The war on ISIS.

  • Thread starter mister dog
  • 3,128 comments
  • 131,360 views
FrzGT
No they are joining because they see big money there.
Click to expand...
Nope they join because they are social outcasts in their homelands, and this way they can let out their frustrations by participating in acts of sadism, in the name of god of course.
 
I see it as apart of being afraid and even threatened. She probably had no choice but to join them.

Those ISIS Extremist actually make me sick, they remind of children who get really upset over an opinion but this time unlike Children, these guys can be dangerous with their tools and being much more aggressive. I also hate how they give Muslims are bad name, however I also blame the media for this as well, I know that Muslims can be peaceful people and live without any harm but thanks to the media giving these Extremist all the attention, people are given wrong messages about Muslims and start to be very discriminatory against them even though they did nothing to deserve it.
 
Cartoons currently being viewed in Syria and Iraq.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-10-12-14-55-15

In one cartoon widely distributed among Iraqis on Facebook and Twitter, U.S. President Barack Obama is dressed as a Sunni sheikh, while Putin as a Shiite imam, suggesting the two are taking sides.

Another cartoon shows a bare-chested Putin holding IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi by the collar of his jalabaya, looking very intimidating. He says to al-Baghdadi: "Where do you think you're going? I'll flatten you like flour," a popular Iraqi expression.

Al-Baghdadi, holding a cellphone, shouts: "Obama, save me!"
 
The Arab groups in the new alliance are operating under the name "The Syrian Arab Coalition" - a grouping which U.S. officials have said would receive support under a new U.S. strategy aimed at fighting Islamic State in Syria.
Click to expand...
^Reuters

This time it'll work! Probably... Not...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/12/us-mideast-crisis-syria-kurds-idUSKCN0S60BD20151012

https://www.rt.com/usa/318596-us-syria-rebels-pentagon/

So I guess now we wait for Russia to throw their bombs on them and piss off USA and United States of Europe :P
 
ULTRAVIOLENZZ
http://egyptianstreets.com/2015/10/...s-video-game-for-russian-airstrikes-in-syria/
Click to expand...
obama-facepalm1.jpg
 
Syrian army is assaulting Jobar, a district of Damascus that was under control of the islamists for the last few years.

GLeQOTlq7G8.jpg

^People walk around the market while a fight is going on in a couple of blocks away.



Quadcopter footage:


Breaking: the leader of Ahrar Ash-Sham islamist group, Abu-Bakr Ash-Shishani, was eliminated by a Russian airstrike, as reported by KP reporter in Syria, Alexander Kots (whose photo and vids are above).
 
Just a small note on the whole slave issue, to clear things up properly:

Slavery IS allowed in Islam by shariah law, that is completely correct. However, the concept of a slave is very different to what we all know as slaves in our world. We think (and I had to triple check this) that slaves generally mean captives with little or no rights, and we are right to think so. Sounds like ISIS are taking this very meaning and raping women. Does Islam say that a male can have relations with his female slave? Yes it does. Does it say that they can rape them and degrade them? No. A slave in Islam has almost all the same rights as a free person (the only major right that is not given is the right to just walk away and never come back). They are to be respected the same, fed the same, looked after the same, listened to the same etc etc. No chain and ball systems like we come to know of slavery.

Furthermore, under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, slavery (which by definition was the chain and ball type) was abolished, however this was also signed and backed by Muslim countries and senior Muslim leaders for the simple reason that slavery was a norm 1400 years ago and Islam was there to bring fairness to it. Slavery today is extremely rare and has no place in the modern world, and a situation where slavery would even be permitted within the rules of Islam does not even seem to exist, nor has it existed for a very very long time.

All in all. Slavery is a no go nowadays, even in the Islamic form.


ISIS are horrible human beings (I cannot think of enough words to describe how horrible I think their acts are) and I never wish harm on anybody, but if did, it would be upon them to make them pay for the crimes they have committed firstly against humanity and secondly in the name of Islam.
 
ECGadget
Just a small note on the whole slave issue, to clear things up properly:

Slavery IS allowed in Islam by shariah law, that is completely correct. However, the concept of a slave is very different to what we all know as slaves in our world. We think (and I had to triple check this) that slaves generally mean captives with little or no rights, and we are right to think so. Sounds like ISIS are taking this very meaning and raping women. Does Islam say that a male can have relations with his female slave? Yes it does. Does it say that they can rape them and degrade them? No. A slave in Islam has almost all the same rights as a free person (the only major right that is not given is the right to just walk away and never come back). They are to be respected the same, fed the same, looked after the same, listened to the same etc etc. No chain and ball systems like we come to know of slavery.

Furthermore, under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, slavery (which by definition was the chain and ball type) was abolished, however this was also signed and backed by Muslim countries and senior Muslim leaders for the simple reason that slavery was a norm 1400 years ago and Islam was there to bring fairness to it. Slavery today is extremely rare and has no place in the modern world, and a situation where slavery would even be permitted within the rules of Islam does not even seem to exist, nor has it existed for a very very long time.

All in all. Slavery is a no go nowadays, even in the Islamic form.


ISIS are horrible human beings (I cannot think of enough words to describe how horrible I think their acts are) and I never wish harm on anybody, but if did, it would be upon them to make them pay for the crimes they have committed firstly against humanity and secondly in the name of Islam.
Click to expand...
Sounds like some of the hired help under Sharia might be better off as slaves if they were treated as you describe. Google Saudi Arabia maid abuse and you'll find dozens of stories of maids being burned, tortured, limbs cut off, beaten etc. I don't want to link them here because many of the stories contain brutal images.

45 Maids on Death Row in Saudi Arabia
 
Johnnypenso
Sounds like some of the hired help under Sharia might be better off as slaves if they were treated as you describe. Google Saudi Arabia maid abuse and you'll find dozens of stories of maids being burned, tortured, limbs cut off, beaten etc. I don't want to link them here because many of the stories contain brutal images.

45 Maids on Death Row in Saudi Arabia
Click to expand...

Oh I have seen those, and I disagree with them (I felt really sick actually since I am not one for gory/brutal stuff) but I actually got this information from an extremely well respected website called AskImam which is led by one of the most knowledgable Islamic Scholars on the planet. What I really feel sad about is not only does the likes of ISIS commit these brutal acts but even countries where Islam is supposed to be upheld in a beautiful fashion. Just as an example, one of the senior Imams are the holy mosque in Makkah spoke out against the government and how they let things that were unislamic slide etc (I am assuming brutality could be one of them) and they threatened to jail him if he ever spoke out against them again, and banned him from leading or making speeches in arabia for a year or something. That is very sad indeed. I find it hard to side with Muslim counties in many ways because, and this is paraphrasing an Imam in the very city I live, in the UK we have the ability to practise our religion more openly than even in an Islamic country. That is saying something. I am not saying Saudi, UAE, Qatar etc are not Islamic at all but there are parts in there that are corrupt. Taking this a little off topic but for example all this bribery stuff and slavery (??) with the World Cup in Qatar? Nothing Islamic about it; bribery is prohibitted (except in one circumstance) to an extent that a hadith states "Cursed be the one who is involved in bribery" (Slight paraphrase).

Bringing it back on topic, whatever ISIS are doing in pointing at Shariah for justification, they are not doing a very good job but of course if you don't know what is allowed and isn't, when, how and under what justification, then we take that as it is. Heck, I saw that article about the slavery thing and whilst my first instinct was "That is not Islam, there is no way it could be", I had to make sure and find out. So now I am sharing my findings with you as best as I can.
 
Spurgy 777
So are you saying according to Islam, slavery is fine as long as you don't harm the enslsved person?
Click to expand...

No, I am saying that according to the rules of shariah, in the case of a valid war (of which nothing that is happening today can be considered) and in the fighting according to the rules of shariah (which again is not happening at all), if PoW are captured as slaves, it is permitted under very strict rules. Furthermore, the laws governing the treating of these slaves is such that they would have almost every right as a free human.

However, in light of this era and the way society has changed, such slavery cannot and should not exist. That is what I am saying. And the term slave in this context again I reiterate is NOT our (also correct) definition of slave.

Only reason I bought this up is because ISIS are pointing towards this ruling and using it as justification for taking slaves and raping them etc. Except they have started a war that is deemed illegal in Islam, ignored pretty much every rule in the book concerning it, and then degraded the people they have captured and then have the audacity to point to Islamic law and say "There is our reasoning, we can do this".
 
Last edited:
You're still not making much sense so I'll try and help you out.

Definition of a slave is when someone is legal property of another person and is forced to obey them. I'm guessing that's what you mean by slave.

So who, assuming you're in a "legitimate" war with another country, are you allowed to take as a slave? Anyone? What stops them from leaving if you aren't allowed to harm them in anyway? You can't enslave someone if you don't forcibly stop them from leaving.
 
Spurgy 777
You're still not making much sense so I'll try and help you out.

Definition of a slave is when someone is legal property of another person and is forced to obey them. I'm guessing that's what you mean by slave.

So who, assuming you're in a "legitimate" war with another country, are you allowed to take as a slave? Anyone? What stops them from leaving if you aren't allowed to harm them in anyway? You can't enslave someone if you don't forcibly stop them from leaving.
Click to expand...


By that definition, yes it is allowed. As for who you are allowed to take, I am afraid my knowledge ends there but there are very stringent rules as to who is or is not allowed. From what I know though, the only people who can now be taken as slaves are PoW and anyone who was born into slavery. But a situation like that arising where it could happen is one is probably a trillion. What I can do is put this quote which explains more about slaves (from the site I mentioned in a previous post). The question asked was "Are Slaves Allowed In Islam?":

Before answering your query, we shall reproduce an excerpt regarding slavery in Islam from Ma'ārif al-Qur`ān by Mufti Muhammad Shafi Uthmani below:

Let us now address the objection that Islam is the great upholder of human rights. Then how is it that it allows the enslaving of human beings?

This objection is a fallacy based on the false analogy drawn between Islamic concept of slavery and its practice in other religions and communities; whereas in Islam after the rights given to the slaves and the social status granted to them, they can hardly be called slaves in the generally accepted sense of the word. They in fact constitute a brotherhood. A famous orientalist in his book Arab Civilization writes:

When the word 'slave' is uttered in the presence of a European who is used to reading American writings, he conceives in his mind those helpless people who are shackled with chains, around whose necks are iron collars, who are lashed with whips and driven forth, whose food is barely enough to subsist, and for whom nothing more than dark dungeons are available to live in...there is absolutely no doubt about the fact that Islam's concept of slavery is completely different from the Christian concept of slavery.

The Islamic viewpoint regarding slaves has been made plain in a famous Hadith of the Holy Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam) as follows:

Your slaves are your brothers, and Allah has put them under your control. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats, and dress him of what he wears. Do not overburden them [slaves] to do things beyond their capacity, and if you do so, then help them.[1]

The social and civil rights that Islam has accorded to the slaves are almost equal to free individuals. Thus, as opposed to other nations, Islam has not only permitted the slaves to marry but also emphasized that the masters should marry off those of their slaves and slavegirls who are righteous[2] so much so that he can even marry a free woman. A slave's share from the spoils of war is equal to that of a free person. If he gives refuge to an enemy, it would be respected in the same way as given by a free individual. There are so many injunctions in Qur`ān and Hadīth regarding good treatment of slaves that if they are collected together, they can be compiled into a voluminous book. Sayyidunā 'Alī (radiyallahu 'anh) says that the last words of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) before his departure from this earthly life were:

"Take care of prayer; take care of prayer and keep your duty to Allah regarding slaves under your command."[3]

Islam organized education and training programmes for slaves. Its effect was seen during the reign of 'Abd-ul-Malik Ibn Marwan in almost all the provinces of the Islamic State. Some of the best and greatest authorities on education and intellectual development were slaves whose chronicles are narrated in several history books. Furthermore, this nominal slavery was gradually abolished or reduced. There is a huge number of Qur'anic verses and Holy Prophetic Traditions which set out the virtues and merits of setting the slaves free. There is no act better than emancipation of slaves. In juristic injunctions, pretexts have been looked for to emancipate slaves: expiation for violating fast, for murder, for zihār, for violating oaths and vows - in all these cases the first compulsory command is to emancipate a slave. A Hadīth tells us that if a person has slapped a slave, its expiation is to set him free. Thus, the Companions used to emancipate slaves in large numbers.

To sum up: anyone who looks impartially at the comprehensive reforms Islam introduced in the system of slavery, he cannot escape the conclusion that drawing analogy between Islamic concept of slavery and its practice among other nations is absolutely false.

Furthermore, holding prisoners of war in bondage is only up to the point of permissibility which means that if an Islamic State deems it appropriate, it may hold them in bondage, but it has not been taken as an obligatory or as a commendable act. As a matter of fact, the collective teachings of Qur'an and Hadīth lead us to believe that emancipating them is more meritorious.[4]

Now that the general concept of slavery in Islam has been understood, we will move on to the question of slavery and its permissibility in this day and age. Simply put, if Muslim nations enter into a compact with non-Muslim nations regarding a certain issue, as long as it does not contravene the general principles of Sharī'ah, then such a pact will be binding upon those Muslim nations and it will be there duty to hold up such a covenant.[5]

In our times, there are international treaties upheld by many countries between many nations that state that "no person shall be held in slavery." This clause can be found under article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (for the full text, please follow this link: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml). Many countries signed this pact and agreed to uphold such a covenant. For a broad list of such treaties and the general agreement between such nations, you may refer to the following two links:



Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights



These laws further extended to abolishing all forms of human trafficking as a result of the ongoing sexual abuse, human bondage, and complete disregard to human rights resulting from today's form of human slavery. Examples of such laws include the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA)[6] and the Palermo Protocol regarding children and women[7].

All in all, as stated before, the Islamic form of slavery cannot be compared to the atrocities committed by the slavery we have come to know today. In order to combat such oppression and violation of human rights, international laws were created and many Muslim nations also agreed to abide by these laws for the greater good and to combat the oppression resulting from modern slavery.
Click to expand...

Edit: To add. I found out about this topic only today, and a couple of things to add about this quote. Firstly, you can see from it that if an agreement does not break Shariah law (and not having slaves does not) then it becomes binding. Therefore by law, a Muslim is NOT allowed to have a slave since the UDoHR and that in itself is built into Islamic law, making the laws about slaves only a theory now for a past era.

Double edit: And one other thing that just occurred to me. Whist Islam does not forbid slavery in Shariah law, but whilst having rules regarding it there is a preference to either free slaves or not take them. But those points are all moot now since I believe all state laws forbid slavery. ISIS have no right to point at those laws and use them as justification.

And to add to a post made by @Johnnypenso sadly brutality and even slavery I believe still exists inside Muslim countries, contrary to the laws set out. It's sickening.
 
Last edited:
I would say I can't believe what I'm reading, but to be honest I'm not surprised, it's a religion after all, to make it clear, here's a summary of his post as I read it;

Islamic slavery can't be compared to modern slavery because Islam says you should treat your slaves better than most other people treat them. And that if you treat them badly they are to be set free, how nice of them.

And the reason Islamic slavery doesn't apply today is because we have laws that say otherwise, damn.

One thing they conveniently missed out seems to be the punishment for a slave disobeying their legal owner, after all, how do you force someone to obey you if there's no consequences for them ignoring you.
 
Spurgy 777
I would say I can't believe what I'm reading, but to be honest I'm not surprised, it's a religion after all, to make it clear, here's a summary of his post as I read it;

Islamic slavery can't be compared to modern slavery because Islam says you should treat your slaves better than most other people treat them. And that if you treat them badly they are to be set free, how nice of them.

And the reason Islamic slavery doesn't apply today is because we have laws that say otherwise, damn.

One thing they conveniently missed out seems to be the punishment for a slave disobeying their legal owner, after all, how do you force someone to obey you if there's no consequences for them ignoring you.
Click to expand...


Islamic Slavery is only slavery as set out by the guides of shariah. It does not say take slaves. But it does not say do not take slaves. All it says is that IF you take a slave then this is how you should go about it, and if you were to take slaves these are the circumstances in which you may take one. And since we have an agreed upon a Declaration of Human Rights, that is binding under Islamic law too. This is the same everywhere. Slaves were commonplace, the only difference was how slaves were regarded and treated, which is one of the aspects Islam tried to change. But the point is moot for two reasons
1) There has been no legal war under Islamic law in a long time
2) Slavery is illegal under state law, which was signed by Muslim counties too, making it illegal under Islamic Law

Doing some digging, I found this, which is written by Professor Bernard Freamon only recently (http://thecnnfreedomproject.blogs.c...-justifies-slavery-what-does-islamic-law-say/):

In the past few months, the world has witnessed horrific accounts of the enslavement of thousands of innocent Yazidis and other religious minorities by ISIS partisans in Iraq and Syria.

In a recent article in its online English-language magazine, ISIS ideologues offered legal justifications for the enslavement of these non-Muslim non-combatants, stating that “enslaving the families of the kuffar [infidels] and taking their women as concubines is a firmly established aspect of the Shariah or Islamic law.”

The article argues, based on a variety of Shariah sources, that ISIS partisans have a religious duty to kill or enslave members of the Yazidi community as part of their struggle [jihad] against their enemies.

This argument is plainly wrong, hypocritical and astonishingly ahistorical, relying on male fantasies inspired by stories from the days of imperial Islam.

It is also an affront to right-thinking Muslims everywhere and a criminal perversion of Islamic law, particularly its primary source, the Glorious Quran.


Jurists around the world acknowledge that there is now a universal consensus recognizing an irrefutable human right to be free from slavery and slave-trading.

This right, like the rights to be free from genocide, torture, racial discrimination and piracy, has become a bedrock principle of human affairs. ISIS seeks to remove Islamic jurisprudence from this universal consensus by citing Quranic verses that recognize the existence of chattel slavery.

Citation to Quranic verses on chattel slavery at first blush seems to make this point because the Quran, like other religious texts, accepted the existence of chattel slavery as a fact of life at the time of its revelation.

It is also true, however, that the Quran established an entirely new ethic on the issue of slavery and ISIS’s selective use of certain Quranic texts to justify contemporary chattel slavery ignores this fact.

First, consistent with the new ethic, the emphasis in all of the revelations on slavery is on the emancipation of slaves, not on their capture or the continuation of the institution of slavery. (See, for example, verses 2:177, 4:25, 4:92, 5:89, 14:31, 24:33, 58:3, 90:1-12.)

There is not one single verse suggesting that the practice should continue. Further, the Quran makes no mention of slave-markets or slave-trading and it repeatedly exhorts believers to free their slaves as an exemplification of their piety and belief in God.

Perhaps the best example of this emancipatory ethic is chapter 90, which is explicitly addressed to the Prophet Muhammad. It posits that there are two roads one can take in life and that the “high road” is the one that leads the righteous human being to free slaves.

The Prophet followed this exhortation, exhibiting a great solicitude for the material and spiritual condition of the slaves in the society around him. His example inspired his companions to emancipate thousands of slaves and, in an oft-quoted statement, he remarked that he would meet the man who “sells a free man as a slave and devours his price” on Judgment Day.

This is an explicit condemnation of trafficking in free human beings.

It is true that there are reported examples from the Prophet’s life that describe him as giving and receiving slaves and he even used slavery as a tool of conquest in war.

He freed all of his individually owned slaves and the wartime circumstances in those reports were very unique, involving specific people who engaged in war or treachery against him.

There is only one Quranic verse, 47:4, that authorizes capture of prisoners of war and it does not permit slavery, ordering military commanders to either free the prisoners gratis or hold them for ransom.

Enslaving a prisoner of war is therefore arguably illegal and certainly enslaving a non-combatant is likewise an Islamic crime.

Many forget that, for hundreds of years, Muslim imperialists and slave-traders illegally raided non-combatant villages in Eastern Europe, West Africa, East Africa, India and Southeast Asia, plundering, pillaging and capturing and raping women and children with impunity under pretextual jihads.

It seems that the ISIS ideologues want to revive this shameful legacy.

Traditionalist interpreters conclude that slavery is lawful in Islam simply because there is Quranic legislation regulating it, suggesting an implied permission.

Even the traditionalists must acknowledge, however, that all of the Quranic verses on slavery arise in contexts that overwhelmingly encourage emancipation.

Why is this? It is because the Quranic intendment contemplated a gradual disappearance of chattel slavery.

This is exactly what has happened in history. ISIS refers to the disappearance of chattel slavery in the Muslim world as an “abandonment” of the Shariah.

This is wrong. Rather, the verses contemplate the advent of a slavery-free society through the vehicle of emancipation.

There is another verse in the Quran, 3:64, that interpreters have argued may actually be explicit authority for abolition.

It condemns any “person of the book” who seeks lordship over another human being. Sayyid Qutb, the Sunni theologian and commentator on the Quran who is widely admired by literalists and traditionalists like the ISIS ideologues, offered extensive commentary on this verse in his masterful work, Fi Zilal al-Quran ("In the Shade of the Quran").

Commenting on the verse, he observed that enslaving human beings, like Pharaoh enslaved the Hebrews, is the “worst type of corruption.”

He argued that the verse aims to make sure that “none is elevated above another,” that “none enslaves another,” and that human beings “do not enslave one another.”

He posits that Islam is “total liberation of man from enslavement by others.” A number of other prominent jurists have agreed with this position.

Recently, a number of well-respected Muslim jurists and opinion-makers directed a letter to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, covering a number of issues.

On the issue of slavery, they observed that “[n]o scholar of Islam disputes that one of Islam’s aims is to abolish slavery” and that there has been a Muslim consensus on the prohibition of slavery for over a century.

This opinion further supports the conclusion that ISIS has wrongfully enslaved the Yazidis and others.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You're completely missing the point though, there shouldn't be any rules or regulations for slavery, if the Quran was truly from an all powerful being who dictates what is or isn't moral the section on slavery should be very short. It should just say;

"YOU CAN'T HAVE SLAVES UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE"

See, wasn't that simple? No, "but if you must treat them nicely".

It is practically the equivalent of a parent saying to their child;

"I'm not going to say you can have a pet, I'm not going to say you can't have a pet, but if you do get one, treat it nicely or I'll take it away"

Except in this case the pet is another human being and the parent is a being who hasn't been proven to even exist and is very unlikely to do anything to stop you.
 
Spurgy 777
One thing they conveniently missed out seems to be the punishment for a slave disobeying their legal owner, after all, how do you force someone to obey you if there's no consequences for them ignoring you.
Click to expand...
Duh.

"Do as I say or I'll whine at you!"
 
I do understand what you're saying, yes. However, consider the time in which it was revealed. Any sane scholar of Islam would conclude, just as Professor Freamon does that the way the Quraan and Hadith talk concern slavery show that it was designed to be gradually abolished. And this is nothing new from other things in Islam. Alcohol for example was not just

"You cannot consume alcohol"

It was done in stages, just like this. But again, I do completely understand where you are coming from however I am sure you can appreciate the fact of phasing rules in. We do it all the time in everything, whether it is rules in F1 or country laws etc. This was no different. Consider this, in Arabia there was a lot of slavery. Some of these slaves were bought by Muslims for the sole reason to free them. If slavery was forbidden in Islam from day one, how could they have stopped these people being treated horribly?

Also as an aside, Islam had regulations and rules for pretty much everything, from monetary transactions to eating, so having ones on slavery is not a surprise considering how commonplace it was. If you read the article it will explain exactly how Islam moved away from slavery (and this is written by a professor of law). It also highlights a horrible part of Islamic history which pretty much correlates to what ISIS are doing again, both against the teachings of Islam.
 
ECGadget
I do understand what you're saying, yes. However, consider the time in which it was revealed. Any sane scholar of Islam would conclude, just as Professor Freamon does that the way the Quraan and Hadith talk concern slavery show that it was designed to be gradually abolished.
Click to expand...

Yes, but its not just any Joe Blogs trying to abolish it, we're talking about a god. He apparently created everything, if he was truly the source of all morality he should just tell people no, slavery is wrong. Just like he said murder was wrong and stealing was wrong, just because it would confuse most people as to why isn't an excuse not to abolish it immediately.

And this is nothing new from other things in Islam. Alcohol for example was not just

"You cannot consume alcohol"

It was done in stages, just like this. But again, I do completely understand where you are coming from however I am sure you can appreciate the fact of phasing rules in. We do it all the time in everything, whether it is rules in F1 or country laws etc. This was no different.
Click to expand...

I don't appreciate phasing in rules when it comes to slavery. Or murder. Or stealing, etc. These things are morally wrong, they always have been and always will be no matter what time you're from. Whereas on the other had you would be very hard pressed to prove drinking alcohol is immoral in the slightest, in fact phasing in a ban on all alcohol is immoral if anything.

Consider this, in Arabia there was a lot of slavery. Some of these slaves were bought by Muslims for the sole reason to free them. If slavery was forbidden in Islam from day one, how could they have stopped these people being treated horribly?
Click to expand...

Buying a slaves freedom and buying a slave are two entirely different things, and really requires very little effort to tell the two apart.

Also as an aside, Islam had regulations and rules for pretty much everything, from monetary transactions to eating, so having ones on slavery is not a surprise considering how commonplace it was. If you read the article it will explain exactly how Islam moved away from slavery (and this is written by a professor of law). It also highlights a horrible part of Islamic history which pretty much correlates to what ISIS are doing again, both against the teachings of Islam.
Click to expand...

Again, we're talking about a god, I would agree with you if it had been a person writing the Quran and coming up with the laws, but it apparently wasn't. And because of that the Quran should just be a long list of all the things that we shouldn't do because they are morally wrong, no if, buts or maybes because it's written by a being who knows everything and therefore should have no doubts over right and wrong.
 
@Spurgy 777 I wish I could explain it more, but what we take for granted now was not what it was like years ago, and we really cannot understand God (if we believe in God that is). Yes, today I do and I believe most people do look at something like slavery and think this is just morally wrong. Back then, especially in Arabia, bloodshed was commonplace as was everything else. I guess we'll never know why it was this way until we meet God, right? I am sadly not an expert in Islamic law at all, or spirituality or anything like that... What I do know though is that ISIS are twisting everything they can into their own evil ways and that is the point I wanted to make across with the original post. But thank you for this debate because it was good. I'm just sorry that I do not have all the answers.
 
Can anyone tell me why moderate and not any Islamist rebels bombed by the evil Russians yell "Allahu Akbar" every 5 seconds on the videos?
 
Rage Racer
Can anyone tell me why moderate and not any Islamist rebels bombed by the evil Russians yell "Allahu Akbar" every 5 seconds on the videos?
Click to expand...

"When the confrontation begins, strike like champions who do not want to go back to this world. Shout, 'Allahu Akbar,' because this strikes fear in the hearts of the non-believers."

My guess is that they are just afraid to die. Some more than others, maybe that's why not all of them scream vodka akbar.
 

Similar threads

Dotini
The US War in Afghanistan
9 10 11
Replies
329
Views
13K
Liquid
Liquid
JMoney
Just War Theory
2 3 4
Replies
100
Views
5K
JMoney
JMoney
Dotini
Wars against native tribal leadership - in general
Replies
24
Views
1K
Rallywagon
Rallywagon
KSaiyu
The New Cold War?
Replies
10
Views
962
YSSMAN
YSSMAN
YSSMAN
21,500 More US Troops Headed to Iraq
2 3
Replies
63
Views
3K
niky
niky

Latest Posts

Back