Are there two parts because a Muslim woman's testimony is only worth half of a man's?
Here is a Muslim woman who has seen the superiour status of women in the west, and her response is to become defensive on behalf of her captors. That's a form of Stockholm syndrome. Understandable where there is little chance of escape, but not something to be encouraged.
Whilst FGM is more severe than MGM, I think that both are quite deviant and irrational behaviours to perpetuate in modern society. (And yes I know that MGM can sometimes confer some health advantages).
Brett - there's no need to be facetious. She's speaking from personal experience.
Terje - there's no comparison between FGM and MGM. None at all.
Actually pommy there is a comparison. They both entail cutting off a natural part of a childs genitals.
FGM is no doubt vastly more debilatating, but both are cultural vestigages of a bigone era that should be abandoned.
Terje
I agree that practising any form of mulitation for cultural or religious reasons is patently wrong, but there are those who believe it is actually healthier for boys.
Also - its not comparable because there are no disadvantages later in life, unlike FGM.
Terje
FGM involves cutting off a woman's clitoris which is a *whole sexual organ*. A clit is basically a woman's microdick, quite literally (which helps explain why women's orgasms are more intense - the same amount of pleasure spread over a much smaller surface area). In M2F sex change operations I believe the clit is actually used to help fashion a new dick.
Circumcision involves cutting off the skin covering a sexual organ.
There is no comparison.
Jason
Jesus man - that's more information than i needed. 
which helps explain why women's orgasms are more intense
how can anyone determine this?
Perhaps intense wasn't the right word? I meant to say it's been documented and well known they last for a much longer period of time than men's.
Jason - I know and understand the essential technical differences. I have also witnessed a male circumcision and I think it was a horrid thing to do to a child. There are very few doctors that will recommend male circumcision on health grounds, especially in a nation with modern hygene. The practice persists largely for cultural reasons.
Saying that there is no comparisson is like saying that there are no similarities between shop lifting and bank robbery. However there are valid comparisons because in both MGM and FGM a traditionalist mentality is required to perpetuate the practice. We do it or tolerate it simply because of tradition. We do it so that the son will look like the father. Or we do it because it is a religious rite of passage.
I agree that MGM is not debilitating in any significant way and it does not limit the sexual response. However the same type of forces that perpetuate MGM are at play in perpetuating FGM. It is done so that daughter will be like mother. So the sacred chain back to antiquity does not get broken on our watch.
Thanks for this Pommy and Kizzie. I'll pop this into the next issue of Missing Link, in the hope that it drains some of the fervidness out of the debate.
A mans orgasm's lasts for an average of 6 seconds, a woman's for an average of 23 seconds.
Hoo boy, did I get a sore thumb working that one out. Did I say thumb?... You'd be surprised how easily a stopwatch can crumble in your hand.
anyway...
If time permits I'll post a reply to Kizzie's post over at TOD tonight.
(that was in reply to Jason Soon, but somehow two more comments materialised while I was typing that)
Terje, actually more and more doctors now again recommend male circumcision on health grounds. For example, male circumcision has been proven to significantly reduce the incidence of AIDS transmission.
As opposed to FGM - in Indonesia 55% of mothers stated religious reasons as the primary reason for having daughters "circumcised" - ie because although not obligatory it is believed to be pleasing to Allah as has been stated again and again by Islamic scholars, following in the example of the Prophet. Not to mention the hundreds of Christian women in Indo forcibly converted to Islam and forcibly "circumcised". How did this sh#t get to Indonesia anyway?
Popo
Is that true about Indonesia? Do you have a link? Are you following the LP/TB FGM OzBlogistan debate?
man - im learning a lot of new stuff this week.
Yea, so basically, we all agree that:
a) FGM is f**ked
b) it is illegal here and should be everywhere
c) its prevalence within a society is a fair measure of that society's 'civilisation', and
d) its prevalence within a religious group is a fair measure of that religious group's 'cilivisation'.
Oh, yea, we also agree that whilst analytically not rubbish, say tay-a's contribution has been rubbish.
Patrick
a) yes
b) yes
c) yes
d) yes
e) yes, unusually for him 
FGM if it exists in SE Asia is very rare indeed as it is not the custom among the societies there before they converted to Islam. I would be very surprised if it was sigificant at all and if it does it would occur through a misreading of the relevant provisions of the Koran which *allow* a restricted degree of FGM rather than actually prescribe it.
Islam was brough to Malaysia and Indonesia through trading with Arab merchants.
This article suggests as I suspected that FGM in Indonesia arises as a result of superstition and misreading of the Koran among some of the more isolated rural pockets of Indonesia. Note the Indonesian government is actually banning the practice
http://www.npwj.org/npwj_topics/
...ital_mutilation
The Indonesian government announced this week that it is prohibiting doctors and nurses from performing female genital cutting. According to Reuters, some Indonesian groups encourage families to perform female genital mutiliation, possibly to maintain chastity and virginity before marriage and to ensure faithfulness in the women’s marriage
There are studies that show that MGM may impede the spread of AIDS but this is not proven as far as I know.
I would not criminalise MGM because it is not in the same league as FGM. It would also be near on impossible to ban MGM because it is so prevalent in our culture.However it is not a practice that I will perpetuate with my male offspring and I do oppose it. Like banning abortion banning MGM would be counter productive.
If you want to cut the foreskin off your baby boys penis then wait until he is old enough to answer the question and give him a free choice in the matter.
I don't see any expression of personal experience in that post. The whole post is pure rationalisation of a lower status, by someone held in that status.
It is not an edifying spectacle. Why be culpable in that?
Pommy, I have links and I will post them tonight.
I have not had the time to really have been following the debate, no.
Brett_McS,
I see you have no credibility for Muslims whatsoever, I understand
I know that there are many crimes against women in this part of the world but my point is don't associate everything with Islam and look at other factors such as culture.
I wrote this post because I wanted people to listen to the other side of the story. There are a lot of women here who are against it and many families don't do it to their daughters.
APopovich,
just like it got to South America! Yes, I've read the report about Indonesia and although most of them cite religious reasons, it's not at all Islamic.
Pommygranate,
here is the link- http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/
20...sion050602.html
Jason Soon-
Thanks for your replies
"The Indonesian government announced this week that it is prohibiting doctors and nurses from performing female genital cutting. According to Reuters, some Indonesian groups encourage families to perform female genital mutiliation, possibly to maintain chastity and virginity before marriage and to ensure faithfulness in the women’s marriage"
I want to add that although FGM is banned in a lot of places, it is still widespread. Unless the people are educated about its dangers, it will not stop. Banning it and imposing laws are one step and spreading awareness is another step. I believe that "men" should be educated about FGM too ( if you educate men about the dangers of this barbaric practice, they are most likely Not going to circumcise his daughter.
From my reading, the low status of women is defined in sharia - it is a part of Islam whether or not there are other cultural influences in any given society.
A Muslim woman who has seen the status of women in the west can have one of two reactions: (1) This is just. I want equal status, too. I demand equal status.. or (2) take the Stockholm Syndrome route of identifying with the oppressor.
I would hope that we in the west encourage those brave women who take option (1) (Hirsi Ali amoungst many others) and at least not encourage those who take option (2) in their choice of denial, as understandible as that selection may be.
thanks Kizzie.
Brett - kizzie doesn't strike me as a 'low status woman'
The low status of women is not defined in Sharia it is defined in "the society".
Frankly, I don't have a problem with Islam but I admit I do have some problems with Muslims who manipulate religion and interpret quranic verses the way they like.
Brett, you are entitled to your own opinion...it's a free country! but you didn't give yourself a chance to read and understand what I wrote becuase you already had preconceived ideas about Islam and this topic.
You should listen to all sides of the story not only one
I've never looked at the status of women in the west as different. In fact I have the same rights they have.
*Not all Muslim or African women are oppressed and living in a backward savage society.*
Kizzie,
Correct me if I am wrong but under much of Sharia law the testamony of a female witness is worth only half that of a male witness.
Regards,
Terje.
How interesting! Thank you, Pom-Pom.
I have two friends from Somalia who both underwent female circumcision as very small children. Even more sobering for me to learn about were stories they told me about little girls who actually had their sexual organs sewn shut to preserve their chastity.
Terje, I'm not aware of such a thing
I don't think it is true.
Ruth, this is called infibulation, when they get married their husbands must use a knife to cut through before intercourse.
Terje:
Under Shari'a law a female's testimony is worthless, not half-worth
Krizzie,
I'm feeling like your now playing dumb. When a man is charged with adultery under Sharia law there must be four male witnesses to testify to his guilt. When a women is charged with adultery there must be four male witnesses or eight female witnesses (a female being regarded as half a male in such matters). There are cases from nations that practice Sharia where adultery verdicts have been overturned on appeal because the relevant witness threshold had not been met.
Clearly Sharia law is in need of at least some minor updating. Wouldn't you agree?
Terje
This is correct. See here
Kizzie - there is no disputing this under Sharia Law.
Since Sharia law is basically whatever you can suck the local bludger into saying some old book says it is, I am sure that there is disputing everything.
See eg 'Islamic (ie 16th century) finance' - it varies from one country to another when the countries are neighbours, and from town to village, and sometimes (although I have only heard this last one second-hand) from office tower to office tower!
So if you are following the path of reason you ultimately must choose;
1. Women are not equal to men.
2. Sharia law is flawed.
Terje - there's no comparison between FGM and MGM. None at all. -Pommy
Pommy,
Watch the Penn and Teller Bullsh*t! episode on Male Circumcision. It's farkin awful stuff.
So a woman doesn't have a low status under sharia law? Who is kidding whom?
That's exactly my point - this is denial in action.
How many people here have watched a male circumcision take place?
How many people here have watched a male circumcision take place? - Terje
Yes I witnessed it on the Penn and Teller Bullsh*t! ep. It was gruesome. Most of the time they scream their lungs out but apparently sometimes they go to sleep due to psychotic shock. Absolutely awful.
Incidentally there are studies that state both Circumcision and not being circumcised benefit your sexual health. Then again it's much healthier just to use a condom.
An uncircumcised penis is far healthier from day to day as long as you keep it clean.
Terje
I actually *am* circumcised though mine was performed under anaesthetic when I was a kid. Nonetheless it still hurt as hell for a day when I woke up. Mine was for a condition known as phimosis which is apparently not at all an uncommon condition. It basically means the foreskin is too tight. I had problems having a piss when I was a kid because of it, it got diagnosed and the foreskin came off.
The point is, as I said, phimosis is not a rare condition and does account for a not insubstantial percentage of circumcisions and would be classified under the category of circumcisions for health-related reasons which you lightly dismiss.
Jason,
I don't dismiss the health reasons. I just said that a lot of the time male circumcisions are done for non-health reasons. A lot are just cultural baggage. And in most such instances they are done at an age when anaesthetic is not an option. The circucision I watched involved no anaesthetic.
It is easy to argue that some other culture should dispense with largely pointless cultural baggage (eg FGM). However our own cultural baggage seems needlessly sacred.
Regards,
Terje.
P.S. I'm circumcised but it's not overly relevant to my main point. My kids won't be.
You forgot # 5. Collateral: As in Damage, the fate of many Muslim girls in Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan at the hands of US air strikes.
Terje,
the woman's testimony is equal to a man's testimony in all cases except "financial transactions"
I'm writing a post about this issue.
Nothing included with Kizzie's article is wrong, but she leaves out a lot.
It is true that last year a meeting was held at (Al-)Azhar university and declared a ban. She leaves out the fact that universities cannot ban such a practise and therefore such a declaration is aspirational not factual. "Denounce" is a more accurate term.
She leaves out that
In 1994, Egyptian Mufti Sheikh Jad Al-Hâqq 'Ali Jad Al-Hâqq issued a fatwa stating: "Circumcision is mandatory for men and for women. If the people of any village decide to abandon it, the [village] imam must fight against them as if they had abandoned the call to prayer. The Al-Azhar University in Cairo has issued several fatwas endorsing FGC, in 1949, 1951 and 1981.
There is a debate is Islamic society and that must be acknowledged but a total omission of the fact that some support for FGM continues within Islamic authorities does you no credit. We might be better served if the writer gave some ideas of the relative strengths of the various factions and whether such factions were growing or shrinking.
Yusuf Al-Qaradawi the famous "moderate" acknowledges this debate here and here.
The second problem I have is with the attempted separation of religion and culture. eg. My favorite culture vs. religion example.... and I know that the cultures of both African and Arab societies are generally affected by "religion" but there are things that are banned by religion but accepted by culture
Culture and religion are very hard to disentangle, because culture inevitably includes religion. This is not to say that religion must include all culture - some elements are separate. However religion generally has three options with such elements - co-opt, ignore or suppress. eg. Mid-winter pagan festival becoming Christmas is an example of co-option. A liking for visiting the seaside is something ignored.
The veil debate might be viewed in this context. The religious requirement of modesty has been used to co-opt the older tradition of complete female facial envelopment.
Clearly FGM has been co-opted by certain factions within the Islamic community. Such groups point to a Hadith as justification. No analysis of FGM within Sudan, Egypt and Somalia is complete without taking this into account.
The third problem I have is with the history.
It is correct that the practice (which largely based in Africa) extends beyond Muslim societies. However it is mostly practised in countries marked by the influence of middle eastern culture such as the two plus millennium slave trade internally within Africa. It hasn't randomly occurred in many places - it spread by the influence of other cultures. Examinat
...
It is correct that the practice (which largely based in Africa) extends beyond Muslim societies. However it is mostly practised in countries marked by the influence of middle eastern culture such as the two plus millennium slave trade internally within Africa. It hasn't randomly occurred in many places - it spread by the influence of other cultures. Examination of this issue (let alone the slavery) might not reveal evidence complimentary to Islam.
I would like to think that your reports of the growth of anti-FGM groups are where the future lies. Unfortunately, I have my doubts. Cultural traditions grow and shrink in response to external stimuli. Even though western feminists, like Germaine Greer, have moved away from condemning FGM, the opposition to it in Africa and the Middle East is still regarded as being Westernised and thus "tainted".
"It is true that last year a meeting was held at (Al-)Azhar university and declared a ban. She leaves out the fact that universities cannot ban such a practise and therefore such a declaration is aspirational not factual. "Denounce" is a more accurate term. "
I didn't say that the university banned this practice. I simply said that the conference was held at the university. Al Azhar University is a well-known and respected Islamic institution in the Islamic world and many meetings are held there every year.
Muslim scholars from different countries meet there to discuss different issues and then they announce a decision. This decision is binding on all Muslims.
"There is a debate is Islamic society and that must be acknowledged but a total omission of the fact that some support for FGM continues within Islamic authorities does you no credit. We might be better served if the writer gave some ideas of the relative strengths of the various factions and whether such factions were growing or shrinking."
I agree with you I should've presented several pro-FGM views.
Thanks for the useful articles. You have to know that there is a difference between Hadith and the Qu'ran. The Qu'ran takes precedence because it’s the words of God.
A similar thing is found in Judaism. I was discussing the similarities between Islam and Judaism with a Jewish guy a couple of months ago and he told me that they have a similar thing in Judaism (Hadith and Talmud/ Torat and Quran). He said that the Torah (Old Testament) takes precedence, like the Qu'ran does. And if things in the Talmud go against the Torah, then it is not permitted. Same type of deal as hadiths/sunnah vs qu'ran. There are many jewish laws in the Talmud that most Jews are not aware of or don't practice.
In addition, Al Qardawi said something very important
1- it is not obligatory
2-whoever chooses not to do it is not considered to have committed a sin.
I believe that we should stop this barbaric practice and many Muslims agree with me but others disagree.
"The second problem I have is with the attempted separation of religion and culture"
I had to emphasize on this point because I can see a clear distinction between culture and religion. We do a lot of "cultural" things that are not mentioned in the Qur'an and vice versa.
"Culture and religion are very hard to disentangle, because culture inevitably includes religion. This is not to say that religion must include all culture - some elements are separate" I agree with you. In fact, I said something very similar ( our culture is influenced by religion but not all the times. You are right culture does include religion (e.g:- some African costumes are influenced by religion *covering the hair* but in some African tribes, men cover their hair too. This is not a religious thing, it is their culture).
"The veil debate might be viewed in this context. The religious requirement of mod
"The veil debate might be viewed in this context. The religious requirement of modesty has been used to co-opt the older tradition of complete female facial envelopment."
Yes, I agree with you. Face-covering/face-veil or "Neqab" is debatable and I personally don't believe it is obligatory. I think it’s a personal decision but I'm not a big fan of it.
"Clearly FGM has been co-opt by certain factions within the Islamic community. Such groups point to a Hadith as justification. No analysis of FGM within Sudan, Egypt and Somalia is complete without taking this into account." Yes, it is that one Hadith people keep referring to
The third problem I have is with the history.
"It is correct that the practice (which largely based in Africa) extends beyond Muslim societies. However it is mostly practised in countries marked by the influence of middle eastern culture such as the two plus millennium slave trade internally within Africa. It hasn't randomly occurred in many places - it spread by the influence of other cultures. "
Yes, you do have a point here but I don't see how this is related to the history I mentioned. The practice is originally pharaonic and Egypt was invaded many times not to mention *Egypt invaded Sudan*. The Nubians ruled Egypt for a while and then Nubia was ruled by the Ancient Egyptians. Egypt was invaded by the Libyans, Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Persians, Arabs, and Turks etc… The type of fgm practiced in the Middle East is usually type 1 ( sunni circumcision) but in Africa, it is usually the pharaonic one (especially in countries close to Egypt). I'm not a historian but I think it is also basic geography. Like you said, slavery from Africa (especially East Africa) to Arabia might be another reason.
I personally believe that although foreigners can contribute in changing things if the local people themselves didn't condemn this practice and strongly opposed it, it will never end. Thankfully, I'm optimistic about the future because many Muslim feminists and African/Arab feminists started to speak up against it.
Thanks for your valuable contribution!
Kizzie -
I am interested to know how you stand in relation to traditional Shariah. Do you accept the ideas of killing of apostates and dhimmi status for Christians and Jews?
Incidentally personally I oppose all genital mutilation, including of Jewish boys. No doubt there may be health benefits to male circumcision, but there is a functional change (reduced sensitivity) which I think it should be a decision for the adult to make.
"I am interested to know how you stand in relation to traditional Shariah" this is a loaded question. Too broad for me to answer
I will answer your second question.
I'm against the killing of apostates.... Simply because religion is a personal choice and my religious beliefs are my personal business so I don't have the right to interfere in other people's beliefs.
By the way, I don't mind Ayan Hirsi Ali being Aethiest or even Agnostic( this is what I read) but I dont like her sweeping generalizations and blame-it-on-islam attitude.
About Dhimmi Status- As far as I know, this "pact" ended a long time ago..correct me if I'm wrong.
Here's my rather lengthy reply to this post:
http://www.taoofdefiance.com/200...lamic-practice/
Pommy, if it meets your approval maybe you'd like to link to it in a post or even use the whole thing.
Thanks for that Kizzie. I'm relieved to hear you don't want to kill apostates. That's not what the Prophet taught or what traditional Islam has taught, but
I'm very happy if you think differently.
Regarding Dhimmi status, I am not aware of anywhere in the world where the non-Muslims are required to pay the special tax laid down by Islam but Dhimmi status certainly survives wherever Shariah is practised. A Muslim's evidence is valued more highly than non-Muslim's and a Muslim is permitted to do things that the non-Muslim cannot (e.g. a male Muslim may marry person of the book outside his religion - i.e. a Christian or Jew whereas a non-Muslim is not allowed to do so). There are countless examples of this sort of discrimination within Sharia.
Here is popovich's reply
http://wholeheartedly-sudaniya.b...a.blogspot.com/
Pommy -
I noticed you had link to "Muslim Village". Thought I'd pay it a visit. Kizzie seemed a fairly reasonable debater. I thought there might be some more there.
But honestly, it is a very disturbing site. One is reminded again of just how offensive the Islamic religion is to all that we hold dear - individual identity, free speech, tolerance of religions and beliefs, frienship, peace, art, music, self expression, democracy, the rule of law as determined by elected representatives. I recommend anyone who may feel that Muslims are hard done by commenters here and elsewhere to visit the site and see what real Muslims think and say.
I notice that the Village has a way with anyone who asks difficult questions. One contributor "Providence" who raised perfectly reasonable questions about the abrogated verses was simply deregistered and not allowed to post! He wasn't at all offensive to the religion.
Please do visit the site.
"Thanks for that Kizzie. I'm relieved to hear you don't want to kill apostates. That's not what the Prophet taught or what traditional Islam has taught, but
I'm very happy if you think differently."
Field, you and your phobics can't have it both ways. On the one hand, when Kizzie posts an argument that FGM is inextricably linked to culture in Africa, you say culture and religion can't be disentangled and therefore Islam must be held responsible for FGM even if there is no specific recommendation of it. On the other hand, you seem a bit frustrated that Kizzie isn't in favour of killing apostates because that is how her cultural influences have mediated her interpretation of the Koran and you're now essentially implying that because she isn't living up to your projection of reality she isn't being faithful to her religion. So this is the RWDB solution to the problem of Islamism - encourage all Muslims to be Islamists so they can be justified in killing them all.
How many of these Islamophobes have actually had an experience of living in a Muslim country? I lived in a majority Muslim country (Malaysia) for 16 years and no one tried to kill me because of my religion or lack thereof. For most of my primary and high school education I went to a Jesuit school and no one tried to firebomb it.Things are not perfect there but insofar as there is any lack of freedom of religion it's suffered by Muslims more who are not allowed to convert to any religion. Even in te States that imposed sharia, they were only imposed on the Muslims.
field,
You can't be serious. There are lots of anachronistic ideas in almost all religions, some of the worst are in Christianity (kill your kids if they disrespect you comes to mind). People of faith who don't throw out the wheat with the chaff should be commended.
Islam teaches a person humility, charity and self discipline. That seems like a tick in every box to me. I defy you to find anything in the five pillars of Islam that, if followed, wouldn't be beneficial to someone's character.
I'm not going to hold all Christians responsible for what was done in the recent past in Northern Ireland or for the radical views held by the Westboro Baptist Church. I'll also not hold Muslims responsible for the radical beliefs held by a vocal minority.
If I didn't know better I'd think you were indulging in persecution a faith you know very little about. I for one don't believe in generalization or summary judgments. They lead to the wrong people being accused of things they've never done.
Ben, Field is nearly always right, and his above post is spot on.
Jason - is Malaysia a typical country? I was under the impression that it encourages a very 'unliteral' interpretation of the Koran. Is the same true for the Middle Eastern and North African Muslim countries?
Ben - i'm surprised that you choose to compare Christianity and Islam. This is a tired argument normally found on moral equivalent sites (that ten years ago were virulently atheist). And what on earth has Christianity got to with N Ireland?
I often take a look at what is being discussed on Muslim Village. In general, i find most of the commenters to be fairly braod minded. Sadly, the site does have its fair share of whack-jobs.
I have to say I find Kizzie a refreshing contrast to Ben Shurey and Jason Soon. Ad-hominem or what?
--
I didn't explain the culture disentangling issue as well as I might. The point about Christmas being a co-opted festival is not simply that it happened but that today it is impossible to imagine a Christianity without Christmas in December. Yet it isn't in the bible. The evidence (such as it is) suggests a Spring birth.
Religions tend to create rituals and once created, the priestly caste (scholars) find authority within the revealed word for continuing them. Such are difficult to stop.
The question then is whether FGM has become as fixed within parts of Islam as Christmas within Christianity or whether it is possible to separate it.
I acknowledge that there is a hierarchy within Islam between Hadiths and the Quran, with the latter taking precedent. This would mean that if a Hadith endorsed FGM and the Quran forbad it, the Quran would take precedence. Unfortunately such clarity is missing. The Quran has little or nothing to say.
In particular (some) Islamic opponents of FGM use the Quranic prohibition against "games of chance" (maysir) in combination with the inherent lack of precision in the Hadith "Do not cut severely..." as a basis to prohibit FGM. I have to say, this is a stunningly unconvincing argument, incapable of persuading the committed.
Perhaps there are other better religious arguments being made.
Other people have noted there is a distinction between an obligatory (wajib), recommended (mustahab), permissible and prohibited. Reading your article, one is led to the impression that the only debate is between obligation and prohibition. My impression is that few advocates argue for obligatory, most argue for recommended and might settle for permissible. I recognise that you argue for prohibited but I suspect that many of the religious allies you respect will settle for permissible. The result will be no change.
Pommygranate,
Ben - i'm surprised that you choose to compare Christianity and Islam. This is a tired argument normally found on moral equivalent sites
How is it tired? I was merely pointing out the fact that there is crazy stuff in the bible that no one pays attention to anymore. Therefore you shouldn't judge a faith by what is in it's holy texts unless you also judge Christianity as harshly.
And what on earth has Christianity got to with N Ireland?
Call me ignorant but weren't the troubles at least in part due to a schism between Catholics and Protestants?
I often take a look at what is being discussed on Muslim Village. In general, i find most of the commenters to be fairly braod minded. Sadly, the site does have its fair share of whack-jobs.
As there is on the ALS blog and any other blog you care to mention.
TDK,
I have to say I find Kizzie a refreshing contrast to Ben Shurey and Jason Soon. Ad-hominem or what?
I pride myself on playing the ball and not the Man. Please point out where I made an Ad-Hominem attack and I will apologize.
Ben
I was merely pointing out the fact that there is crazy stuff in the bible that no one pays attention to anymore.
And that is the whole point. Sure, there's pages of nutjob stuff in the Bible, but as you say, no-one pays any attention to it anymore.
The same, sadly, cannot be said of the Koran and Islam.
That's why your argument has no merit.
Truly great post. Nice discussion as well.
John
thanks. did you catch Hassan Butt's and Ed Hussain's comments on the Glasgow bombers? Interesting that Western foreign policy plays only a minor role in the radicalisation of most young British Muslims.
Commenting by HaloScan
