Court Backs Turkish Headscarf Ban

My apologies. I've had conversations before with real wacky liberal people who were so insistent that religion conform to contemporary society's standards and to not do so made them oppressive and reactionary. I assumed, incorrectly, you believed that religion should move to conform to a societal standard.

Your comment "But this is all worth it if the truth has a chance to surface" is what led me on. There are millions of ways I can twist my explanation.....Lets say that something like fornication becomes accepted doctrine of mainstream Christianity, this in order to conform to a societal standard even though this throws away thousands of years of traditions. "Truth" can be twisted to mean many different things and change isnt always for the good.

Prove that hijab or turbans were used at the time of the prophet as an islamic headgear. I do not think that it is compulsatory. Islam is an august religion, but there is no way one can bring about a reconciliation between the republic and the kind of mentality that reduces Islam to �turban� wearing and also confines ethics to the narrowest interpretation of chastity, although ethics should embrace all society and every societal activity. I have given my reasoning against the hijab. Aside from azimuth no one else seem to provide documenatation to prove otherwise. http://i-cias.com/e.o/index.htm

Opinion or reality? Need proof from you on this one. Most traditionalists seem to follow the notion that women back then tied there hair behind their backs and all that the new revelations provided was to cover the hair fully past their necks.

- [33:59] "O prophet, tell your wives, your daughters, and the wives of the believers that they shall LENGTHEN their
garments. Thus, they will be recognized and avoid
being insulted. God is Forgiver, Most Merciful."

So what could this mean azimuth? Lengthen garments. But it does not say how far. Thats is up to us. Avoid being insulted. Yeah! So they would not become harrassed by aggressive men who might think of them as something less noble or conservative. Notice how no punishment is proclaimed for believers who don't lengthen the garments. But I am sure the history of traditional Islam and the taliban types love to take basic freedoms and personal choice out of the equation.

Or is this how traditionalists treat their women?

Hadith - Al-Tirmidhi 3257, narrated Talq ibn Ali

Allah's Messenger said, "When a man calls his wife to satisfy his desire she must go to him even if she is occupied at the oven."

[Tirmidhi transmitted it.]

 If the religion was not changed or corrupted then you are going against your own scholars?

Hadith - Bukhari 4:668, Narrated Abu Huraira , see also Bukhari 7:786

Allah's Apostle said, "The Jews and the Christians do not dye (their grey hair), so you shall do the opposite of what they do (i.e. dye your grey hair and beards)."

In the process of writing I wrote prophet's wives and not believers. Only the last verse specifically mentions prophet's wives. My mistake if you were confused. Obviously the two previous verses I mentioned were for women of all ages. You seemed to jump on that like you have made a great discovery. But the point and logic of my presentation has not changed. The things to keep in mind is that the best garment is righteousness modesty; covering bossoms, and lenghten garments (cover legs or chest for example) are physical ways to do so. This all helps keep the wolves at bay and brings respect to women.

I have no problem with the Quran today as being written in the same language as when it first was delivered. The actions taken, as you say, were shared by the prophet and followers. That is why it reminds people to follow God and the prophet. He was a role model. His guide was God and the Quran. The hadith books were not around at the time of the prophet. It would be absurd to think that his compatriots lived by contradictory standards created generations later when they were not cannonized. Muhammad received personal revelations too, like many other humans do. But, the Quran was the only revelation he was commissioned to deliver and it is the only revelation we are supposed to follow.

If you think a believer needs to check with history and historical responses then you do not believe God that he is the teacher of the Quran. You need scholars and historians to tell you what to believe.

Seems that traditional believers tend to bring up this lack of detail bit into an arguement. Questions on prayers and such are given as examples. But if you look closer you will find it there in the Quran. I will show you if you do not have that info. But first, I am interested in how you get your info on prayer. Show me your hadiths on it. They must be out there somewhere. Are they detailed as you imply?

Lastly, I am of the mind that the Islamic religion is going through a reformation. It has in the past too. Yet currently we have greater access to vast amounts of information that enables us to question, confront or reafirm our own knowledge. The traditionalists will have to answer alot of questions with sound evidence while trying persuade inquisitive minds to see things there way. And the inquisitive ones will have much to say about age old beliefs. Commands will be evaluated and rules will be changed. People will be offended. But this is all worth it if the truth has a chance to surface. No more diets perscribed by the scholars (i.e.-shelled fish are harram); no more dress codes prescribed by scholars beyond the freedom of personal choice as layed out in the Quran; no more baseless commands. Piety is not how long one grows a beard or follows the rigours of blind superstitions. To each their own.   

To say you have nothing against prostitute but you have a lot against who use them it is an unbalanced view as much as saying "you have nothing agaist drug sellers, but you have a lot against drug users".

While some prostitute are forced LITERALLY to engage in prostitution, most are forced by economic difficulties. Those are as worse as saying I had to steal money because of economic difficulties. I  have no sympathy to prostitutes and those who use them too.

That is the whole foundation of our argument. When it is allright for you to excercise options of not feeling limited and when is it not your right to unlimit yourself. You have to teach yourself to accept feeling of being limited. From simple things as being limited not to eat the whole candy box in a store without being able to pay for it, all the way to limiting your sex adventure to your truely chosen beloved wife.

To say "I hate the feeling of being limited" is kind of a selfish statement.

 

Then I guess we agree here that injust cultural morals cannot be tolerated. What fits under injust? that is a whole new discussion. 

Then I assume here again that we both agree on supporting single women who cannot support themselves. Regarding a pre-cautionary common sense procedure, is marriage. Naturally most ladies are reluctant to raise kids or various kids out of marriage. We always witness the hit-and-run habit of men where he get her pregnant and disappear or deny it. Marriage assures parent support, taking responsibility and pro-women policies of divorce (in US, mostly half of husbands assets goes to the ex-wife) are nothing but an assuring measurement of protecting their rights and recognizing they are valnurable to all challenges.

Don't get sensitive Maju. You should take it as a joke as much as I took your "whimpy" label on me. I hope you enjoyed it. At least, you have now a new terminology.

Originally posted by Maju Next time you are in Porstmouth take the ferry to Bilbao. .

Since Im a whimpy, I prefer traditional family-friendly beaches. But thank you though.

As yourself said it, "this is not privative of that sect". Nudists are not the only people with scandals. But their news visit our newspaper much more regular with other groups of course. No wonder that is happening as now, every a child molestar, a psycho is claiming to be a nudist as an access gate for their fullfillment. Same as the doctorine of repent in Catholism which allows for priests to take advantage of kids in private sets of confessions.

There is a lot that can be said here, I personally prefer observing the developing studies regarding nudity effect on the society and based on those imperial studies, I will be able to render a better decision in the future.

I enjoyed the topic though

what are you talking about?

discuss whatever you like anywhere, that quote is not a complain or a restriction or anything.

you misunderstood what i meant obviously and happily tried to make fun of it >>><<< and another one for the "banana club"  suggestion here it is >><<

anyway

i meant you dont expect people to belive you on your claims with few knowledge you got from reading a transilted verses, and not caring about what people did through history from their understanding to such verses.

its wiser to take into account why others did such actions regarding such orders and didnt do what you see as obviouse order.

The headscarf Arab wore before Islam is different than the one women had to wear after Islam.

that the first one was not actully covering the hair, it was mostly used as a type of sun and environment protection, women also used it as a beauty accessory, with more colors and gold hanging on it.

the one Islam ordered women to wear is different , that it has to cover all the hair and the neck and to be less attracting when the women is out of their homes.

and iam not using anything here which is not being used through history.

AS i said earlier when any verse comes with an order for muslims to follow the usual practice is to see what did the prophet and his companions reacted to such verse.

the way they delt with such verses IS the way the Verse is has to be understood  as simple as that.

you dont come now after all these years and to tell us that the Quran was misunderstood and you the wise one after 14 centures found out the truth !

the way the Prophet and his companions dealt with the Orders in the Quran is the exact action required by the Quran.

Originally posted by Maju the order is clear enough, people who doesnt know much about the religion and its history would aruge about these things. half knowlege is worse than ignorance. One can't know about everything. But I try to understand. Yet the more I understand Islam the less I like it. It seems a cult, in the worst sense of the term: mixing religion and politics since its origins, trying to get women back to the dark ages, threatening those that decide to abandon the sect... Ugly.

i didnt say one can know or cant know, i said half knowledge is worse than ignorance,

that when you base your actions and decision on such poor or incomplete knowledge about certain matter.

and about the dark ages story, well if you are intersted i advice you to keep getting more infos and read more about how women treated through history and how are they actully treated now FROM DIFFERENT angles and not from one community and one source.

iam not claiming that the original arabic has to be transilated to be understood by Arabs today, we Arabs read the quran as it is when it first came.

the thing is that there are some words which are not popular today and not clear to many people and we have Arabic/Arabic Dictionaries for these words. similar to the English/English ones.

also it is known that the Quran has deep meanings which are transilated through the Actions of the Prophet and His close Companions after him.

these Actions ARE the ones the Islamic Scholars used to give more details about certain verses.

so the comparision between the Quran and the bible is weak, that the first bible is not the same as the ONES available today.

Muslims dont treat the transilations of the Quran as Quran.

well obviously this law is not being enforced as you are saying, less than a month ago the Turkish President made a party in his residence and didnt invite the women from some political parties because they wear head scarf and made an announcement that this place wont allow any women with head scarf to enter it. !! how can this be a governmental duty and university settings???

and how would you make this as a law while a huge percentage of the population are against it? very democratic huh?

they are calling themselvs secular and Muslims at the same time and so strict about a peice of extra cloths a woman wants to wear on her head. i wonder if they acctuly pray and if they do  what do they wear? i mean the female ones.

dont know how you can use the christian and the jewish wearing of hijab against the using of hijab to musilms?

these two religions are supposed to be the same in line with islam and as per muslims belive that these religions were corrupted and changed by its people, so having some wearing hijabs can be considered one of the things which werent changed or corrupted.

and as i mentioned above the wearing of head scarf before islam is not as it is after islam.

what i meant from my quote which you used is that the quran came in the same exact languge as the Arab spoke that time WHICH means that it was understood by them faster and the Actions they took were the accurate ones regarding any order in any verse.

Arabs today do understand the Quran easly too but as you can see to know the exact requrement of certain verses Muslims had to check through history What the early muslims did when such order or requirenmt came.

iam not saying Arabs dont know what is written in the Quran unless they transtlate it. we do know whats written there and for more details about certain matter a history must be used

a simple example the prayers werent mentioned in details in the Quran.

how would you know that you  are praying as God wanted?!

it was explained by the Prophet as he said Pray as you saw me Pray.

Your article says the results were not normalised for all factors. Most single-parent families are poor, because the parent does not have support. If they were not poor, things would have been different. Also, I have seen research which gives different results than this before.

The example at the end of your previous post. I am asking you if you believe that there is a connection between that person's deviant sexual behaviour and him being an atheists' and feminists' rights supporter? 

This is not true. It is known that such children grow up quite normal.

What are you trying to show us by those examples? I am an atheist and I support feminism. Do you claim that we are less moral than religious people?

Originally posted by Maju To prevent all those problems Napoleon had a remedy "the child born of a married woman is son of the husband" (Napoleonic code). I have another: support lone mothers and end with that anachronism of traditional family.

Napoleon was not the initiator of children of married couples to be named after their husband. Supporting the mother is not the answer because that support has to come from somewhere. If you enjoyed your sex with her or not, sorry you have to support her child as it is a product of you. Plus, it is not the fault of the mother to be a single-parent. Social and Scientific studies has shown that children can have a severe mental and growth imbalance with single-parent uprising.

Then I think it is easier and wise to marry a prostitute. She has no objections with you goofing around and she will support the family financially too.

Wether you and me like it or not, women need an external support especially during their pregenancy period and recovery period and the time they spend with their children at early ages. If you are opposing spending a cent in supporting a family, then who is going to support them? Government? They need to tax you for that, so you are going to support them no matter what. Or maybe the husband? Yes, he has an obligation. This child does not only belongs to the mother and deserves a normal stable life.


 

I think you missed the point here. The point is that if other cultures do it, it does not mean it is correct or it is a part of the culture that we shall stay nuetral about. If you are opposing Burka for women rights, I oppose sex out of marriage as it has been proven the case most of the time the husband will escape his obligation leaving the women valnurable to many difficulties. Also, why would I support a child that is not mine? We are not hamsters who only produce with only motherhood support. 


 

Originally posted by Maju What is a nuptial fighter? First time I read or hear that term.

Don't worry, Nuptial fighter is much politer than a whimpy. Nuptial fight is when males go and fight during the breeding seasons of various animals. I just loved classifying you a nuptial fighter as you might wait for your breeding season and excercise your mother nature-given right of breeding around with various females at the same time

Im not sure about Spain, but Portsmouth, England, sets an age requirement for entering a nudist beach..

Funny story. For me, I would like to tell you also a story but not as peaceful and funny as yours.

Nudism is nothing but a blanket for social decay. If it wasnt to encourage it, at leasts it covers it. As far as I recall, the well-known American nudist Jonathan Tampico  was convicted of child molester. He is known to frequent nudist camps and to use the preaching of family nudism and whole body acceptance to victimize male children. He is not on the "Caution List" of the American Association for Nude Recreation (past American Sunbathing Association).

Also in 1992, Joseph Robert Wanner, 39 years old and a substitute elementary school teacher; pro-feminist member of a university women's action committee; naturist; and articulate defender of abortion, animal, atheist, and Native American rights, was arrested at his home in Kutztown, Pennsylvania. Mr. Wanner was charged with 14 counts of rape, 14 counts of statutory rape, 12 counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, 3 counts of corruption of minors, 19 counts of sexual abuse of children for the production and manufacturing of child pornography, 144 counts of child sex abuse for possession of child pornography, 17 counts of indecent assault, 6 counts of aggravated indecent assault, and 1 count of voluntary deviate sexual intercourse (with a cat).  

Copies of the police reports are available on http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/NudistHallofShame/Tampico.ht ml

If I understood you well, you are saying basically that you are fine with spouses having sex out of marraige?

The number one element in raising a healthy society is a healthy family. Otherwise, why governments are spending all that money in family support and dealing with high divorce rates.

Try to watch Jerrey Springer's show and see how pathetic it is filled with spouses who had sex out of marriage and got children who needs a DNA test and refusal of custody...etc   Or have you looked in the newspaper maybe and watched how many divorces are caused by cheating?

If you and your spouse are fine goofing around with other men and women, that is your choice, but try not to miss up with other people's spouses.

I'm not sure what are you tring to say here. That Islam ignores or condones polygame?
no porque otras naciones hacen la poligynia, significa que tienen razón! (not because other nations do polygame, it means they are correct).

Siempre! Many cultures allow for a wife to be burned with her desceased husband. Does it mean we should watch it and admire that part of the culture and have an open mind about it???

You can call me a whimpy and i can call you a nuptial figher. However, I think most of today's human being don't appreciate you walking nude in public. If you are proud of your nudity, find a proper place maybe.

My sister studys nursing and they have seen even videos of male private organs. No sanction is imposed on educational and special-purpose films.

 

Thank you for your European style invitation. I have been to Europe and nude beaches are seperate from public beaches. In fact, you have to be of a certain age in order to enter those nude beaches, which means it has a negative impact on immatures and children.