacred texts, whether Torah, Koran, or Granth, requires more than simply choosing a religion. People who dedicate their lives to the historic, linguistic, and socio-anthropological studies necessary to claim more than a superficial layman's understanding of the preferred interpretation of one's priest, rabbi, imam, etc. still sit up till dawn engaged in lively debate over the possible interpretations of one word, sometimes even part of a word, consuming such substances as permitted by their own interpretations, and boring anyone within hearing distance to tears. If you should see such a group, RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY!

A few weeks ago, Bishop Desmond Tutu shocked a CNN infobabe by stating that A) God is not a Christian, and B) He is not finished with us, we are a work in progress.

Interpretation of scripture is also a work in progress, and it is difficult to find two scholars who will agree on a whole hell of a lot regarding it, whichever scripture you prefer to watch them argue about.

Thus, while Ayatollah Khomeini may have been acting according to his own interpretation of a particular hadith (note that hadith are NOT part of the Koran, if you have somehow missed that), his was not and is not the only game in town:

Our thesis that Islam imposes no secular penalty for simple apostasy having been conclusively established on the basis of the Holy Quran and the practice of the Holy Prophet, it is not necessary to have recourse to any juristic opinion on the subject. We are aware that a misunderstanding on this question arose in the midst of a certain section of the jurists on this subject. Yet it is of interest that the Hanafi jurists at the very start were
firmly of the view that simple apostacy was not subject to any secular penalty.

http://www.alislam.org/books/apostacy/17.html



Surah An-Nisa', 4:137, states that "those who believe, then disbelieve, then believe again, then disbelieve, and then
increase in their disbelief - Allah will never forgive them nor guide them to the path." If indeed it was Allah's intention to impose the death penalty for apostasy, then such occasion of repeated apostasy could have provoked such a punishment. But neither the first instance of apostasy, nor repeated apostasy
brought about capital punishment. Those who advocate the death penalty for apostasy based their reasoning on a hadith which proclaims, "kill whoever changes his religion". But this hadith is open to varying interpretations on several grounds. First, this hadith is considered a weak hadith with just a single isnad (this means there is only one chain of transmission or narration) and thus according to the rules of Islamic jurisprudence, it is not enough to validate the death penalty. Second, this hadith is also considered a
general ('amm) hadith in that it is in need of specification (takhsis); for it would otherwise convey a meaning that is not within its purpose. The obvious reading of the hadith would, for example, make liable the death punishment on a Hindu or Christian who converts to Islam. This is obviously not the intention of
the hadith. According to the rules of Islamic jurisprudence, when a text is interpreted once, it becomes open to further interpretation and specification. Therefore, many scholars interpret this hadith to apply only to cases of high treason (hirabah), which means declaring war against Islam, the Prophet, or God or the legitimate leadership of the ummah.

http://www.muslimtents.com/sistersinislam/letterstoeditors/22071999.htm

Those interested can do as much further study on this subject as they wish, for those who consider facts a most insidious and heinous kind of blasphemy and who are offended by this particular blogrant, take comfort in the fact that yours is the majority view, with all that company, you do not need me to apologize for having muddied your waters.

And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.
Leviticus 24:11-16

http://ductapefatwa.blogspot.com/2004/09/yusuf-islam-nee-cat-stevens-blasphemy.html

[6th Borough]

192. Easy now...I was responding to the previous poster. EOM

[Blue_Tires]

5. you gonna explain it to us or what?? n/t

[skjpm]

10. You may like Western Humanism

And you may be proud to be in a Western Humanist country. But there are those who don't think this is the best of all possible countries. There are countries who have different bases for government, and we have to deal with that.

No one, no Muslim, can speak for the whole of Islam. There are scholars who are noted for their understanding of the Koran. If an issue comes up, then this scholar, speaking for himself alone, gives what he thinks is the application of the Koran on this subject. Another scholar could give a completely different opinion. For instance, different scholars, all venerable, have given different opinions on whether or not women should wear hibab.

You then, as an individual, have to sort through the scholars opinions, and come to your own decision. No one can tell you what to do or believe.

A scholar's opinion is called a fatwa. It is not binding, it only has the authority the individual believer gives it. All Cat (Yusuf) was saying that some scholar had issued a fatwa which said that Rushdie was an apostate, and that the Koran's punishment for apostasy was death. Other scholars presented different fatwas on the Rushdie affair and the meaning of the Koran in this case. He never said he agreed with any particular fatwa, he was just saying what had happened and why--and it's true that the Koran says death to apostates. But not every scholar is going to apply that in every case.

[skooooo]

15. We shouldn't have to deal with...

...some religious figure declaring a death sentence against a citizen of a Western country (I believe Rushdie was a citizen of England) and sending a bunch of nuts to murder him so that he has to go into hiding.

If they want to follow Islamic law, then they keep those fatwas within the boundries of those nations.

[Djinn]

117. it'd be nice if the US/Israel adn other nations followed that code too

Instead of assasinating people in nations outside THEIR borders.

[skooooo]

126. Probably, but that's not the topic, is it?

[Djinn]

136. no but there's not a lot you can

do about what the Ayatollah Khomeini did (particularly given he's been dead for some time) but to condemn another nation for doing something (although they didn't actually do it they advocated it - Rushdie's still alive) when the one you live and pay taxes in not only advocates but CARRIES out may be seen as somewhat hypocritical.

[skooooo]

139. who condemned another nation?

Words in my mouth again. Since when is Cat Stevens another nation? Unless I advocate illegal activities by my government, you can't call me "hypocritical". Nice try, but I never did that.

[Djinn]

144. OK so try changing the focus of your outrage

to view it the way many people in the world do now

"We shouldn't have to deal with... ...some religious figure (change to political figure) declaring a death sentence against a citizen of a Western (middle eastern) country (I believe Rushdie was a citizen of England) and sending a bunch of nuts (special forces/"smart" bombs") to murder him so that he has to go into hiding. ( unlike the nutbags "sent" by Khomeini US "nuts" don't give the person a chance to go into hiding and actually manage to kill said person

If they want to follow Islamic law, ( an illegal "defence" doctrine) then they keep those fatwas ( bombing runs) within the boundries of those ( their own ) nations."

[geek tragedy]

161. Do the US and Israel bomb people for writing books that harm no one?

If not, your analogy is worthless.

[Djinn]

167. no but they do

bomb nations and civilians that pose NO threat to them whatsoever (Iraq/Vietnam) and regularly kill civilians who pose no threat to them (Sabra, Chatilla, recetn Gaza protests)

if I had only mentioned US in this example would you have given a shit??

[geek tragedy]

168. Yes.

The point is that Stevens wanted someone dead for writing a freaking novel. That is simply beyond the pale. I don't want people like that in my neighborhood.

[Djinn]

171. and Sharon wanted people dead

for being refugees and Bush wanted people dead for having the temerity to live under a brutal dictator that the US previously supported, Nixon, Kennedy, JOhnson wanted millions of Vietnamese dead becasue they were cheeky enought to want their independence after years of colonisation by China and France.

Who you "want" in your neighbourhood is kind of a scary statement don't you think - surely unless someone has done something illegal that's not really you're judgement to make - do you honestly think Yusuf Islam (do you insist on calling Mohammed Ali Cassius Clay as well) is or at any time was a danger to US citizens?

Do you think it'd be fair for Australia to refuse entry to West Bank settlers (or Bush voting Americans) because we "don't want people like that in our neighbourhood" even if they were absolutely no threat to us or do you think that might be refererd to as anti-semitic/anti-american

[geek tragedy]

172. If they endorse some barbaric Jewish religious ruling

calling for the death of an apostate, the folks in Australia would be more than justified with not wanting such a creep around.

Not letting him into the country wasn't necessarily the right thing, but I have zero fucking sympathy for him. Fundie fascists like he and Ashcroft deserve each other.

And it is customary in the US to refer to people who convert to the lunatic fringe of Islam by their given names. Very few people know the Muslim names for John Walker Lindh, Jose Padilla, and Richard Reid.

What the hell is the point of comparing him to Sharon anyway? I think Sharon is a war criminal who belongs in prison.

And your comments about Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, and yes even Bush demonstrate a complete and profound misapprehension of intent and volition. Kennedy wanted to commit mass genocide? Sorry, but you're just talking out of your ass about American history.

Again.

[Djinn]

175. What would you call authorising deforesting large parts

of an agragrian country. what would you call napalming half the country??? or have we got back to the insane argument that as long as you call them "collateral" it's OK because you didn't mean it??? Tell me when you get your masters in US history and we'll argue about it.

It's customary where I come from to refer to people by what they wish to be called.

Plenty of people call for the deaths of peadophiles - yet that wouldn't bar them from coming here even though we don't agree with the death penalty - and before you start I'm not comparing writing a book with paedophilia I'm saying that Yusuf Islam should not have been banned from visiting the US because of his support for the fatwa (if that's what he did I can't say I followed the rantings of Khomeini that much or those who agreed)

[geek tragedy]

176. Effect and intent are two different things.

I'm not going to dispute that the US committed gross human rights abuses.

But, Kennedy did not sit around thinking about the best way to kill millions of Vietnamese. He didn't even kill millions of Vietnamese or commit the really horrific abuses. It was actually Lyndon Johnson who escalated the Vietnam war to its disastrous levels.

Again, if you can't appreciate the difference between effect and intent, this is really futile.

The news media report them by their given names--why I don't know. I know Islamaphobes here don't like the practice, and want them to be called by their Muslim names, so I'm not so sure it's a bad policy.

And I would be very surprised if Australia let convicted foreign pedophiles into the country. They shouldn't let them into the country.

[Djinn]

178. sigh

"It was actually Lyndon Johnson who escalated the Vietnam war to its disastrous levels."

and I think you'll find I mentioned Kennedy, Nixon AND Johnson - I'm more than well versed on the subject, thanks.

"Again, if you can't appreciate the difference between effect and intent, this is really futile."

what's futile is trying to explain the dishonesty in claiming once you've bombed a place back to the stone age and reduced a third of the populations entire food supply and fucked their gene pool for the next 50 years to say "oops but we didn't mean it" If I get completely blind drunk and drive my car at 100mph down your residential street and kill your loved one the "i didn't mean it" excuse would cut little ice with you or the courts.

"I would be very surprised if Australia let convicted foreign pedophiles into the country. They shouldn't let them into the country."

and if Islam had issued the fatwa maybe I'd agree with his immigration ban - he didn't. I mentioned if someone advocated the death of peadophiles not paedophiles themselves. It's very hard to have a coherent argument with someone who either willfully misrepresent your posts or sinply does not understand them.

[geek tragedy]

179. What is the point of comparing Salman Rushdie to pedophiles?

It's a completely bizarre and illogical comparison. I think that pedophiles should be either imprisoned or confined to a psychiatric ward. That is reasonable. It would be unreasonable to recommend the same for Rushdie.

Bottom line is that Mr. Islam is a theocratic fascist who endorsed a death sentence for Mr. Rushdie that was issued by a foreign cleric. He himself did more harm to Muslims in Britain than any member of Blair's cabinet could ever do.

You're the one who said that Kennedy had the same intent/state of mind/desire to kill as Islam. I pointed out that pursuing disastrously wrong policies is not the same as directly desiring the evil results of those policies.

Again, I don't agree with his immigration ban. But, he does not deserve any sympathy, and he is not the moderate, decent fellow everyone is making him out to be. He's an Islamic Ashcroft--only worse.

[Djinn]

180. eho's making him out to be

a moderate decent fellow? the issue people have is with the ban you've said you also don't agree with the ban so that kinda ends the argumetn right?

and I never compared Rushdie with a peadophile...again you either wilfully misrepresent or simply do not underastand.

I compared someone who supported someone elses advocacy of the death of peadophiles (or the death of anyone else - say ANY death penalty or euthanasia supporter if that makes it easier for you) should not be banned from the country someone who ACTUALLY kills those people yes, and maybe even the person who made the "death" call - although for me that's still dubious...is it illegal in the US to say "I think so and so should be killed"? if so I'm happy to say well then maybe this ban was right?

[LiberalVoice]

189. No, they bomb them for preaching from books that don't harm anyone.

Don't pretend that america or israel has any moral high ground on ANY OTHER COUNTRY on earth.

[Dorian Gray]

104. Was it a scholar?

Just a scholar who issued a fatwa? Or the Ayatollah?

[Djinn]

118. the ayatollah

(I presume you're speaking of Ayatollah Khomeini) is not never was and never claimed to be the authority on all of Islam for all Muslims.

[Susang]

114. What Cat Stevens actually said:

From the New York Times, May 23, 1989 edition (registration required to read entire article):

LONDON, May 22 -- The musician known as Cat Stevens said in a British television program to be broadcast next week that rather than go to a demonstration to burn an effigy of the author Salman Rushdie, ''I would have hoped that it'd be the real thing.''

The singer, who adopted the name Yusuf Islam when he converted to Islam, made the remark during a panel discussion of British reactions to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's call for Mr. Rushdie to be killed for allegedly blaspheming Islam in his best-selling novel ''The Satanic Verses.'' He also said that if Mr. Rushdie turned up at his doorstep looking for help, ''I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like.''

''I'd try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is,'' said Mr. Islam, who watched a preview of the program today and said in an interview that he stood by his comments.

http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/04/18/specials/rushdie-cat.html

[jdj]

181. Call me a hateful western bigot then.

Religious fanatics are dickless wackos. I don't care how they dress, or who they pray to.

Thank you Susang, for finding this, it's what I've been trying to find for days. All I could find were stories where Yusef said he was "misunderstood".

[jdj]

183. several people have posted links that contradict your assertion.

surprise, surprise, surprise.

[liberalmuse]

6. WTF?

An accusatory, condescending, 'You people' post isn't going to win you any friends here. I happen to love Cat Stevens music, and have nothing against his new incarnation, Yusef Islam--he's the same man, basically. I feel he is a peaceful Muslim who shouldn't have been targetted as a 'terrorist' by our spastic Attorney General.

Basically, this a crusade against all Muslims and/or Arabs instigated by our current government and this should not be tolerated by the American people. I'm furious over Yusef Islam being deported from the U.S. So please don't lump everyone here in the same little box.

[skooooo]

9. Yeah but the topic is the fatwa against Rushdie and Yusaf's

defense of it, not "Islam" in general.

[DulceDecorum]

22. The Satanic Verses controversy

The publication of The Satanic Verses in 1989 caused controversy in the Fundamentalist Muslim world, due to its irreverent depiction of the prophet Muhammad. On February 14, 1989, a fatwa promising his execution was placed on him by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of Iran, calling his book "blasphemous against Islam". Furthermore, Khomeini condemned Rushdie for the crime of "apostasy" – i.e. attempting to abandon the Islamic faith – which according to the Hadith is punishable by death. This was due to Rushdie's communication through the novel that he no longer believes in Islam. Khomeini called on all "zealous Muslims" to execute the writer, as well as those of the publishers of the book who knew about the concepts of the book. On February 24 Khomeini then placed a three-million-US dollar bounty for the death of Rushdie. Rushdie lived for a time under British-financed security.
During this period, violent protests in India, Pakistan, and Egypt caused several deaths. Muslim communities throughout the world held public rallies in which copies of the book were burned. In 1990 Rushdie published an essay In Good Faith to appease his critics and issued an apology in which he seems to have reaffirmed his respect for Islam. However, Iranian clerics did not retract the fatwa.
Rushdie's notorious friendships with occult groups and group members such as ANTON LAVEY and book shows at popular occult gatherings has linked him to occult activity. In various interviews Rushdie has professed to practicing occcult activites including alchemy.

(ANTON SZANDOR LAVEY (11 April 1930 - 29 October 1997), born Howard Stanton Levey, was the founder and High Priest of the Church of Satan, author of The Satanic Bible, and creator of the religion known as LaVeyan Satanism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_LaVey
The US Postal Service used to deliver letters addressed to Satan to the current home of Anton LaVey.)

<snip>
Even popular musician Yusuf Islam (aka Cat Stevens) indirectly yet infamously stated his agreement with the fatwa. But later in 1989, Yusuf Islam said in a British television documentary that he wasn't against the death sentence in principle: Rather than go to a demonstration where Rushdie would be burned in effigy, "I would have hoped that it'd be the real thing" he said. If Rushdie showed up at his door, he said he "might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like... I'd try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is." The New York Times reported that he stood by his statements in a subsequent interview.
<snip>
After the death of Khomeini,
the Iranian Government publicly committed itself in 1998
NOT to carry out the death sentence against Rushdie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Rushdie

Rushdie praises porn
08/08/2004 20:36 - (SA)
London - Writer Salman Rushdie, in an essay to be published in the autumn, has praised pornography and implied that it is common in Muslim societies as a result of the segregation of the sexes in Muslim culture, it was reported in The Sunday Times.
The 57-year-old author, in remarks certain to stir further controversy in the Islamic world, backs his views with statistics about the volume of porn traffic on the internet in Pakistan.
"Pornography exists everywhere - but when it comes into societies in which it's difficult for young men and women to get together and do what young men and women often like doing, it satisfies a more general need," an extract from the essay The East is Blue reads.
He also argues that a free and civilised society should be judged by its willingness to accept pornography.
His essay, to be published with images of American porn stars in a book called XXX:30 Porn Star, also states that pornography "becomes a kind of standard-bearer for freedom, even civilisation," the newspaper quoted the author as saying.
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1569912,00.html

If you are against porn,
then you are against Salman Rushdie
and you are uncivilized.

[6th Borough]

174. The occult and porn...nothing to lose one's head over /NT

[Sporadicus]

7. It's Like an Islamic Legal Opinion

that only an authorized cleric can issue. Theology and law are intimately entwined in Islam, and blasphemy against Mohammed the Prophet is strictly forbidden. I don't know if the cleric who issued the fatwa against Salman Rushdie was legally qualified to do so, but I recall some sort of flap at the time this was news.

[skjpm]

13. Anyone can issue a fatwa--all Muslims are equal

But unless you are an imam and have earned the respect of you community, no one will listen to you.

It is OK for Muslims to want to base their government on the political theories of the Koran rather than Western Humanism. Islam, in the eyes of most scholars, supports freedom and human rights. They also have the right to see blasphemy as a serious issue. They don't have to see our religious tolerance as a good thing if they don't want to, and we don't have to emigrate to their country.

[skooooo]

17. Some muslims are more equal than others, seems to me.

[skjpm]

19. As are some Americans

but we say we are equal anyway

[skooooo]

20. I didn't see anyone say that here.

[Djinn]

119. so you think all American's

opinions are listened to equally? or that all christian ministers/preachers/priests have equal influence???

[skooooo]

127. Did I say that?

No. Please don't put words in my mouth.

[Djinn]

137. you said

rather snarkily - atleast that's how it came across - "some muslims are more equal than others" in reply to people trying to explain that the "weight" given to a fatwa declared by one person is only in relation to his reach and influence, NOT their "equality" of lack of before Allah - the point other posters have made in reply to that (including myself) is that yes in practice not all people (withing Islam or the US) are "equal" and not all have the same influence - that does not mean that the Koran/US constitution do not specify that equality.

[skooooo]

138. uh huh...

right...what difference does it really make? Someone with reach and influence puts the hit out on someone. What does that have to do with everyone being equal in God's eyes? It's a digression from the issue, and that's all.

[Djinn]

146. true but you brought up

the "equality" thing. For me (btw I'm a born atheist) it's about getting people to recognise that Islam suffers from EXACTLY the same inconsistencies as EVERY other religion.

People generally (I'm not saying you or even many people on DU) totally misunderstand the meaning of a fatwa, the meaning of Jihad and the role of and authority of various Imams/Sheikhs etc including many Muslims - just like many Christians havn't read much of the Bible and certainly do not understand the historical/moral and cultural context it was written in, many Muslims know little about teh Koran aside from what a certain "preacher" has told them.

In Islam there is no hierarchy, each person IS equal in their relationship with God - Khomeini issued a fatwa (I didn't agree with it and do not beleive in ANY religious person inlficting ANY of their beliefs on me or other people) but there are over a billion muslims worldwide Khomein was just one AND he's dead.

[jdj]

184. When the fuck will this p.c. all over Islam shit be over with????

I am SOOO freaking sick of it, :puke:

These folks beat women who reveal their ankles in town, you can't go six months without a slew of battery acid attacks breaking out in some "islamic" country. Read about these women standing on corners begging for any handout with their children, while their eyeballs hang out of their melted faces.

NO THANK YOU,

No thank you xtians, orthodoxies, muslims, or any testosterone saturated control freakish bullshit philosophy. Period


I
DON'T
CARE.

And the more you are in my face trying to justify some of the bullshit they do to women as "cultural" (despite the fact that the very women they are doing it to are begging for better treatment) the more I HATE IT.

[fujiyama]

66. So you're basically saying

that the UN charter of human rights has no bering in the Muslim world?

Doesn't the UN charter state that all religions must be respected and tolerated?

And frankly, I have a right to criticize such religious figures and theocrats in this country and others. I also don't have to agree that barbaric practices like blashpemy laws have any place in the civilized world. I also don't believe that Islam (or Christianity), any more than any other religion supports freedom or human rights. I happen to believe that like Christianity many aspects of it DO not support freedom or human rights.

So quit your condescending attitude.

[Kierkegaard]

11. On second thought

not worth a response...

[skjpm]

14. thanks for help bridge the gap between us and the Mideast

Your lack of interest in trying to understand a foriegn culture is the heart of Bush policy. You and W. should invade a country together.

[skooooo]

21. You're just looking for a fight..don't be surprised if people aren't

interested.

Bye.

[Kierkegaard]

23. You should take your accusatory attitude somewhere else.

The heart of Bush policy is hegemony. He does NOT speak for me, and neither do you.

I have no interest in responding to questions baiting a finger pointing session. You have no knowledge of where my interests lie nor of what my cultural experience consists. Speak of which you know and don't presume to tell me what I lack.

[Brian_Expat]

12. I don't know and I don't care

Keep your superstitions to yourself and stop trying to impose them on my life.

[skjpm]

18. Your concern for truth matches the Swift Boat Veterans

You would rather wilfully misunderstand and spread a lie than understand what actually happened. I look forward to your collaboration with John O'Neill.

[Brian_Expat]

25. I don't know and I don't care

All I know is that fundies -- Christian and Muslim -- make my life miserable. I wish they'd all just go and kill each other and leave me alone. Along with their agendas and their "clarifications" and their wars and their calls for death.

Fuck them all.

[smirkymonkey]

113. Here, here!

Well put.

[Wat_Tyler]

16. A fatwa is a talking point usually issued by a cleric.

However, the fatwa in question was a call to kill Rushdie.
Regardless of how you feel about it, it is reasonable to oppose an incitement to kill a man. This neither makes us bigots or Islamophobes and I for one resent the implication that to question Yusuf Islam, the Ayatollah Khomeini's fatwa and the opposition to Rushdie's book makes us appallingly ignorant haters.

[Wat_Tyler]

24. One point I'd like cleared up then -

If the fatwa was so innocuous, why was Rushdie forced into hiding for more than a decade?

[skjpm]

27. Because the Imam who gave the fatwa was the Ayotollah

He was a big name, and lots of people followed him. But there were many other Muslim scholars who did not see the issue the same way.

[skooooo]

31. So what exactly is your point????

[skjpm]

35. That other scholars did not pronounce a death sentence on Rushdie

That a fatwa is the opinion of one scholar. This particular fatwa got a lot of press because the scholar was very famous. Not every Muslim followed the fatwa, but prominent Muslims had to explain it because it was out there being talked about. I've had to explain a lot of what Pat Robertson says, not because I agree, but because people are talking about it.

[Wat_Tyler]

41. Sadly, several people died for Khomeini's opinion.

And, IIRC, Rushdie's publisher was seriously wounded in a shooting.

[skooooo]

54. And Cat Stevens supported the fatwa, so that's why people don't like him..

deal with it

[Djinn]

121. just to be devil's advocate here

Presumably most people here supported Clinton - Clinton's decision to bomb the Al-Shifa plant meant that tens of thousands of people died as a result because crucial medicine was not available.

so should people "not like" those who supported Clinton?

[peach720]

158. Many, many Muslims supported it then

It was raw and being whipped up by some of the Clerics.
My 18 year old friends supported it too, I am not a Muslim, of course disagreed with them but I didn't like them less for it.

[Djinn]

165. and many many Christians

support making homosexuality a crime, many Hindu's support (or at the very least do not oppose) bride burning, many Jews support ethnic cleansing (or "transfer") because their God gave "Greater Israel" to them. It doesn't actually make those beliefs an intrinsic part of those religions.

[annabanana]

94. So if people set out to murder someone

because someone influential says it should be done, that is ok? (Even if some other influential people don't agree)

I'm thinking of the murder of abortion doctors being considered justifiable homicide by some other fundies.

[HootieMcBoob]

68. Wasn't he living with Bono?

I remember hearing that Rushdie was living in a little house on Bono's property in Ireland.

[Wat_Tyler]

73. He moved 30 times in 10 years, I believe.

[skjpm]

26. Did Kerry compare Viet Vets to Ghengis Khan or didn't he?

No sense getting angry about that, eh? I mean, it's not like people say things when they're young and get misinterpreted later. Why not give Yusuf the same slack we give Kerry?

[Wat_Tyler]

32. Sorry, you've lost me there.

I don't think I heard anything about Kerry, the Vets and Genghis Khan.

[skjpm]

33. Then you missed the latest SBVT ad

Did he say that? Did he mean it? Would he say it differently now? Might not Yusuf be more careful now?

[Brian_Expat]

36. WTF does SBV ads have to do with religious nuts? n/t

[punpirate]

28. Actually, I do know about this fatwa....

"I inform the proud Muslim people of the world that the author of the Satanic Verses book which is against Islam, the Prophet and the Koran, and all involved in its publication who were aware of its content, are sentenced to death."

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini
FATWA issued February, 1989

I don't see that as any different than the crazed dominionists in this country saying that adulterous women or homosexuals should be stoned to death.

It may be an affront to Allah in Khomeini's view as a blasphemy, but it's extremism and contrary to free expression, which is something we value in this society (most Muslim societies value it, too).

Religions can only order people killed if they are also the state--that's why in Islamic societies, a properly-issued fatwa is a legal opinion or a legal order.

In this country, the First Amendment protects us from that eventuality, even though there are many people trying to undo that separation at present. That First Amendment was put there to prevent precisely the sort of abuses for which many religions are justifiably infamous.

When people get this serious about defending their religion, they've lost touch with reality. It's fundamentally the same as burning witches at the stake, imposing torture on another to extract a confession of faith (an inquisition), things I am quite happy to say our Constitution prevents. That may not be in accordance with Khomeini's Islam, but it is an enlightened view, even if you choose to define it as "Western humanism."

As for Yusuf Islam, I believe the flap started because he was asked what that fatwa meant, and he described it from a Muslim's point of view. I don't believe he was inciting people to actually carry it out. There's a difference, legally.

When we start tolerating the killing of people for things like blasphemy, we descend toward our lesser nature, rather than rise to our best--it doesn't matter in what God we believe.

Cheers.

[skooooo]

29. did you read this?

Even popular musician Yusuf Islam (aka Cat Stevens) indirectly yet infamously stated his agreement with the fatwa. But later in 1989, Yusuf Islam said in a British television documentary that he wasn't against the death sentence in principle: Rather than go to a demonstration where Rushdie would be burned in effigy, "I would have hoped that it'd be the real thing" he said. If Rushdie showed up at his door, he said he "might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like... I'd try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is." The New York Times reported that he stood by his statements in a subsequent interview.

[punpirate]

51. No, I hadn't seen that...

... I'd only read a brief description of it, more or less to the effect of what I said in the previous post.

All I can say is that I disagree with it and hope that such doesn't become institutionalized in society. We have enough trouble right now with killing people who disagree with us.

Cheers.

[skjpm]

30. We were able to kill Native Americans under our Constitution

They were seen as blasphemous and dangerous to our way of life, and we killed them, and thought it legal. We can hardly blame another country for doing similar things. Jackson issued a fatwa, and we followed it.

[ulysses]

37. huh?

We can hardly blame another country for doing similar things.

Sure we can. Our treatment of the Native Americans in no way relieves us of the responsibility to condemn that which is wrong, in ourselves as well as others.

As a side note, the Native Americans weren't seen as "blasphemous and dangerous to our way of life", we just wanted their land. Pretty strained comparison.

[skjpm]

40. No, I think many thought they were blasphemous

They didn't accept Christ and they deserved death.

[ulysses]

45. some may have thought that,

in fact I don't doubt that some did, but that wasn't why Jackson did what he did. Had nothing to do with religion.

[punpirate]

42. I don't approve of that, either.

But, let's cut through the sophistry. If you believe that this fatwa was appropriately issued, and it's the duty of every good Muslim to carry it out if possible, do you also then believe that the religious right wing of this country should be able to overturn the First Amendment and apply their religious law to any Christian in any country? Because that's what's implicit in your answer.

And, regardless of the excuses given for the virtual elimination of indigenous peoples in this country, the reasons were primarily economic and ethnocentric--they were wrong then and wrong now. Our being wrong then doesn't excuse some other religion for being wrong now.

Cheers.

[skjpm]

49. I think we need to recognize that fatwas are non-binding

And that explaining any particular fatwa is not an endorsement of that fatwa. And that people might say things in the first flush of a conversion (such as comparing troops to Ghengis Khan) which later reflection might modify. And I think we should stop attacking a moderate Muslim like Yusuf Islam who has done more to help Westerners understand Islam than anyone else I can think of. He is a necessary ally.

[Wat_Tyler]

56. Still, people should be held accountable for what they've said and done.

After all, what's good for Salman Rushdie or John Kerry is good for Yusuf Islam.

[tinanator]

115. Bush aint held accountable

so no one should be.

[annabanana]

95. they may be "non-binding" but.......

don't they imply that if someone DOES kill someone at the direction of a fatwa that it's ok? (at least with the person who issued it?)

It may be non-binding, but it sure as hell is a real strong "suggestion"

[Wat_Tyler]

53. Oh come on now. That's moral relativism,

Yes, we were bad people. I would've criticised that also. We can, and should counter dangerous and irresponsible acts.

[fujiyama]

74. That's the stupid fuckin thing

I've heard.

So, because this nation commited genocide centuries ago it's OK that other countries do it?

I don't even know what to call this sort of reasoning. It goes well beyond moral relativism.

[skjpm]

85. Or, by understanding our own history, we might understand others

By understanding that we, too, as a nation have done horrible things, we might better understand where other nations are and be better able to help them to a better, more tolerant stage of their history.

[jdj]

186. "to help them to a better, more tolerant stage of their history"

there's that good old eurocentric paternalism that they love so much.

Truth is, the U.S is responsible for so much fundamentalism by destablizing economies of developing nations.

[mzmolly]

47. BRAVO!

:toast:

[Columbia]

34. I don't care what a fatwa is

And I don't care what an Ayatollah says either. No person should be subject to any religious authority. Same goes for the Pope and his anti-choice creeds.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Columbia]

44. Thanks for ignoring my post

No person should be subject to any religious authority.

[skjpm]

55. Many people choose to be Muslim

There is nothing wrong with someone voluntarily converting to a religion and willingly accepting it's regulations. As long as it doesn't hurt you, it's not your problem.

[Brian_Expat]

58. It does hurt me when they try and force their superstitions on me. n/t

[skjpm]

64. Have you ever tried saying "No, I'm not interested?"

The Koran teaches explicitly that "There is no compulsion in religion." No Muslim would talk to you if you didn't want to hear, and if they did, they would be sinning. So the next time some religious zealot tries to convert you, just say no. But try to respect the believers who just want to be left alone to believe.

[Brian_Expat]

69. Try telling young gay Muslims in Britain to say "no thanks, not interested

They get "honour killed" by their families, along with women who leave their faith.

The agenda of radical Muslim fundies is exactly the same as radical Christian fundies -- a radical religious society where everyone is forced to live under Sharia.

You're damn right I'm going to fight them. It's not about being "converted." It's about protecting myself and others from becoming YET ANOTHER victim of their crazed, wild-eyed hatred.

Wild-eyed hatred encouraged and endorsed by people like you who condemn those of us who seek to protect others from religious violence as "Islamophobic bigots."

[muriel_volestrangler]

110. And yet Muslim apostates get condemned to death

that seems like extreme compulsion to me. Does this mean that fatwas condemning people to death for their religious views are in fact against the Koran?

[Djinn]

123. yes according to some muslims they are

that's the shitty thing about ALL religions there are as many interpretations of them as there are practitioners.

People need to view Islam with the same eyes they viwe Christianity - there are nutbags, there are fascists, there are people who follow but mind their own business about it and there are other who's only real connection to a particular religion is a cultural one.

[Columbia]

61. Control via religious authority hurts everyone

A person accepting regulatins within a faith is quite different from following orders from a religious official to kill others who are not of the same faith.

[Brian_Expat]

71. Hey, that's not fair

How dare you explain that it's not just about "saying no" for lots of people?!?

[skjpm]

81. Rushdie was an apostate--Islam doesn't kill people of other faiths

See? It sounds like I'm supporting the fatwa when all I'm doing is trying to explain it. The Koran teaches that leaving the faith is a crime worthy of death. Different scholars have approached this issue different ways. The Koran preaches tolerance of non-Muslims.

I am a Christian who opposes the death penalty for everyone.

[ulysses]

83. that's nice.

Do you support the fatwa against Rushdie, him being an apostate and all?

[Brian_Expat]

86. That's why the Iranians offered a $$$$$ award for Rushdie's death n/t

[skjpm]

87. I'm a Christian--we don't have fatwas

But we do try to understand other people so that we can help them better. Oh, and I'm against war and the death penalty. But I think I'm in a better position to present my case if I show that I understand the other person's position.

[ulysses]

88. you're dodging the question again.

I asked if you supported the fatwa against Rushdie.

[skjpm]

93. I don't support the fatwa against Rushdie.

But I am willing to pay attention to how important apostasy and blasphemy is to Muslims and work not to offend them. And I'm not going to wilfully misrepresent someone who tries to explain his religious faith to me.

[ulysses]

96. thank you.

But I am willing to pay attention to how important apostasy and blasphemy is to Muslims and work not to offend them.

Ok, great. That's noble.

Problem is that we have a civil right, that of freedom of speech, conflicting with a religious law. Civil authority must take precendence, no matter who gets offended, otherwise we return in haste to the Dark Ages.

Respect for religious law/tradition is nice, but respect for civil protections (say what you like without fear of being killed for it) is necessary.

[Wat_Tyler]

100. Why should a religion like Islam care what one writer says?

Why be so insecure? Rushdie is no threat to 1200 years of culture.

[Columbia]

92. I don't care if he loved eating pork

Single-minded acquiescence to religious authority is one of the leading factors of why the world is as fucked up as it is. And I do not tolerate such orders from any kind of religious authority from Catholic to Muslim to everyone in between.

[annabanana]

97. "leaving the faith is a crime worthy of death"

I thought that "everyone was born Muslim"..............so where does that leave us?

[muriel_volestrangler]

111. But this fatwa also comdemned to death the publishers

see post #28: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2415480&mesg_id=2415581&page=

So it looks like some Islamic clerics are happy to kill people of other faiths for religious matters.

[Wat_Tyler]

160. The fatwa was renewed in 2003.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2765303.stm

Iran's hardline Revolutionary Guards have renewed the death sentence on British author Salman Rushdie issued 14 years ago by the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Khatami said in 2001 the death sentence should be seen as closed
The hardline military organisation, which answers directly to Iran's current Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said that the original fatwa, issued in 1989 following the publication of Mr Rushdie's novel "The Satanic Verses", was still valid.

"The historical decree on Salman Rushdie is irrevocable and nothing can change it," said a statement carried by Iran's official IRNA news agency.

[jdj]

187. I believe the Japanese 'Verses' translator was assassinated.

I'll try to find a link.

[jdj]

188. yes, Japanese translator assassinated, link below

JULY 11
ASSASSINATION IN TOKYO. Professor Hitoshi Igarashi, the Japanese translator of The Satanic Verses is stabbed to death in Tokyo. A spokesperson for a Pakistani association in Japan declares: "This murder is entirely linked to Rushdie's book. Today we celebrate this event."

http://www.autodafe.org/ipw/1991_1994.htm

also, another, I know nothing about the pov of these links, just to doc the occurence of the murder.


ROME 11 Jan. (IPS) Italian editors of "The Last Day’s Light", a novel by a young Iranian writer Parviz Parvizian, have been threatened by anonymous islamist fundamentalists to withdraw the book or they would be assassinated.

"Francesco Maria Gallo and Giancarlo Calzati, directors of the Giancarlo & Calzati editing house confirmed to Iran Press Service that they had received telephone calls from people who spoke in broken Italian warning them to stop editing Mr. Parvizian’s book or their bookstore would be bomb fired and themselves murdered, like the editors and translators of "The Satanic Verses", the controversial fiction for which Mr. Salman Rushdie, the world famed Anglo-Indian novelist, had been sentenced to death by Ayatollah Roohollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution of Iran.

Agents dispatched by the Islamic Republic or on its payroll had killed the Japanese translator of "The Satanic Verses", condemned as being insulting to Islam and to the Muslims prophet Mohammad and seriously wounded his Norwegian and Italian colleagues while Mr. Rushdie lived several years under strict and close protection of the Scotland Yard’s special agents before the Islamic Republic announced officially it would not attempt to carry Mr. Khomeini’s fatwa ."

http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2003/Jan-2003/editors_menaced_11103.htm

[clonebot]

39. this is the stupidest thread i've seen in a while

its some guy lecturing all us cro-magnon americans about an attitude that we don't have.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ulysses]

48. is a deep knowledge of Islam required

to condemn religious death sentences?

[skjpm]

50. It would be valuable to know when the Koran allows for the death sentence

Since 1/3 of the world is Muslim, it might be good to know what sorts of things they consider so important that they would use the death penalty. We might not agree, but we should know. don't you think? Wouldn't it be better not to cross lines we don't have to cross? Wouldn't it be better not to offend people we don't have to offend? Or should we just assume we're better and never learn anything about them?

[skooooo]

57. I don't give a crap what the Koran says about the death sentence.

[skjpm]

60. Neither does Bush.

It's his ignorance of Muslim culture that led so many innocent people to die in Iraq. Thanks for continuing the ignorance!

[skooooo]

63. You're welcome.

anytime

[ulysses]

62. valuable, sure.

The question was about the necessity of that knowledge in order to make a judgment about a religious death sentence.

Wouldn't it be better not to cross lines we don't have to cross? Wouldn't it be better not to offend people we don't have to offend? Or should we just assume we're better and never learn anything about them?

I suspect that Salman Rushdie had a pretty good idea of what he was doing, so his "crime" wasn't based in ignorance. No one here - to my limited knowledge - has offended Islam. You're making a straw man.

Besides which, Rushdie is, as has been pointed out, a citizen of a western nation and an artist. Should he have muzzled himself in order not to offend? Do you agree with the fatwa?

[annabanana]

98. you just said that

"leaving the faith" was a crime worthy of death.......But I also understand that it is understood that "everyone is born Muslim" So that makes everyone of every other faith apostate.

[Djinn]

125. just like the bible

the Koran has inconsistencies - it is also open to interpretation by individuals - just like the Bible.

I'm not aware that the Koran says anything about everyone being born Muslim, seems odd in that it would make the Kalimah superflous, but it would not surprise me were it true, like the Bible it is riddled with contradictions.

[NervousRex]

52. Apparently...

If you don't approve of religious zealotry you are a Swift Boat Veteran...That's what I am getting out of this thread.

[skjpm]

59. If you don't quote in context with full understanding, you are a SBVT

If you wilfully misquote Yusuf Islam and choose not to understand his cultural context and where he might have been personally at the time, you are using the same tactics as the SBVT. Kerry did say that about Viet Vets and Ghengis Khan. Does the commercial quote it in context? Did he mean it? Would he say it differently now?

You can be against religious zealotry all you want. Yusuf Islam is against religious zealotry, too, as are all moderate Muslims.

[NervousRex]

78. It's called

lying, misrepresentation of facts and deceit....which have been around long before Cat Stevens and the SBVT. Comparing Du'ers to Bush and O'Niell (and now Coulter...see #91)over this topic is seriously an act of distortion and taking things way out of context.


edited for latest specious, spurious and outrageous comparision.

[Brian_Expat]

89. It's what the desperate do -- make false comparisons

Why a DUer would be covering for Islamic (or Christian) religious fanatics who wish to impose their superstitions on everyone in the world remains unexplained. . .

And I know, I know, I'm a Swift Boat Vet now. :)

[skjpm]

91. I'm for people having their views correctly represented

Religious views, or lack thereof, are irrelevent. But wilfully misrepresenting someone is a SBVT tactic.

You sound like Ann Coulter, incidentally. We just convert them out of their silly superstitions. Yeah, that attitude helps the peace process.

[Must_B_Free]

108. Why is it that Cat's defenders all use personal attacks?

That is the most consistent strain I heae throught out these threads?

If you don't agree with Cat's cover, and find that in his official rebuttal, he incrimianates himself even further into a position which he tries to distance himself from only for the negative PR value, why does that make you, stupid, an Ann Coulter, a Jerry Falwell, etc?

[Columbia]

131. He was calling people Bush and O'Neil earlier too

[peach720]

159. I am not defending Cat...

I am pointing out that he is one of millions of Muslims worldwide that shared that opinion in 1989. They are not all prevent from entering the United States, in fact many of live productive lives in the USA.
Whatever the rights or wrongs of the Fatwa, Cat Stevens is being kept out of the USA because of something he said 15 years old, which was the same thing was the popular opinion of the time, amoung Muslims in the UK. I remember it well.
The Fatwa was mightily condemned by the British Government and the none Muslim population in the UK were disgusted and supported Salman Rushdie.

[Brian_Expat]

166. It IS superstition

They have a right to believe what they believe, but they don't have a right to force me to believe it, respect it, or spend a single iota of my time worrying about it. Period. I live my own life, they live theirs, and I'll not bother them so long as they don't try to force their fractured superstitions into law and take away the freedoms of others.

Unfortunately, that's what they are often trying to do.

If they want "peace," they can start by calling off their holy war.

[skjpm]

90. Except they're lying....and misrepresenting...and spreading deceit

Trying to tear down the repution of a man who is trying to do good in the world--Kerry or Yusuf.

[skooooo]

65. LOL

Ok, I get it now.

[Must_B_Free]

107. I believe this answer to be a subset of Godwin's law

It may not be a comparison to Hitler, but it serves the same futile end and symbol of devolvement.

[mzmolly]

43. Alot of "western humanists" here defended Cat Stevens.

Or Mr. Islam depending.

Though ... if Bush wanted to put someone to death for "blasphemy" I'd have a problem with it regardless of my quest for religious tolerance. Just like I have a problem with the justification for the Iraq war. Religious zealotry and intolerance are dangerous regardless of who the zealot is.

I am very tolerant of other religious views, provided said views don't advocate the murder of those who disagree.

I am still a fan of Cat Stevens and his music, but his views differ from my own.

Thanks for educating us on what a 'fatwa' is however.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

67. You mean like this?

"If the peasants are in open rebellion, then they are outside the law of God. Therefore let all who are able slash, strike down, and kill (those who rebel) openly and secretly, remembering that there can be nothing more venomous, harmful, or devilish than a rebel. It is exactly like killing a mad dog." Martin Luther

or, these?

Now therefore kill every male among the little ones.
--Numbers 31:17
utterly destroyed the men and the women and the little ones
--Deuteronomy 2:34
slay both man and woman, infant and suckling
--1 Samuel 15:3
dash their children, and rip up their women with child
--2 Kings 8:12
all the women therein that were with child he ripped up
--2 Kings 15:16
Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
--Psalms 137:9
Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished.
--Isaiah 13:16
They shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children.
--Isaiah 13:18
Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little children.
--Ezekiel 9:6
give them a miscarring womb and dry breasts
--Hosea 9:14
their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up
--Hosea 13:16


Kinda makes the Islamic brand of fundamentists look like a bunch of pantywaist do-gooders.

A pox on all their houses.

[Wat_Tyler]

76. I've often wondered what people would think of 'Onward Christian Soldiers'

had it been written by a muslim.

[skooooo]

84. I'm sure they have their version..

...except the title would be "Onward Muslim Soldiers"

[Wat_Tyler]

70. This is a difficult issue for us on the left.

We want to counter the islamophobia prevalent in our society that has been fostered by the right-wing, but also, we have to return to certain core Democratic values. Hence the flamewars.

[ulysses]

75. it doesn't have to be.

"I support religious freedom up to the point at which it conflicts with civil and human rights protections."

[Brian_Expat]

80. Too sensible

This is will be labelled as "radical socialism" by the flying monkey right and "corporate fascism" by the looney left.

[Wat_Tyler]

82. I'll sign up for that.

Thanks.

[Salman_Rushdie]

72. Cat Stevens is an ass.

Not ONLY did he write shitty songs, but he wants me dead.

Fuck him. Fuck him right in the ear.

[VOX]

77. Why, Mr. Rushdie, you've grown so **eloquent** over the years!

:thumbsdown:

[jpgray]

79. You just wish you had put your sacrilege to a sappy, cheerful melody

Jealous bastard.

[IronLionZion]

101. spoken like the well-educated writer that you are!

beautiful! :puke:

[Must_B_Free]

109. About the music

I find very little of his music groovable. It was the kind of albums that were always in my way it garage sales and flea markets. I constantly had to thumb past them, along with Bobby Sherman and various Chicago albums, and perhaps, Andy Gibb.

As an instrumentalist, when I played his songs, they were the type you play in a teenage singalong type environment for girls to swoon over.

I haved heard a fantastic version of Peace Train, but it took Jimmy Smith to do it as an instrumental upbeat Jazz piece (Album: Wild Horses).

So I have never really gotten the "Cat" thing. The TV bio made him seem sort of fake and superficial as a performer - sort of a "Johnny Bravo" who "fit the suit".

[Wat_Tyler]

116. What do you know, ya U2 groupie?

[Blue-Jay]

99. .

[ulysses]

103. hippothanatological uncertainty principle

The only way to make sure that the horse is dead is to keep beating it. :)

[IronLionZion]

102. We DUers don't even know what we are, let alone what a fatwa is.

Instead of insulting us simple-minded folks, why don't you enlighten us in your first post? Or are we just not worthy? It seems like there's some angry bigotry in your heart as well.

Some of us support Cat's freedom of expression and realize he didn't want to kill Rushdie (especially after he said he didn't want to kill Rushdie).

And yes I saw your other post that defined fatwa.

[FlemingsGhost]

105. LOL ... One of the silliest flame war ever.

And I've been here since day one.

No wonder the Party is in such disarray. Folks spend a weekend afternoon getting on each others nerves as opposed to ... say, doing something constructive.

Meanwhile, our opponent keeps their eyes on the prize ...

[skooooo]

106. eye of the beholder I guess

[geek tragedy]

112. I understand medieval moonbat evil fundamentalism

And Stevens and his beloved Ayatollah embraced it.

Fuck Stevens--he and people who think like him have no place in a progressive society. And no, by "people like him," I do not mean Muslims. Stevens=Jimmy Swaggart and Jerry Falwell.

[JVS]

120. Do I know what a fatwa is? What a rediculous question.

I've been declaring fatwas for several years now and it just keeps on getting better.

[Fescue4u]

122. Isnt' it an Islamic Murder Contract?

Kinda like the Mafia, but instead of the Godfather ok'ing, Allah does gives it the thumbs up.

Im sure that fartwahs could be used for other purposes, but it seems that the biggest use for it is when Allah puts a hit out on someone he doesnt agree with.

[Djinn]

128. just as "God" doesn't "hate fags"

his numpty followers do - equally Allah doesn't issue fatwa's and never has - his numpty followers do.

[Zero Division]

124. Funny, you just smeared Juan Cole, of all people, with your broad brush

I think it would be highly laughable to call Prof. Cole "appallingly ignorant about Islam".

http://www.juancole.com/2004_09_01_juancole_archive.html#109592379002363404

Excerpt:

"But I have a hard time rushing to Yusuf Islam's defense because I never forgave him for advocating the execution of Salman Rushdie in 1989. He endorsed Khomeini's "fatwa" or death edict against Rushdie for the novel, Satanic Verses. He later explained this position away by saying that he did not endorse vigilante action against Rushdie, but would rather want the verdict to be carried out by a proper court. These are weasel words, since he was saying that if Khomeini had been able to field some Revolutionary Guards in London to kidnap Rushdie and take him to Tehran, it would have been just dandy if he were then taken out and shot for having written his novel. In my view, that entire episode of the Khomeini fatwa showed how sick some forms of Muslim activism had become, and served as a foretaste of al-Qaeda's own death warrant served on a lot of other innocent people."

[Lex]

129. "You people" "You people?"

Oh, how I hate "you people."

[UpsideDownFlag]

130. he disrupted...poorly...nt

[Columbia]

132. Not yet he didn't

[skooooo]

134. Who's "he"?

What are you talking about?

[Columbia]

135. Ask JibJab

[Violet_Crumble]

140. Why don't you tell us?

After all, you must have known what JibJab was talking about seeing as how you replied to him :)

Violet...

[Columbia]

142. Because I'm not him

I'm guessing about whom he was speaking of, but only he knows. You should ask him.

[Violet_Crumble]

143. Ah, so you were just replying to something you had no idea about?

Okay, that sorts that out :)

But what did you mean by 'not yet'?

Violet...

[Columbia]

147. As I said before

I am guessing at what he meant.

And you can guess what I meant too. :)

[Violet_Crumble]

149. Yeah, I can guess...

Though I've got no idea why he'd be thinking that way. If anything, I've seen others who are much more deserving of that fate...

Violet...

[Columbia]

156. It's a hobby of his

[UpsideDownFlag]

162. i dunno, guys. he certainly got "you people" whipped up into a a frenzy.

nt

[HEyHEY]

133. Why are we talkin' bout what a dink he was 20 years ago?

[Violet_Crumble]

141. I thought I'd timewarped back 20 years...

Knock me over with a feather, but I thought the big news was that Yusuf Islam had been denied entry to the US. As not even the most moronic conservatives have claimed that it's got anything to do with fatwas, I figure the pearls of 'wisdom' to be gleaned from this sorry thread is:

1. Anyone who dares to try to explain what a fatwa is automatically comes under strong suspicion of supporting all fatwas...

2. Moderate Muslims = Fundamentalists....

3. Knowledge of the Koran is baaaaad!! Ability to insist that one knows heaps about Islam without needing to learn about the religion is gooood and the American Way of Freedom!!

4. Honour killings are prevalent in England. If only Norma Kouri had based her autobiographical work of fiction in England instead of Jordan, no-one's suspicions would have been aroused...

Violet...

[Djinn]

148. hehehe

"4. Honour killings are prevalent in England. If only Norma Kouri had based her autobiographical work of fiction in England instead of Jordan, no-one's suspicions would have been aroused..."

interestingly no-one ever mentions the fact that honour killings (and FGM btw) have their origins in cultural practices present for over a century before Muhammad and have FAR more to do with culture than religion (big in Saudi influenced areas, not at all in Indonesia for example) - no-one mentions that the Bible also advocates the stoning of a daughter who "shames" you, and no-one mentions the enormous number of Hindu "honour" killings either, I guess being stoned to death or drowned is much more abhorent than being burnt alive because your dowry wasn't up to scratch :shrug:

People need to realise this isn't about religion - it's about misogyny ( NOT a word I use lightly) each religion (and those passed into history) have had their nutbags, their fascists, their psychopaths AND their tireless workers for justice and humanity - this is PEOPLE not GOD.

[Violet_Crumble]

151. No-one ever mentions that because...

...that would involve reading the Qu'ran, and then they wouldn't be able to mention honour-killings because they'd cotton on that honour-killings aren't mentioned in the Qu'ran, and that the Prophet Mohammed had an attitude towards women that had a lot to do with equality and no whiff of misogyny. The patriarchal crap crept into Islam over the next few hundred years and were picked up from other cultures and religions. But if I've learnt nothing from this thread, it's that we don't need to know about Islam to bag it out. In fact, the less we know, the more we can bag it out with great confidence ;)

Violet...

[enki23]

155. jesus. i don't care if the prophet was a full-on raging feminist

radical islam, like radical christianity, radical hinduism, and radical-(insert nutty-yet-powerful cult here), is a fucking menace. you don't need to delve into theological debate to see how women are treated in a number of islamic nations.

there is no "real islam," just as there is no "real christianity." there are only people who do things. when people do bad things and call it "islam" then that "islam" is just a code word for doing a particular set of bad things. other versions of "islam" are less bad insofar as they involve doing fewer bad things. same for any other religious, or non-religious doctrine. the proof is in the motherfucking pudding. and by their goddamned works you will know them.

the theological horseshit isn't pungent enough to cover the stench of those particular works.

[Djinn]

164. exactly

"and by their goddamned works you will know them."

problem is many people don't even recognise that there are as many "normal" Muslims as there are "normal Christians" and there is an overwhelming opinion within the west (including within the left leaning progressive types) that Islam is INHERENTLY violent and/or misogynistic. It isn't any more than any other religion.

[jdj]

185. then honey, why come all them male muslims ain't marching

in the streets for women's rights?

I mean if they's so image conscious and misunderstood...

seems like they'd wanna correct the erroneous assumptions of most of the western world.

sorry, I can't go on, it's just too ridiculous

[Violet_Crumble]

190. Thank you for sparing everyone...

Yr right. It would have been just too ridiculous to go on after so totally opposing the idea that there are just as many 'normal' Muslims as there are 'normal' Christians. I was a tad concerned going on may have brought on a bout of 'then why aren't all them Muslims opposing terrorism???!!!!?????'

Violet...

[Cat Atomic]

145. Honestly, I couldn't care less about any fundie's bullshit.

I don't care what religion they come from.

You can call that "western bigotry" if you like, but I suspect there are alot of people in every culture who just wish the religious assholes would shut the fuck up. I count those people as my brothers and sisters.

Fundamentalists annoy the hell out of me, I don't care whether they live in Texas or Tehran.

[Bucky]

150. I have issued a fatwa calling for everyone in this thread to be spanked

Bad, bad Democrats! Go to your room until it's time to go register more new voters.

[Djinn]

152. mmm spanky fatwa

sounds kinky :evilgrin:

[enki23]

153. a fatwah is simply a religious proclamation from authority.

like a papal bull in catholicism. and one of those which calls for death because of 'blasphemy' is abhorrent no matter which religion issues it.

luckily, when a falwell makes death threats against his favorite infidels he's got us western secular humanists to call him out for it. all we got was a lame, semi-apology, but that's a hell of a lot better than nothing. i don't remember hearing the fatwah against rushdie being defended as "a joke." you can chalk that one up to us western humanists. there are plenty of falwells out there who'd dearly love to start chopping off our blasphemous heads, if they weren't forced to live in a very watered-down version of a "christian" culture.

i'm all for cultural relativism, to a point. that point is where it starts to make life unnecessarily more difficult for people. i like hummus, neutral on head scarves. i don't like public beheadings. i'm oppposed to those negative aspects of my own culture in exactly the same way. i like cheeseburgers, don't like corporate welfare. that's why i'm called a 'liberal.' or, as i prefer to think of myself: "a member of that distinct minority of non-asshole, non-religious, non-mouthbreathing americans."

in other words, a western humanist.

then again, maybe your post was a subtle joke. if i were to give you the benefit of the doubt, that's how i would interpret it. thing is, i stopped giving that benefit a while back.

[Forkboy]

154. It's an obese wa

[peach720]

157. I was in my late teens and all my Muslim girlfriends..

wanted Salman Rushdie to be executed.They were seventeen and eighteen year olds When The Satanic Verses was out it was the sentiment, it was being preacher at the mosques. I remember have heated discussions with some of them about it too.. However I do not think that any of those are now terrorists and a threat. The only difference is that Cat Stevens just happened to say it in public.

Cat Stevens is not considered a threat in the UK anymore that Mohammad Ali is a threat, purely because he supported the Fatwa against Salman Rushdie.

[Trajan]

163. FUCK Fatwas ....

FUCK Religious extremists ....

FUCK Cat Stevens ....

I am a proud liberal ...

I am an even PROUDER HUMANIST, which forms the foundation of the liberal worldview ....

With that thought in mind: FUCK Anti-Humanists .....

[skooooo]

177. fuckin' ay

[dogman]

169. Is it like calling for a Crusade?

[Mr.Green93]

170. "what a fatwa is?"

it's those beans you eat with a nice Chianti?