Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Just watched the video, it was quite interesting. I wonder if that is why the stereotype of flamboyant, social butterfly type homosexuals exists. Perhaps since an apparent connection exists between sociability and homosexuality, there is a greater chance that homosexual men are more socially responsive. Interesting thought. So I guess the takeaway from this is that progesterone is the reason why girls all want gay friends; we engage them more socially. Makes me wonder if it's the same with lesbians.
please stop generalising what "all" religions do and quote me the phrase from the Quran which commands disbelievers to be stoned and burned.
You are a person of evidence correct? So provide the evidence.
A "mu'aahid" is a disbeliever/nonmuslim under Muslim rule
The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If anyone wrongs a mu‘aahid, detracts from his rights, burdens him with more work than he is able to do or takes something from him without his consent, I will plead for him (the mu‘aahid) on the Day of Resurrection.” Narrated by Abu Dawood, 3052
See.... I told you it always gets interesting.....
Anyway... "quote me the phrase from the Quran which commands disbelievers to be stoned and burned."...
Well try this....."They who disbelieve, and deny Our revelations, such are rightful Peoples of the Fire. They will abide therein." 2:39
A clear condemnation of unbelievers to the fire...
Now I know as well as you do that there is no injunction in the Quran regarding stoning .....
(apparently there was one but a goat ate it... according to Aisha......)
[Narrated 'Aisha] "The verse of the stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the messenger of Allah expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper."]
Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal. vol. 6. p. 269; Sunan Ibn Majah, p. 626; Ibn Qutaybah, Tawil Mukhtalafi 'l-Hadith (Cairo: Maktaba al-Kulliyat al-Azhariyya. 1966) p. 310; As-Suyuti, ad-Durru 'l-Manthur, vol. 2. p. 13)
But most of the Hadiths introduce stoning.....although admittedly mainly for adultery and not generally for disbelief....
So which cherry are you picking.... Quran .... work of Allah or Hadiths work of men.
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever kills a mu‘aahid (a non-Muslim living under Muslim rule) will not smell the fragrance of Paradise, although its fragrance may be detected from a distance of forty years.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2995
This is one of many reasons why I believe most all religions to be proof of being invented by men, and not a supernatural entity. Why would a god that has power/control over the universe, need to include subjugation of women. Illogical.
I have not come across any verses in the Quran or hadith where women are subjugated. Stop feeding into the media about what Islam is and do not turn to online versions of the Qur'an. I have a Yusuf Ali translated Qur'an and it is one of the most accurately translated English Qur'ans. When you read the truth of what Islam is it will set you free. I am a Muslim woman and I feel liberated. Society likes to portray Muslim women as oppressed, but it is far from the truth.
"I have not come across any verses in the Quran or hadith where women are subjugated. Stop feeding into the media about what Islam is and do not turn to online versions of the Qur'an. I have a Yusuf Ali translated Qur'an and it is one of the most accurately translated English Qur'ans. When you read the truth of what Islam is it will set you free. I am a Muslim woman and I feel liberated. Society likes to portray Muslim women as oppressed, but it is far from the truth."
Oh please, you are either deluded, dishonest or ignorant of your religion. Islam subjugates woman in many ways. Please learn the religion you are defending.
Veils and covering - The covering of cloth is supposed to keep the sexual appetites of passing men at bay when women travel outside the home. This might even save a woman's life, since she is usually assumed to bear the responsibility of unlawful sexual encounter. Quran - Quran (33:59), Quran (24:31), Quran (33:55) Hadith and sira - Sahih Bukhari (6:321), Sahih Bukhari (60:282), Abu Dawud (32:4092), Abu Dawud (2:641), Sahih Bukhari (52:250), Sahih Muslim (26:5395), Sahih Bukhari (8:395). In 2017, an Islamist lawyer on Egyptian TV stated that "when a girl walks about like that (without being completely covered), it is a patriotic duty to sexually harass her and a national duty to rape her." Clear as day, subjugation of women!
A womans worth in islam - Does islam teach that a womans worth is less than a man? Absolutely! Quran - Quran (4:11), Quran (2:282), Quran (2:228), Quran (5:6), Quran (24:31), Quran (2:223), Quran (4:3), Quran (53:27), Quran (4:24), Quran (33:50). Hadith and sira - Sahih Bukhari (6:301), Sahih Bukhari (2:28), Sahih Bukhari (54:464), Sahih Bukhari (62:81), Sahih Bukhari (62:58), Sahih Muslim (4:1039), Abu Dawud (2:704), Abu Dawud (2155), Ishaq 734, Ishaq 878, Ibn Ishaq 693, Al-Tirmidhi 3272, Tabari 8:117, Tabari 9:137, Ishaq 969, Tabari 9:1754. The fourth Caliph, who was Muhammad's son-in-law and cousin, said just a few years after the prophet's death that "The entire woman is an evil. And what is worse is that it is a necessary evil." Clear as day, subjugation of women!
Does Islam teach that women are under the charge of men? Absolutely! Quran - Quran (4:34), Quran (2:228), Quran (33:59), Quran (33:33), Quran (2:223), Quran (66:5). Hadith and sira - Sahih Bukhari (88:219), Sahih Bukhari (2:28), Sahih Bukhari (72:715), Sahih Bukhari (4:149), Sahih Bukhari (48:826), Sahih Bukhari (58:125), Sahih Bukhari (62:81), Al-Tirmidhi 3272, Abu Dawud (567).In her lifetime, a Muslim woman is never to be without the guardianship of a man, from her father to her husband to the male members of her family (in the event that she is widowed or divorced). Clear as day, subjugation of women!
I would be only glad to discuss with you in public, each and every verse cited above that shows your religions subjugation of women. Your religions texts are literally filled with abusive writings against woman. I could almost go on forever about topics in your texts about islamic women's subjugation and abuse. Should I continue? Maybe the following topics...wife beating, divorce, polygamy, female mutilation...etc? Media and society speak truth about islams subjugation of women, both in daily practice witnessed by the world, or as written in your dogmatic religious texts. When I read the truth of what islam is, it disgusts me. It in no way sets anyone free.
Might I suggest that, instead of railing on about the false virtues of islam, we discuss the existence of allah, which would be much more positive. Let me start. How does your god allah, manifest in reality?
If I may ask my own question, do you wear a traditional hijab? If so, do you wear it by choice, without fear of punishment for taking it off in public?
Yes feel free to ask me anything.
Well I wear niqab, and a jilbab. Niqab is the face veil which only reveals the eyes. And jilbab is like a burkah, over the shoulders, except it is much longer like until the hips and doesn't show the shape of shoulder or breasts. Now the following points will surprise you. Maybe even shock you...
It was never forced upon me. It was my choice. My late parents were always cool lovable parents who showed tolerance and understanding. They were Muslims and yes wanted us daughters to wear scarf, but there was no such thing as punishing us.
Women around here where I stay ,most of the Muslims don't wear hijab. Sometimes you wouldn't even know the difference between a Muslim and a non Muslim woman here. South Africa is not a Muslim country, it used to be considered a Christian country but now I'm not even sure what it is to be honest.
I am the youngest of five.
I attended university, studied a science degree in physics, astronomy and mathematics. I had many unanswered questions about my faith. Which lead me to feel guilty because I did feel a connection with God , but couldn't get myself to follow all the rules in Islam. I misunderstood much of what the Quran said and it lead to some inner resentment. I buried it and told no one. Until now .
. I have two small children. But I am glad the marriage ended. Initially after the divorce I was withdrawn and confused. Well I felt lost after the divorce, despite knowing divorce was the best thing for me. So I cried a lot and prayed, I asked God to show me a sign that he is listening. I must have cried a river on my prayer mat while sitting on the floor. I didn't get an answer and just wiped my tears and stood up. I took the Qur'an off my cupboard without thinking, opened it and the first words I read was that Allah does listen.
And when My slaves ask you (O Muhammad) concerning Me, then (answer them), I am indeed near. I respond to the invocations of the supplicant when he calls on Me …} (Al Baqarah 2:186)
I already know the atheists here will say I am delusional and its okay if they say it, but this is my story and this is how my faith in God grew. This gave me strength and the more I read the Qur'an the more I started feeling strong again, as a person.
I could slowly stand on my own feet again. I started understanding what hijab was about and it helped. When I wore it, men flirted less and looked at my body less. It became easier to focus in society. I understood the hijab was FOR me, not against me. It wasn't oppression, it was liberating actually. When men flirt and stare at you, it can really be distracting. I have heard people say its because Muslim men are perverts. That's incorrect. I met at least one man who said he had no religion, and that man flirted, watched porn and had an affair while he was married. So any man can be a womaniser.
I wear the niqab though, because I feel comfortable in it. And I enjoy studying the Qur'an as much as I can.
(Content removed by author due to privacy concerns)
You've led an interesting life, by the sound of things. I am just glad your choices are your own. Unfortunately, it is a painful reality for many women that such a choice doesn't exist. You're truly one of the lucky ones. In Iran, hijab is compulsory in public. No matter your view of the garment and its purpose, it should be a choice to wear it, right? At any rate, I'm glad you've found a coping mechanism that works for you, even if it is something I don't personally view as true. Whether or not Islam is truly peaceful (I have my doubts), you seem to be amiable enough, and I enjoy our discourse together. May your happiness multiply.
Policing of sex was one of the first things that brought me to question Christianity and was (and is still) deeply confusing to me. At 18, I realized I was attracted to both women and men. I asked every Christian friend that would listen: How is it that the church is so adamant that we choose an opposite sex husband/wife purely based on their character (physical attraction is unimportant and can be nurtured and created inside of marriage) -- but if I have a man and women standing in front of me of identical moral fiber, character, commitment to God, personality, etc. I'm only allowed to marry/have sex with one of them? And that marriage/sex with someone of the same sex (with excellent character) is somehow detestable? That seems a complete betrayal of the commitment to focusing on character instead of bodies.
Notice how UmmHurayra Makes a demand for us to find quotes in the quran and then completely ignores the posts that do exactly that. Notice how she just cherry picks through the posts to find what she thinks she can win an argument on and doesn't address the argument that she started and is exposed as being completely wrong. Notice how she harps on profanity and insults the members here and completely ignores the content of posts.
It is apparent that she wants to engage in conversation that glorifies her faith and nothing else, how she intends on policing the forum to HER liking with her condescending sanctimonious attitude and hypocritical posts.
Although her requests of finding passages in the quran have been more than met, she has not, will not, address any of our request, namely to prove her god. Furthermore, none of us have expressed any statement that she even prove that muhammed was actually a profit or even existed.
She wants us to not only respect her faith but to obey it, yet she won't afford us the same courtesy.
This is a clear example of all myth believers. They put their faith above individual freedom. They demand censorship obedience observance and respect for their god while disrespecting the rights and views of anyone else. This single issue is why their so much conflict in the world. I have been in the middle east and personally witnessed this conflict. One tribe doesn't respect another tribe's belief and they try to kill each other over it. Take the conflict between Sunni and Shia. The Sunni believe that muhammed was the last prophet and the Shia believe that there is a bloodline lineage that still exists. This is a fight/war over control of all of islam. The Saudis are Wahhabists and extreme autocratic sunni islamic sect. The Iranis are extremists shia. Here is an article that explains the divide.
Another point is that UmmHurayra states that people misunderstand the quran. Even if that is true it doesn't explain the reality. Saudi Arabia is a Theocratic Monarchy. Meaning that its laws are based on islam and enforced based on islam. Iran is a Theocracy and it is also based on islam. Both regimes are extremely oppressive to women. Women are not respected as individuals but regarded as property.
Since Saudi Arabia is the authority of all over sunni islam and Iran is the authority over all of shia islam, then all of islam is oppressive to women. That is a fact.
I have very close friends that are Ismaili islamic. They treat women as equals, but they are very much the minority. The Kurds general treat women as equals with a few exceptions but they are also very much the minority. So it doesn't matter what the quran actually says, because the authorities of the religion dictate the behavior of the religion.
I have been in many middle eastern and African nations. I have seen people killed over the way they wash their feet. Yet in the same vein, I have worked with female Kurdish commanders that effectively led troops (male and female) in combat. These happen to be the bravest commanders in the area. They have a death sentence hanging over their heads by Saudis, Iranis, Turks, Al Qaeda, ISIL and most of the islamic world, for not only being effective war commanders but also for being females.
So I don't want to hear about how women are equal under the quran. It just isn't the fact.
Breezy "Having read through your respose again, I'm curious as to why you made the basic rule of age and consent the exception?"
Do you really? Come off it man, the basic premise has been spelled out to you again and again that most atheists view pernicious behaviour as immoral.
Sex without consent which would include anyone under the age of consent is pernicious.
Sex that some people think offends their deity is a victimless act.
I'm asking what is the basis for determining someone's ability to consent. The age of consent is a legal term, not a moral term, and the fact that people can adopt their countries laws as moral guide shows how powerful cultural influences are.
All adolescents do is study and take tests. If a test was created that measures a person's ability to consent, and their understanding of sex, do you think they would pass or fail such a test?
The distinction between whether a law is purely legal or purely moral is arbitrary.
Age is used as a proxy for determining whether individuals are acting reasonably in terms of the law in regards not having sex with minors and not having sex with those who are not capable of giving informed consent.
"The age of consent is a legal term, not a moral term, "
I disagree as the two are not mutually exclusive. Are you saying it would never be immoral for someone above the age of consent to have sex with someone below the age of consent? How far would you take this claim exactly is a 50 year old man having sex with a 9 year old girl immoral to you, or just illegal? If it were legal would you consider it moral by default? Do see no connection between moral turpitude and breaking the law?
"All adolescents do is study and take tests. If a test was created that measures a person's ability to consent, and their understanding of sex, do you think they would pass or fail such a test?"
Clearly that would depend what they're consenting to and under what circumstances. The law can't take into account individual idiosyncrasies as it's a balance between protecting vulnerable people from exploitation, and avoiding criminalizing them unnecessarily.
For a psychologist you seem wholly unaware of human nature.
It’s my observation that John does not want to take into consideration the concept that two 15 year olds having sex with each other are at arms’ length from each other. A 50year of and a 16 year old are not. The two are in no way, shape, or form, the same thing.
I'm not sure how you managed to take the question I asked you, and flip it on me. Yet, precisely because I study psychology, my job is to understand the nature of morality, not ask whether something is moral or not. Your response about the law taking into account individual idiosyncrasies seems irrelevant to my question. My whole point in drawing a line between morality and the legal system, was to get you to stop hiding behind the legal system for your claims.
What do you mean about being at arms length of each other? How does age change the connotation of the act? Its almost worse for two teens to be having sex. One person with the inability to understand sex and consent is bad enough, but two?
Hmm, perhaps you'd like an introduction into the field. The following are easy reads; they're also available in audio, should reading be something you're not fond of doing:
1. Righteous Mind
2. Moral Tribes
3. Just Babies
Breezy "Why, out of the millions, if not billions, of species of animals are we the only ones that don't just have sex for reproduction. "
We're not. Other species masturbate, and have homosexual sex.
Almost all giraffe sex is male on male because the gestation period for females is so long. Can't blame a guy for getting bored.
Concerning masturbation, perhaps more so in animals than humans, I'm inclined to believe that lack of access to a willing sexual partner is responsible for the behavior. Animals would need to have the cognitive ability to decide they don't want to get someone pregnant, and therefore opt out for masturbation, before masturbation can be seen as not related to reproduction.
To exemplify what I mean by us not just having sex for reproduction, consider that people often engage in sex, not because they feel the urge to, but because their partner has the urge, and they love their partner.
I guess my question would be, what do you consider to be homosexuality? I'm under the impression that homosexuality means sleeping with the same sex, to the exclusion of the other.
That's just semantics, your first claim "Why, out of the millions, if not billions, of species of animals are we the only ones that don't just have sex for reproduction. " is demonstrably wrong. You never mentioned your miraculous ability to know what animals are thinking when they have a wank. It's irrelevant anyway, though I'm dubious, especially since you offer naught but the assertion.
"To exemplify what I mean by us not just having sex for reproduction, consider that people often engage in sex, not because they feel the urge to, but because their partner has the urge, and they love their partner."
That's not clarification it's a different claim. Other animals have sex that has nothing to do with reproduction, we're not unique in that behaviour. Homosexuality has been evidenced by research in multiple species.
Well, from what we know about giraffes, I would not say that they are homosexual as much as sexual pragmatists. For them, it seems that the sex is the goal and the partner is the means to that end. But of course, I am not Dr. Doolittle. I don't know if the intercourse is the product of boredom, excessive lust with limited available partners, attraction to individuals of the same sex, or an inability to masturbate effectively. But going by how much of giraffe sex is homosexual, coupled with the fact that giraffes still reproduce, I would guess that one of the former explanations is true over the latter.
As far as what homosexuality is, I would say that your definition is fairly accurate with one caveat. Not all humans who identify with homosexuality are necessarily in it for the sex, so to speak. There is a certain level of romantic attraction toward another individual of the same sex that is not entirely sexually driven. Sort of like how we have marriage as opposed to a series of one night stands with the same person. The practice of monogamy or even just general faithfulness to an individual or group of individuals is seen in other animals, specifically penguins. I'm not aware of some large or even marginal homosexual community withing penguin populations, but monogamy is practiced in all sexual orientations. But even still, homosexuality is not defined entirely by sexual attraction, but a personal attraction as well. To demonstrate this idea, think of your wife or girlfriend, should you be so lucky as to have one. Do you only think of her sexually? Sex isn't the only idea that crosses your mind, right? I should think that you also value her companionship or some aspect of her character, right?
Now, I'm fairly certain I can see where you'd object to this, because companionship can be found with a partner of either sex, and certain characteristics are present regardless of sex. However, keep in mind that our typical feelings of attraction to another individual are caused by chemicals. Anyone versed in biology knows that certain hormones are produced differently or even not at all from one sex to the other. So I would assert that homosexuality is partly sexual, but also partly a chemical dependence upon others of the same sex. As far as what causes this chemical dependency, I don't know.
The law emphasizes the importance of informed consent independently of age.
Re: your OP "Why do so many religions and so many of the religious seem obsessed with sex? "
I've been thinking about it (slowly, took me awhile to put the blatant misogyny in religion to one side ) and here's what I came up with: I think it's because we're all the products of sex and the sex act itself is faintly ridiculous.
We've had the mind/body dichotomy for a very long time. It's on the ropes now, but it's still around- it's going down fighting. All the dignified, high falutin, profound stuff comes from the mind, but the stuff from the body (us)...well, the act that produced us wasn't dignified, was it? All those bits dingle dangling, and wiggling jiggling. The grunts. The groans. The heavy breathing . The funny faces we pull. Nope. We wouldn't want to be presented to the queen looking and sounding like that. Not dignified at all. A little bit...well...silly, really.
Sex reminds us we're animals, and if you're of the stripe that doesn't want to be an animal, that wants to be something better than an animal - well, you're going to think and say nasty things about the evidence that we're animals, aren't you? You're going to go out of your way to deny it. You're going to split the body from the mind. You'll put the mind on a pedestal and kick the body into the gutter. You might even invent a third thing - a soul- so you're even more better than an animal.
Thank you for your interesting take....my turn to ponder for a bit. :)