If you raise your kids to believe in Allah you are setting up your grandchildren to live like this. Oppose religion, wherever you see it.
Well that’s pretty reductionist, and bigoted. If you’re going to judge Muslims by their extremists then you can’t leave out the Christians and Jews. Hell Jewish extremists in Israel are committing genocide as we speak.
Yes those as well.
They said religion, not just Islam.
And yet they specifically reference Allah. And elsewhere in the comment section they try and say Allah is different from the Judeo-Christian “God”.
You’re allowed to use a specific example to make a general point.
Funny how that seems to happen with minorities and Islam but not white people.
You’re the only person concerned about race here. Stop being racist.
That’s literally a line used against people protesting for minority rights. It’s not racist to call out problematic stuff.
Literally nobody mentioned race.
And aside from that, you’re wrong anyway. People criticise “white” religious beliefs too. A lot.
Like, you’ve never heard people hating on the catholic church and the people who support it for turning a blind eye to sex abuse scandals? Seriously?
Or about the religious Christian crazies in the US? You’ve never heard about that?
Or the cult that is Scientology? Is that something you’re unfamiliar with?
Fuck off with this trying to frame criticising a religion or pointing out its harmful effects as being racial bigotry.
It’s not racism, and you know it isn’t. You’re just indirectly supporting actual bigotry that Islam pushes against women, LGBT people, and non-believers.
Yes. Specific things about Christianity are complained about. That doesn’t mean bigots aren’t out there spreading islamophobia.
Oh look an example of someone using an extremist group to paint all Muslims. And trying to cover it with the weird religions in there once.
And if you think race is the only kind of bigotry going, I have a bridge to sell you.
Christianity is literally the most critiqued religion in the west lol
As they control Congress?
White people can’t be Muslim?
In a post about Muslims oppressing people, someone references Allah.
Who the f cares? Allah and Jahweh and trinity are all just made up feel good stories to ABUSE HUMANS
Because most Islamophobes are religious extremists themselves.
Nope, not at all. All of France Holland Germany Nordic are NOT religious and we have some decades of experience with the islamites. Blegh
Lmao. I’m sorry, your argument is you’re not religious extremist, you’re just a racist?
Oh God, that’s the laugh I needed.
Especially because there’s still 10-20 percent depending on your country. And you’re just falling into the propaganda created by the extremists among them.
You are failing miserably in your crusade here
But the Muslim, Christian, and Jewish god is the same deity. So “Allah” refers to the god of all 3 religions.
Not to islamophobes it doesn’t.
ALL religions
Cool. Now have the commenter up there clarify that.
I’m not saying I agree with op but their comment is very clear already
Obviously I disagree.
oppose religion
Then don’t specifically mention Allah. It’s one of the older propaganda methods. We don’t like the general group but fuck those guys specifically.
Funny how all the commenter needs to do to clear things up is edit their post. Instead you guys are all trying to make excuses.
How dare they use Allah as an example of a god, in a submission about the harmful effects of Islam!
Sure, breed more islamophobia. Most Muslims don’t want this. It’s like using the FLDS as an example of all Christians.
Which is why “oppose religion” means all of them. No exceptions
I cheerfully include any and all branches of Abrahamic religions in my unbridled hatred of these psychopaths. Even more than that I hate those who continue to defend them.
Yes, allllllllll of them abuse their fake man on the cloud to rape and kill children. No joke.
What a pathetically ignorant statement
Lolbruh, have your sky daddy smite that guy.
if you have a religion you’re a baby
But soooooo true. I rather be pathetic as WRONG
You can’t just equate religion with fascism. Not that I think religion is ethical or even separable from fascism, but they aren’t the same. Plenty of people practice religion without resorting to extremism.
I don’t think I did. Cancer and heart disease are not the same despite both having very similar results given enough time.
You implied that religion necessarily results in fascism.
If I did I am sorry. There is no way I can make a claim like that. If nothing else the world could end long before the process finished. There is a link between the two but it does not mean that a society with monotheism will have to, 100% of the time with no exceptions, eventually become a fascist one.
wtf do you know
The evidence of religion ruling people’s lives is right in front of you and you act like we are drawing conclusions from nothing.
hur dur religion bad
read a book
As long as its not a fucking religious text.
Religion can be toxic, but so can non-religious nations like Russia under Putin.
The real shit is money and power - those are what kill and lie and steal from the billions of us who haven’t yet got to the point of revolution.
If nothing else we know it’s coming … and when it does it’ll be massive and worldwide.
Putin embraces the Russian Orthodox Church as part of his nationalism. Also, Russia is only 13% atheist. Hardly a non-religious nation.
But, you’re right, power is the real point. Religion is just one of the most hateful methods of justifying and maintaining power.
Democracy with socially regulated capitalism, in our experience, has a lighter touch and has thus far provided a lot of benefits to the vast majority of people.
You mention revolution, but don’t specify from what or to what? Revolutions have a way of not going quite the way the idealists hope they will.
So, you’re close but wrong country. Russia tried to get rid of religion but failed. The Russian Orthodox Church just kind of became part of the government. That’s why you see the priests blessing Russian weapons and stuff.
China on the other hand did get rid of religion pretty successfully. The reason communism strives to get rid of religion is because when people aren’t arguing over who’s imaginary supernatural friend loves his people more. It’s easier to get them to agree on things.
Now, I’m not going to pretend that this is a perfect plan. After all successfully getting rid of religion comes with a whole new set of pitfalls. But, I personally think the pros outweigh the cons.
Russia is 72% Eastern Orthodox by population. The US is estimated to be ~63% split between flavors of christianity, for comparison.
Religion can be toxic, but so can non-religious nations like Russia under Putin.
You can die from snake venom. That doesn’t mean cancer is harmless.
I get what previous commenter said: the problem is the people with power wanting to control the population, religion is just the means to an end (sorry if this is not the correct way to say it). In my way of seeing it, religion as always been a cover to interests of the powerful, a way to keep the population controlled, or dumbed down. In the example of this thread, they are openly using this strategy by cutting access to education.
Bad people do bad things.
But for a good person to do bad things, that takes religion.
But for a good person to do bad things, that takes religion.
This sounds like it’s a prerequisite to be good before becoming religious … which historically is not the case.
Child molesters who entered the priesthood were not “good” before using the shelter of the Church to rape children.
Being “good” or “bad” is a conscious, moral decision which is maintained by every person choosing what is of the utmost importance for their life … selfish fulfillment or altruism.
… this is, ofc, setting aside mental health issues that do not allow some to make rational conscious decisions.
read a book
Bible, Koran, Torah, Book of Mormon, The Vedas… you know there’s actually a lot of objectionable shit in all of these.
I wonder if you meant some other books that support your ideals, jokes on me for reading the source materials instead I suppose.
Like the ones the Afghan schoolgirls won’t be allowed to read?
Yeesh, I’d recommend the same to you.
Yes sir! Only Bible!
Anyway, pretty fucking weird society where they have to wrap 6th grade girls from head to toe to avoid feeling attracted to them.
Religion is bad and what book would you have us read?
Religions are as dumb as the people who believe them?
I would not say religions are bad when people consider real life more important. However, any form of religious radicalism is terrible and also when religion is combined with politics.
There is nothing bad about following some religious tradition (such as all saints day or christmas) but pls don’t take religion too seriously. Edit: corrections
Religions can be harmful for certain dumb people who believe them. It’s not a given, but with the interconnectivity of today these dumb people can organize and create echo chambers, and be much more harmful to both themselves and others. A stark, anti-religion stance seems harsh, but it’s likely the most effective way to avoid these pitfalls.
casually thinks back ONLY these last five years
remembers all the excuses and acts committed whilst hiding behind religion
suddenly falls into a wormhole and lands in 1095
I dunno, seems fishy.
More than them.
Nice take.
Stuff.
Can we have an exception for one religion? It’s called quantum physics.
It would be equally as effective as praying to an electron as it is to pray to skydaddy. Also you are very unlikely to send a country back to the dark ages by praising the wave function.
Fine, I tentatively approve of this religion. You have my blessing. Go with photon my son.
String theory seems more apt in that it appears to be mostly bullshit.
Fuck are you even on about???
Did you know that, mathematically, there can be a three-dimensional universe that closes in on itself? If you went in a straight line, you would always end up coming back to the same place.
Believe in math! Or more specifically, with whoever says they understand math!Yeah but not always and besides whose to say that we are requesting the past, or whether we’re really just experiencing an increase in empathy beyond our usual limits? Maybe this is our evolution that we’re experiencing, just like COVID may have been China’s black death…
What do you mean covid may have been China’s black death? China experienced yersinia pestis back when it was plaguing Europe, so black death was already China’s black death, maybe even before it was Europe’s black death.
What about the Allied Atheist Allegiance, the AAA? Praise science!
Not all quantum physics is religion. Only the Copenhagen interpretation.
I don’t care what anyone else thinks, this is pretty funny.
At school we make fun out of it because you cannot see this physics, you can just believe maths is right ;)
You know, that’s a good point. The first step to understand quantum is a suspension of disbelief.
It’s a hypothesis that we haven’t managed to understand how to even test yet, come on
What? There have been hundreds of experiments confirming many different hypotheses of quantum physics…
The photoelectric effect you have seen nearly every day (have you every used a modern camera with auto-iris? What about solar power?)
The double-slit experiment proves that subatomic particles can act as both a particle and a wave, which is pretty instrumental in further theories of QM.
Freedman-Clause verified quantum entagnlement.
Usage of Nuclear energy for both bombs and generating electrical power…
Superconductors and Cooper-pairs.
Even the other poster joking about the Copenhagen interpretation - Copenhagen lead to discoveries in Qubit measurement (read up on Quantum State Tomography).
Quantum physics isn’t one single, independent theory… And it keeps evolving as our understanding changes.
I don’t think that’s a religion…but I’m not a, er, member
Allah is the God in Christianity though
What?
Not the commenter, but I assume they talk about the nature of Abrahamic religions.
Technically, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are just three updates of the same religion. First came Torah, then it got transformed into the Old Testament and completed with the New one to get the Bible, and then Bible itself got completed to get Quran.
With that came one abrahamic God - referred to as Yahweh in Judaism, Trinity in Christianity (note: Islam goes back and denies Trinity and godly nature of Jesus, calling him a prophet, not element of God, and rolling back on Holy Spirit, too, reinstating Father God as the only source of godly power), and Allah in Islam.
Thereby cancelling Allah means also cancelling Trinity and Yahweh, as they’re actually one and the same.
Before mankind was rebooting film franchises it was rebooting religions.
deleted by creator
Yes
ThorSquint.jpg
I don’t get it. Thor is not the same as Allah/God, even though he is a Norse god.
Not just exclusive to Islam. This is what Christians are actively working to make happen in the US.
All organized religion is ripe for abuse by its uncontrollable masters. It’s almost like communism in that!
Imagine looking around that classroom and thinking “All is right with this”.
Not just “all is right”. They see this and think “this is what God wants.”
If this is what the God wants, he is a real dick then.
Have you read the Old Testament? The deity in that book is not what I’d consider benevolent. He’s also really insecure, requiring that his followers only worship him, which doesn’t at all sound like an abusive partner separating a person from their familial relationships to isolate them.
Heck, in the New Testament he (because somehow a sky deity has a penis) sent his son to be killed horrifically, and because he is both omnipotent and omniscient, he knew exactly what to do to stop said horrific death at the hands of the Romans.
That’s the thing with religious people. They don’t think. They’re told this is what God wants and that’s the end of it. That’s why it’s so important to keep churches out of government.
Allah wants.
If you didn’t know, they’re the same thing.
I know but I think it is important to emphasize. God as an abstract concept is not as bad as God as the personal total micromanaging god of Islam.
Neither is an abstract concept. They are the same exact deity from the same story and the same origin.
No they aren’t. There is a lot of difference between an Enlightenment era diest god, a local tribal god, and a triomni god.
What do you care anyhow? It isn’t like Islam is monotheistic. They have Satan and dijins.
You’re talking about God (such as the god of Islam and Catholicism, which is the same god) and gods, as in the concept of a god, which encompasses sun gods, Aztec gods, etc etc.
Usually I find how you capitalise matters here. God with a capital is a name, and talking about the “God” most people talk about.
A god, on the other hand, well you get the idea.
Anyway in this case we’re talking about the god of Islam, Christianity, Catholicism, etc. This god is the same god, and in English we would call that god “God”. Allah is that god’s name in another language. But it’s the same deity.
They must thank Allah every day for America’s Oligarchy gifting the military industrial complex trillions of dollars of tax payer money, and occupying their country for decades, to end up stuck in the same prison as their parents… Instead of the darkest timeline — universal healthcare and climate action!
At least it was a chance. We certainly fucked up in Afghanistan but it’s not like the Taliban came back from nowhere.
People act like the Afghani army that the US spent years trying to rebuild didn’t just up and run away.
“Welp, time to suck off the people who put me in this position!”
I’m pretty sure that’s against the teachings of Islam.
I especially like that guy in the back. That could be the teacher, but I guess that it’s someone who observes that the God is feared enough and nothing disallowed happens.
Makes me wonder how one makes such career choices, too
religion sucks, conservatism sucks. that shit is so old.
No where in Islam does it say that girls are not allowed to study, what a fucking bunch of dimwits these people are…
Edit: Narcissist would be the right word here
Removed by mod
Hey There, I appreciate you citing sources and doing some research yourself! However I would like to clarify the things that I feel are wrong in your argument, I am on mobile so please forgive if the comment is not formatted well
The first thing here is that as far as basic human dignity is considered, both men and women are equal in islam, if anything is permitted for men, it is also permitted for women and vice versa unless explicitly stated otherwise (and innovation is a huge in sin islam)[1]
Nowhere is education banned for women specifically, and it is in fact encouraged (which means for women as well)[2][3]
This is also a nice segue into the fact that islam doesn’t really ‘prohibit’ critical thinking, it deals with supernatural things, nowhere in islam you are taught calculus (cringe analogy i know, but it gets the point across), specifically islam talks about life after death, which we have no idea of, it’s completely open to interpretation, so there is really no answer to what happens after death or why life exists in the first place. Also nowhere in the quran will you find absurd statements like the sky is red like the thread suggests, most of the things that it talks about are established science or real life experiences (sun rising from the east, fruits growing from plants etc), or advice on how to handle situations like loans, marriage, divorces and so on, every institute has some sort of set of rules it is governed by, and you can read through the quran and won’t find anything that straight up contradicts common knowledge or established science, you can just think of it as a general set of rules, also it tackles a lot of things that the arabs of that time dealt with so it alienates some people, but the general rules which apply to everyone are very ‘naturalistic’/real life based, so saying that islam does not allow critical thinking is just wrong imo
Now on the most sensitive issue, the status of women in islam, i would like to point out that any hadith or verse from quran should be taken in context of the time and place it was revealed in the case of quran or said/performed in the case of hadith, things can change quite substantially depending on time and location, there are multiple examples of this of which i’ll add a source later
So in the hadith you mentioned about degeneration of women, i’ll first point out some reasons as to why it was probably said
-
With regard to a woman’s lack of reason, it is because women are easily swayed by emotions, which make them unable to deal appropriately with new issues that arise.
-
As for a woman’s lack of religious commitment, it is because women do not pray and fast during the days of their menses and when they are bleeding following childbirth.
As for them complaining, Surah Al Mujadilah (The first few verses) specifically talks about a women who complained to the prophet about the way her husband acted, and she was not the one criticized, instead all men warned about sinful divorce and the compensations they will have to complete(You can read it here https://quran.com/al-mujadila)
Also islam talk a lot about women rights in various other places[4][5][6][7], hence maintaining a sort of equilibrium, both men and women are warned about their wrongdoings
On the last topic of suckling, it has nothing to do with segregation, it was a different matter which this [8] explains quite well
I would like to end by saying that there is a reason scholars exist who spend their lives studying hadiths and quran, they both have to interpreted carefully to not arrive at the wrong conclusions, your understanding of hadith isn’t perfect, nor is mine, the best I can do is try to explain the best I can, no society is perfect, there are of course of a lot of extremist on any sort of ‘following’, you will even find atheists who don’t want any person who follows any religion to exist, but it is important to understand there are good people and scholars as well, while our opinions might differ, the best thing to do is to try to adopt the good qualities from both sides
And really the point I am trying to make from all of this is that ‘organizations’ like taliban or ‘some’ governments don’t really represent Islam, for them religion is just a tool they can use to bring a ton of people on their sides who will not bother to fact check their claims or even bother to learn about their own beliefs, the perfect example of this is the fact that in photo in the article, you can see a male teacher teaching an all-female class, the more appropriate thing here is to actually have a female teacher, but I guarantee that the taliban doesn’t hire female teachers, which is just enough for any reasonable person to understand the hypocrisy of these (talibani) people
[1] https://sunnah.com/nasai:1578
[2] https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:1388
[3]https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:1383, https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:1385
[4] https://quran.com/an-nisa/19
[5] https://quran.com/an-nisa/32
[6] https://sunnah.com/muslim:1468a
One major problem with the Abrahamic religions is that they are too scholarly in regard to their religious texts. It is horrifying how much collective brainpower has been wasted on this complete and utter bullshit, that could instead have been spent discovering the true nature of the universe.
You say that there are atheists who wish religious people to not exist. That is true, but perhaps not in the way you imply. The vast majority of atheists don’t want to see religious people killed, but rather freed from the bonds of religion, not only for their own good, but for the good of humanity. Religion is in the same category as poverty in terms of degradation and the wasting of human potential. Like poverty, it needs to be eradicated, not by eradicating the impoverished, but by improving education and social conditions.
He is not wrong lol. His interpretation is just more “originalist”
You can reform islam all you want but the text says what it says.
both men and women are equal in islam
Quran 4:34 Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allāh has given one over the other and what they spend from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband’s] absence what Allāh would have them guard.2 But those from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; , forsake them in bed; and , beat them .4 But if they obey you , seek no means against them. Indeed, Allāh is ever Exalted and Grand.
Nowhere is education banned for women specifically
They are only allowed islamic education according to ijmaa https://youtu.be/sluWhFVw7h0?si=mc-OOq_hejDY02c_&t=525
The video you linked has uh, let’s say a lot of problems The first red flag being that the individual claims that ‘he is more knowledgeable about islam than anybody else’ which is a major red flag, but let’s put that aside for now
The very first hadith he quotes is da’eef (weak) so that is pretty much irrelevant considering there are sahih(correct) contradictory hadith(s) one of them being this Riyad as-Salihin 1390 https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:1390 (Sahih)(Correct), this hadith specifically mentions religious knowledge, and doesn’t specify who gets this knowledge or not
But he uses the weak hadith to push his point anyway, and the reason is because the feeling i get is that this guy is trying to say we should not share any of our knowledge with people of other faiths
Second issue he mentions is that women are not allowed to come to colleges with non mehrams and not learn anything that takes them away from islam and uses it as the reason girls are not supposed to study in Islam, what he conveniently misses out though is that men are also subject to these rulings, and i don’t think men have any problem going to colleges, flip this guy from atheist to religious and this is the type of guy who would ban women from education, I think i don’t need to explain the mentality this guy has, also there is a thing called ‘concessions’ which are granted by scholars, and most of the (decent) scholars are of the opinion that studying in co-ed schools and colleges is permissible as long both the sides stay within the prescribed rulings
Third: This guy picks a random guys book who I have never heard of and starts quoting whatever he has written, safe to say i don’t care what ‘Ashraf Ali Thanvi’ has to say, he never seems to derive any of his opinions from quran and sunnah, i have already mentioned that no society is perfect, while I have never even seen the book, let alone heard this guys name, I will admit that there maybe some places where this guy is popular, and I will wholeheartedly admit that this is a problem, the source of sharia is hadith and quran, and ijma (see the last part) (and to some extent the four imam’s of fiqh) anyone who starts saying whatever they think is best/appropriate is dishonest
Then at 15:50, he says the most ridiculous thing possible, he shows a fatwa where IT CLEARLY STATES THAT IT IS PERMISSIBLE FOR HER TO STUDY IF THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVES and then he proceeds to ask what if these laws are not met, what laws are not met? I don’t know about any college that forces male and female people to sit together, or make them talk forcefully, because if something like that exists, it is an issue on a state level, people are given freedom of expression, no women (or men) should be forced to do anything.
He then proceeds to say the prophet only took help from women in those things which the women were able to do, what? How can someone do something they can’t do, the statement doesn’t even make sense, this was really the point where I was about to close the video but then he said some other things that i think could be clarified, you can learn more about women treating men in battle here: https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/156919/the-life-of-rufaydah-al-aslamiyyah
His argument about The university of qarawiyyin is also so ignorant it’s hilarious, he didn’t even bother to read the Wikipedia page which clearly states that there is lack of documentation about who used to study there and what type of studies were there, regardless if it’s fake or not, he used this to try to prove his point anyway, if you dig deeper into wiki you will find this:
Students were male, but traditionally it has been said that “facilities were at times provided for interested women to listen to the discourse while accommodated in a special gallery (riwaq) overlooking the scholars’ circle”. Like I said, that there is a lack of documentation, so really anything is to be taken with a grain of salt, it also shows that there was period of decline until the early 1900’s meaning there were probably fewer students, it was finally reformed in the early-mid 1900s until it was finally integrated into the state educational system in 1947, and women have been studying there since 1940’s.
Overall this is just a pathetic source when you are trying to prove something.
I would also like to add that a hypothesis is not given by a conducting one experiment, a lot of factors are taken into account and the experiment is repeated multiple times with different conditions, similarly picking one ayah from the quran and using it to prove a point doesn’t make a lot of sense, you need look at the context, and the other verses and hadiths as well, which i have already provided a few and you can look for more yourself, or if you want I can list them, which will take a lot of time on my side
The next slave girl concept has been long obliterated in today’s modern world, you have to remember like i said in my previous comment, quran also has a lot of laws for the arabs of that time which have been called illiterate a variety of times, people really used to marry practically infinite amount of women and even their mothers, there are many hadiths that talk about releasing slaves and how rewarding it is [1][2][3] in fact it is a compensation in many cases where you miss important religious duties, to the point where the system has died (i am not saying Islam did it, it happened due to a variety of reasons)
Also even in that time you just couldn’t make any girl a slave, this was only for the prisoners of war, you were supposed to share your food and wealth with them and help them in tough works, I am not saying that having a slave is even remotely justified today, but what i am saying is that there is a lot more nuance to it
Also in response to some other replies, I am not really trying to influence or change your opinion, you are absolutely entitled to your opinions, I am just writing this to speak about how many muslims I see who are discriminated by people because of terrorist organizations or an incomplete understanding of Islam, even if you don’t agree with the teachings, it doesn’t even remotely justify people using terrible words and accusing them of actions they didn’t do in the first place, not just about islam, i could make a similar case about judaism, christianity or any other religion for that matter.
Some people need to start seeing other people as people first not muslim/christian/jew/atheist
[1] Sahih al-Bukhari 2517 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2517
[2] Sahih al-Bukhari 2518 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2518
[3] Sahih al-Bukhari 2519 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2519, Sahih al-Bukhari 2520 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2520
Side-note: Ijma is “ Ijmāʿ (Arabic: إجماع ʾiǧmāʿ [ʔɪd͡ʒˈmæːʕ], “consensus”) is an Arabic term referring to the consensus or agreement of the Islamic community on a point of Islamic law.”, not something a random guy said on youtube
very first hadith he quotes is da’eef (weak)
According to whom?
i don’t care what ‘Ashraf Ali Thanvi’ has to say
Ashraf Ali Thanwi (often referred as Hakimul Ummat[a][5] and Mujaddidul Millat[b] (19 August 1863 – 20 July 1943) was a late-nineteenth and twentieth-century Sunni scholar, jurist, thinker, reformist and the revival of classical Sufi thought from Indian subcontinent during the British Raj,[6][7] one of the chief proponents of Pakistan Movement.[5] He was a central figure of Islamic spiritual, intellectual and religious life in South Asia and continues to be highly influential today.
clearly he has done his homework and he holds good amount of authority and credibility.
also the wiki page for the university mentions about the doccumentation
Also even in that time you just couldn’t make any girl a slave, this was only for the prisoners of war, you were supposed to share your food and wealth with them and help them in tough works, I am not saying that having a slave is even remotely justified today, but what i am saying is that there is a lot more nuance to it
please see the following link Recommendations VS LAW (The recommendation is to set a slave free for slapping, but the LAW is an owner will not be punished even if he kills his slave)
-
Insightful!
rampant misogynists would be appropriate too.
Infact, in thr quran, Allah encourages everyone to gather knowledge.
These fuckers are making a mockery of Islam
The religulous are always the worst at all things, ironically including being religious.
It isn’t about religion with any of these types. Rather, it’s about religion being a tool they can use so that those who do think it’s all about religion allow them to have authority.
Religion is the second worst plague visited on humanity. As you say, the worst is the lust for power over others. Religion, especially the Abrahamic religions, is second because it is uniquely positioned to facilitate the ambitions of those who lust for power. Pure violence can subjugate a population for a while, but real, long-lasting, self-regulating, trans-generational oppression has usually required religion.
Brother, that’s literally the point of all religion. Religion is by definition a social institution intended as a tool for public influence.
I don’t disagree with you but I think it’s important to draw a distinction between the motives for that influence, which I believe falls primarily between three possibilities: someone seeking to save souls (or true believers with no personal motive other than maybe getting points for their own soul), someone seeking to manipulate others into being good to each other, and someone just seeking personal power and who will adjust the “good” their religion supports based on their situation.
They can all blur into each other, so reality is a bit more complicated than that, but what I wanted to express was that most (if not all) religious leaders present as the first, but some not insignificant portion of them (if not all) actually fall more into the 2nd or 3rd categories. They don’t believe in the same god that their followers believe in.
I think most assume that they are true believers.
Absolutely reprehensible and repulsive. Sick fuckers are so scared of women that they will not let them be educated. Fuck those backwards ass sexist monsters. Indefensible
learning is never over. No matter how hard authoritarians try.
This is exactly what the alt-right Christian fucks want. I’m surprised that they don’t realize how much in common they have with the Taliban.
[Citation needed]
Source: Da South
Correction: your bigotry
You’re kidding, right? They’re open about their intentions and have actively worked towards it
So provide your citations. If it’s so obvious, then it should be trivially easy for you to show examples of people in the US working to ban women from going to highschool
… Nationwide statistics based on publicly available data are bigoted…?
Removed by mod
religion sucks dude
religious fanaticism in all regards
And at this pace it will happen.
Time is favoring the extreme, maybe that will change but right now every decade marches in that direction.
I’ll never forget, a few years into the war I asked what my Afghani colleague thought of the war. He told me “I hate the Taliban. When I was a boy they came to my village and slit all the men’s throats. NOT a few of the men. ALL of the men.” Leaving those people to suffer that regime was a greater crime than any we committed in the 20 years of occupation.
Leaving those people to suffer that regime was a greater crime than any we committed in the 20 years of occupation
This doesnt make any sense lmao.
We tried. We failed. So we stopped.
No words to describe this stupidity.
Should be raining switchblade drones on their leadership until they learn to behave. Let them play 13th century games on a modern battlefield without the courtesy of putting ourselves in AK-47 or exploding vest range.
Because if it didn’t work the last 20 years the US was doing it, it’ll work the next.
Drones are effective at killing people, but they’re dogshit at killing ideology.
Ideas have to have heads to live in.
So kill em all then?
Y E s
More than that, drones are bad at constructing infrastructure, but they’re really good at destroying it. If you’re tearing through a housing complex to kill a terrorist, you’re going to make a lot more disillusioned people out of those who are now homeless. It’s really epic how people don’t understand this, and don’t understand how people might not look kindly to a military occupation generally, especially one that isn’t helping much to build out their infrastructure, or, maybe more importantly, position them in a way where they’re actually well off in the global market, since that’s something they have to worry about now in a neoliberal, globalized society. And then instead everyone’s just like, yeah, well, they don’t want our help, but they’re still a threat, let’s kill everyone, and then we can save the little girls that are never going into the classroom again after they’re fucking dead.
I hate this place, bro.
You’re right, what I’ve described above is the same as what you’re talking about. Good job not noticing the differences which were clearly meant to mislead.
The US has caused this shit, why don’t you guys fuck off and stay out of conflict…just for like a week and see how it goes.
The US caused radical Islam?
During the cold war, the US armed and supported radical islamist factions called mujihadeen because they were opposed to the communists. This didn’t help, but ofc there were other factors. When the US began its wars in the middle east in earnest, they killed a lot of people including civilians. As a consequence, they were probably the most effective recruiters for radical islam (when a foreign government kills your friends or family, you’d feel positively incluned towards fundamentalist groups fighting them too). Throughout the iraq war and the related conflicts analysts warned that us intervention was fuelling islamic terror. I was under the impression that by now this was common knowledge.
I recommend the book “Charlie Wilson’s War” for those who want some insight into the funding of the Mujahideen.
What an ignorant take. Radical Islam existed long before the US went there. Salafism and Wahhabism have been around for more then century at this point, to name two of several fundamentalist movements.
Muslims have been infighting with fundamentalists and more secular members of Islam for centuries.
The US surely didn’t help, but they are so, so far from being the sole or main cause for the turmoil in Afghanistan and the middle east in general.
There is radical islam existing, and then there is radical islam being the dominant force it currently is.
For a big part, yes. Overthrowing democratic governments, funding radicals and bombing civillians tends to make people join the side that is seen as the enemies of the culprits of these crimes.
The US is merely the latest to try and control the region. And their attempt didn’t end any better than any of the previous attempts.
That’s some mental gymnastics. I dislike the US going abroad with their military as much as the next non-US person, but if I had to choose one instance where they weren’t the biggest dicks on the battlefield, it would be Afghanistan.
What? This country didn’t allow education for women long before the US ever set foot there
It’s too late. Americans have adopted the ‘brown people need to solve their own problems’ mantra for this generation.
Come back in 20 years when things are so shit we can no longer look away.
If you kill enough of the right ones, it’ll work. When their leader’s first act in office is to hose what’s left of the last guy (and it will have been a guy) off of the floor and walls, I think they’ll gain some perspective and make better choices. Can’t be as polite and delicate as we were over the past couple decades.
Yes, because achieving lasting positive change by killing people has worked SO well in Afghanistan of all places 🤦
Why should you give a shit what they do? I’ll hunt down anyone who commits acts of terror against the US, but I don’t give a fuck if these people want to repress their own people. It’s their choice how to live, not mine. One man’s repression is another’s freedom since religion makes people do dumbass things. They’re not worth the cost of a switchblade nor any of the other expensive shit we lobbed at that country for 2 decades. Once we had the guy that coordinated 9/11 we should have pulled out. They don’t want western style “civilization” they’re perfect happy (definitely not all of them) with their value and political system.
Guess I’m one of those weirdos who wants humans to have rights even if we don’t share a flag or similar genitals.
You’re literally calling for raining bombs on a country of people who don’t want that… you’re not asking for human rights. You’re pushing your ideas of right on them. Have you learned nothing from what the middle eastern people have been telling western civilization over the last several years? They don’t want our ideas. They have religious texts that they believe sets up how to live and act for them. Just leave them the fuck alone and focus on our own countries.
Is there really no middle ground between “I don’t give a fuck about them” and “Bomb the country” ?
In logical thinking there is, but not in US foreign policy.
No. Clearly only two options
I’m calling for raining bombs on a select group of people who can’t seem to navigate their way out of the dark ages. Advocating for the “sit back and watch” position puts a higher value on the lives of tyrants than the rights of the people they oppress. If we kill the ones in charge who turn out to be assholes, they’ll either run out of assholes or get the message. Both outcomes are fine.
So if Russia wants to bomb your leaders because your country allows slaves in prison like a middle age shithole, you wouldn’t mind do you? You should actually welcome it.
And then when your leaders keep ruling as tyrants by refusing to give universal healthcare to your people, the EU should execute your leaders immediately, you agree?
And when your police keep murdering black people, your leaders should once again get blasted, you’ll get the message eventually, right?
You wouldn’t disagree with these rightful bombings, would you? It’s all for putting you out of your oppression and the dark ages.
You have made an accurate and fitting comparison, Vladimirovich. Definitely the same things going on in both cases.
You’re a clown. The US has literally banned abortion and you want to take the high moral ground. Lmfao.
I am fine with that. If all the politicians in the US were put on show trials and hung tomorrow I would go to work same as normal. You can do that for the Wall Street fuckers as well, plus the health insurance people, the lobbyists, anyone who sits on a think tank.
Pretty much anyone who claims they get to rule over me and not provide people with a service. Go do whatever you want.
Pretty much anyone who claims they get to rule over me and not provide people with a service.
The problem is that these two things aren’t, you know, unrelated. You say, the health insurance people, right, and I would generally agree they can go fuck themselves, but I think if we kill a bunch of them, the power vacuum will probably just fill itself with the exact same shit, while people slowly get radicalized and possibly become nationalistic because everyone’s getting killed by a foreign government, you know, especially as the government that’s getting bombed to shit starts cutting propaganda about it. You need to actively be providing an alternative that people will flock to, when you go and kill these people, otherwise, you’ll just be eliminating infrastructure in the form of people, and you’ll be turning everything into a dark age political radicalization hellzone.
Interesting thing about Afghanistan is that according to the UN, each government of a country is well within their rights to how they run their country within their own borders.
Yes, genocide and loss of freedom are frowned upon and sanctions are called - but as it is the religion and view of the country they are left to it. We can’t push western values on another country.
The idea that half of the people in a country are still people even if they had the audacity to be born without a penis shouldn’t be a “western value”. Read the article again and find a book or two about what goes on over there before suggesting that we follow the UN version of Starfleet’s Prime Directive.
Ah, yes, remember when the Taliban was democratically elected by the people of Afghanistan?
… oh. It wasn’t?
Exactly - internal matter within own boarders.
No other government claims they are in Hargett.
Ah, it’s just an “internal matter”, like genocide.
I remember when the Afghanistan army folded in a week.
Is that what an election is?
No but when they spent 20 years helping the Taliban it pretty well reflected what the majority wanted
Interesting thing about Afghanistan is that according to the UN, each government of a country is well within their rights to how they run their country within their own borders.
The argument for other country to everstretch itself can be that other country’s problems leak over their borders. What is the reasonable limit there? Instead of ‘we want oil’, there can be another case of a biological weapon, or that Afganistan is the source of a world illegal drugs trade etc, or whatever. Even plain cultural or religious antagonism can be faned into a fire, sold to a public as good and just. Now, after what happened to Afghanistan after 20 years is discouraging, but in twenty years? With corrupt guys like Trump, a military lobby and other conflicts in acive phase?
their own people
This might come as a shock to you, but those are people just like you.
They’re still worth saving even if they aren’t from your country.
You’ll understand when you’re older, maybe.
I love when you lemmings end your shit with “maybe when you’re older” like as if you’re some all knowing creature because you’re old as shit (boomer).
Maybe when you’re older you’ll learn to leave people the fuck alone that want to be left alone. We’ve tried world building enough. The Soviets, the British and the US. How many dead Middle Eastern people will it take before your colonial ass realizes it’s not what they want.
They’re only worth saving if they want to be saved. Keep worrying about your $1 food, I’ve got bigger things to be worried about that don’t involve making kids terrified of clear blue skies.
Gods, I’m probably going to regret this, but…
I agree with your overall point, but the unempathetic way you’re expressing it is really off-putting to me. For example…
I’ve got bigger things to be worried about
People say things like this all the time about problems that don’t affect them and that they can’t control (some other examples are homelessness, addiction, etc.). It always strikes me as being super uncaring and cold. No one’s asking you to help them directly or to let it spoil your day or whatever – but it takes absolutely zero effort to just briefly recognize systemic problems like these. In fact, I think it’s important that we do so. Why? Because that shit could happen here as well. That 6th-grade girl could be me, or my nibling, or my neighbor, and there but for the grace of god go I. (It’s an expression, I’m not being religious here.)
Yeah, yeah I know “thoughts and prayers” and all that noise, but I think it’s more than that. There are oppressive religious entities here where I live in the US. Seeing what this leads to … nothing we can do to stop it, right. And FFS the US sending our military to try to fix anything is absolutely … “colonial” is a good term for it, as you said. Even non-military intervention, like when we send politicians to Latin American countries to lecture them on instability that we created. So wack.
But I can at least recognize the humanity here, and what it must feel like to get one of those girls. It doesn’t really constitute “worry” to just care about another person and to express that.
They don’t want to be “saved”
Really? You speak for all of them?
Obviously not for all, but demonstrably for the majority
Oh? When was that vote taken?
It’s obvious when you listen to anyone outside of Kabul
What about the ones who you don’t speak for?
What about them?
The linked article suggests otherwise.
The linked article, like the vast majority of articles about Afghanistan, exclusively covers Kabul.
So the people in Kabul are not Afghan?
Go troll somewhere else
While I disagree with your view on “happy” and “choice how to live”, it is a very interesting discussion that a country never successfully developed democracy and equality without their own citizens fighting for it.
We can push our values all we want, but until people die for how they want to live it won’t stick. Unfortunately America is declining for the same reason.
I’m not saying I’m happy, or that I think they’re objectively happy. They just don’t want anything else or can’t conceptualize anything else. The people of Afghanistan have a way of living that they’re comfortable with since they don’t show much resistance to the status quo. We spent trillions on that country trying to make it “western” and a “democracy” like the US when the reality is that they don’t want that. They also don’t know anything different other than when we brought them “freedom” it meant the sky occasionally rained death and explosions. I don’t have an answer for them, and as history has shown for that region no one has an answer. I just know I don’t want to spend my tax dollars blowing up random people on the other side of the planet because I don’t give a fuck about them and I don’t want them to actively hate me in the future.
Dude wtf are you on about. This is literally a thread about 12-year girls crying because they’re not “comfortable with…the status quo”. They clearly do “know anything different”, because that’s what they’re upset about.
Ok, we can go back to bombing random civilians then. I guess if we guise it under “human rights” this time it makes all the bad stuff go away. Y’all realize you’re literally asking for people to go in and bomb a sovereign nation solely because you disagree with how they’re living?
I feel for those girls and the future they want. I hope they can make it to a country that supports them and fosters the same ideals they hold. Sometimes the country or culture we’re born into doesn’t align with us. However those girls aren’t a majority. I can find Americans saying things the majority of us don’t agree with, I can find Iranians saying things the majority of Americans agree with. These don’t make those things true of each others cultures. You’re wanting to change a culture because it doesn’t align with your ideals rather than realizing that sometimes that’s exactly what people want.
I’ll leave you with this: The monarchy in Britain has centuries of human rights abuses, and is something I think is completely antithetical to Democratic principles. Yet 62% of Briton’s support the monarchy. Should I be able to drone strike them just because I disagree or think it goes against human rights? Where does that line get drawn except in all y’all’s Weird brains of assuming you know what Afghani people want and should get.
That’s a lot of words which you could have summarized as “I don’t know how to compare things, 10 equals 10,000,000 because they’re both numbers”.
To repeat a comment you got 3 hours ago:
Is there really no middle ground between “I don’t give a fuck about them” and “Bomb the country” ?
Not when they’re content and approve of the way things are, and spare me the “but here’s a video of a person unhappy about it”. I guess I’ll shift back then so the people of Lemmy can be happy to my true American roots and say we should bomb them again randomly. I mean, it worked for 20 years apparently so why did we stop.
The middle ground is to be friends with them. They don’t want that either (can’t blame them on that one), so leaving them alone is our best course of action. Bombing their leaders because of “human rights abuses” is exactly what created Osama Bin Laden, ISIL, and every other terror group in the last 20+ years. I’m sick of fighting and being at war. My country, the US, can build some of the greatest infrastructure on the planet. I’d rather build that and spend money on humanitarian relief to help people after natural disasters.
Next go around at trying to colonize Afghanistan can be done by Australia if you want. I’d hope you all would have opened a history book by then, but probably not considering the thirst for blood in this thread.
Oh, and P.S., “Afghani” is a currency. Not a people.
Oh dang, thanks for the catch!
I am sorry for those girls that their parent’s were god fearing and as a result they have to suffer
The people of Afghanistan have a way of living that they’re comfortable with
Do those crying girls sound comfortable with their way of living to you?
So I guess we should just take in the citizens who don’t want to live in that environment.
There’s plenty of room over here in the USA!
People in America are ready to die for almost anything and that’s unironically a bad thing
they’re perfect happy (definitely not all of them) with their value and political system.
The way I see it, there are three groups in Afghanistan worth considering. The first is the group you referred to with that caveat: the people unhappy with their value and political system.
The second group is those who are “perfect happy” (sic) with systemic oppression. They’ve built an entire religion, an entire way of life predicated on oppressing themselves. Those people, being “perfectly happy” with oppression, will gladly welcome the opportunity to be oppressed themselves.
There’s a third group of people. A small group. So small you didn’t even see fit to mention them. Like the first group, this small group of people truly despises systemic oppression. They hate it. They know it is wrong, and they never want to be subjected to it. But, like the second group, they deliberately employ it. They actively and systemically oppress not just the “perfectly happy” second group, but also the first group.
I see no problem whatsoever oppressing people who are “perfectly happy” being oppressed. They will relish the opportunity at being oppressed into a fine pink mist.
I feel no ethical or moral compulsion to segregate the “perfectly happy” from the “hypocrites”. I think they should be similarly mistified.
Should have spent 20 years establishing islamic-free zones. You can only enter if you curse the prophet. Build up fortresses of civilization.
Or just the dark mosque where young men pray and literally learn to box with blindfolds in the dark to take out their rage.
Now imagine the next big movie, the transporter but next level badass, with beards, tattoos, swords, guns and straight up ICI the killer levels blood and Michael bay camera works. All in some middle eastern version of Bruce Lee but where the main character winds up fighting terrorists, Rambo, some random corrupt guy, his friends asshole neighbor and a whole gang of dudes who are all rapists or something strange like that, then there’s some GTA bad guys, some Russian mobster guy, the Wagner guys, then the final boss is like Bin Ladens paedophile friend/cousin whose secretly an o.g traitor, and also an MMA fighter, a kamikaze pilot and a bomb maker guy who has an entire harem of children and even a secret chapel hidden in the mountains where he prays to an evil alternate Allah for more children or something.
The lore combined with the action would be enough to make a whole trilogy of badass
That’s funny because they think the same thing about the United States, as clearly indicated by bin Laden’s letter to the US.
Bin Laden was Saudi. And the 9/11 attackers, well, they very much put themselves in range of an exploding vest, metaphorically.
I’m just saying that he speaks in the exact same tone as this commentor and we should take note of the danger of this rhetoric.
My initial thought experiment on this was “could these girls migrate to the west on a visa to complete their studies and return?”, and then I went down the rabbit hole of the demographics of Afghanistan. Of a population of around 40m, 46% are under 15, which is mad! That’s potentially a lot of girls that will lose an education.
I wonder if a remote education could be the way forward? Let these girls study remotely online, assuming they have some form of internet access available, and create a worldwide visa that would allow any Afghan girl that can pass a standard entry exam to attend university. While we have no need to provide children from another country an education, this would probably be a low-cost solution, and one that I imagine many rich philanthropists would happily provide as a grant.
This solution sort of implies that the Taliban would allow it. Like the whole system over there isn’t designed to crush these women as a form of control. It’s not a lack of ability to educate them this is by design of their government.
For a visa like this to work you’d need the government and the Men of the country to be in agreement with it happening. That currently isn’t the case. Providing a visa that almost no one will be able to use even if they wanted too would not only not help but could easily be something that’s pointed to as “we’re already providing a way for them to get educated and we don’t have to do anything else.”
True, under current laws women obviously can’t travel without a man present, so it would basically mean sending a full family over, or at the very least, a parent or partner with them.
My main point of highlighting it was that it’s not a small number of people, and that the young population of Afghanistan isn’t anywhere near as small as I thought. A remote education might help, as it’s something that women can access without having a man present.
The young population is really high in Gaza too. You often see that with poor nations.
Not to bang on about this but, how are you building the infrastructure to get reliable internet (that the men won’t let women access anyway) to remote afghan villages that don’t even have running water?
I think you’re wildly under estimating the control men have over women there. You also may be under the impression it’s just the government trying to control and crush these women, it’s not. The average man in Afghanistan is not only complicit but active in subjugating Afghani women. This isn’t about lack of access to education, it’s about lack of personhood and autonomy for women. Afghanistan has education, women just aren’t allowed to be educated.
Edit: so I just realized you’re probably really young given the solutions you’ve proposed. (I reread and suggesting to send a full family/guardian can only be someone young or a troll.) I apologize if I’m coming off really harsh. The reality is just that men are actively trying to subjugate/control/own/deny basic human rights to women in some of these countries and your comments completely missing that got under my skin. My apologies.
Coming close to my forties, but I’ll take the youth comment! It’s not a serious suggestion, but more of a discussion starter to how help could be given in instances where women want an education AND their families support them.
It kind of makes sense because I bet the life expectancy in Afghanistan is not very high at all, so a higher percentage of the population would tend to be younger because of that.
there’s also the whole issue of, you know, not letting them in cuz they have no education or marketable skills
we don’t just let people in
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In September 2021, a month after U.S. and NATO troops withdrew from Afghanistan following two decades of war, the Taliban announced that girls were barred from studying beyond sixth grade.
The Taliban have defied global condemnation and warnings that the restrictions will make it almost impossible for them to gain recognition as the country’s legitimate rulers.
Last week, U.N. special envoy Roza Otunbayeva expressed concern that a generation of Afghan girls is falling behind with each day that passes.
Last week, an official in the Education Ministry said Afghan girls of all ages are allowed to study in religious schools known as madrassas, which have traditionally been boys-only.
In another part of Kabul, 13-year old Setayesh Sahibzada wonders what the future holds for her.
Analyst Muhammad Saleem Paigir warned that excluding women and girls from education will be disastrous for Afghanistan.
The original article contains 327 words, the summary contains 141 words. Saved 57%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
That’s just the multipolar world kicking in.
Just religion
No. The world may be multipolar, but this is clearly a low point on the moral landscape.
Yes, that’s the joke. When people say they want a “multipolar world” what they mean is that we should not use global institutions to influence global values and we should tolerate all sorts of human rights abuses in the interest of some odd idealistic parity.
I laughed.
I feel like when people say multi polar world, it still benefits China and America with their space programs etc but quite literally leaves Australia, NZ, EU and Russia in a pickle.
Only on religion.
For the bigots out here, this is just the Taliban being incels. Nothing related to religion, if anything a lack of religious knowledge.
https://en.vogue.me/culture/afghanistan-taliban-women-school-ban/
Religion is the vehicle of monstrosity
I guess the Americans Genocide in Palestine is just a very religious crusade. Must be Jesus’s fault!
I cannot tell if this argument is for, against, or just dumb
Who knows. All these secular nations are the most moral until they do evil stuff then it’s religion’s fault.
America is not a secular nation lmao. The entire language of the Bush administration during the Iraq war was one of a ‘holy war’ – they wanted it to be a new crusade.
America just wanted a base in the middle east to extort and terrorize other countries with and steal their oil. Bush was as religious as Donald Trump.
Hypocrites abusing religion as a pretense for their misdeeds are described in pretty much every religious book.
Now defend the CCP and China. Are they religious too?
I’m not arguing that secular people (or, indeed, nations) can’t be evil. While you bring up China, though, it’s a bit of a myth that they’re not religious; approximately 80% of the Chinese population practise cults of gods and ancestors or belong to folk religious movements.
My point was that it’s a bit odd to pick the US as your example of a secular country when it is at the moment de facto Christian.
With regards to Bush being ‘as religious as Trump’, that’s just simply not true. He’s a pretty devout Christian, and has put it in a prominent position in all his campaign rhetoric, more than any other president of this generation. If you just Google George W Bush religion you’ll find plenty of news articles from a variety of sources saying that (e.g. this or this).
It’s about as logical as I’d expect from someone trying to defend religion.
It truly is. In all it’s forms and shapes.
Religion is like comunism, the idea is good! But the execution is always dependant on the human factor, who abuse these systems without control.
How is the idea of religion good? Sure, it may provide some people some comfort, but it can’t tell you things that are true.
As you said, Desperate people need hope.
The organized part is where the trouble comes in.
nothing related to religion
You have got to be kidding with this one right? No one can be that dense
What’s the relation? Nothing in Islam forbids female education.
The only point of contention you can have with it is that it enforces segregated male and female schooling but it doesn’t ban female education. Since schooling was already segregated in Afghanistan there is no religious reason for the Taliban to close those schools.
The Taliban sadly has heavy elements of tribalism that are not religiously but culturally motivated.
The relation is that if a girl in Afghanistan now dares to seek out higher education, she will be denounced by the Talibanis as an infidel trying to defy Islam.
Islam is the base they use to enforce this cruelty. The fact that the religion originally didn’t intend this is immaterial.
You’re missing the point where religion is always (ab)used to control the masses for whatever point you want. Want to go to war? God hates the enemy and wants you to fight! Oeipoemdie due to poverty caused by government mismanagement? It’s gods will. Want to stop girls from attending school? That is just the way that god wants it baby, sucks to be you!
Some people will do anything to lick the Taliban’s boots.
Oh yes, it’s “religion is not a at fault” right here.
As well described in another comment thread, Quran literally encourages everyone to learn, with no gendered distinction made.
You may easily write off bigotry on religion, but it’s literally them doing some crazy shit and covering with religion that clearly says not to do this.
That’s same as many American Christians literally ignoring the Bible, but this time way more consequential. Bigots will stick to religion as an instrument of power and hope nobody actually reads the sacred books, because they never said all those things. Should there be no religion, they’d use something else.
That is not to say religions are flawless. But bigotry just uses religion as a cover, it doesn’t come from it.
Religion in reality is defined by the action of its adherents. The books are just pieces of paper, that the holy book doesn’t condone this cruelty is immaterial when the adherents are overwhelmingly indulged in it. There are definitely Islamic sects around the globe that are socially good, but Talibani Islam is filth that needs to be eradicated.
Sure, and here we can agree.
Just saying that Talibani Islam is as far from actual Islam as Greenland from Australia.
No, it DOES have to do with religion we are NOT in politically correct feel good land here. Welcome to reality where religion and communism is USED to TERRORIZE human kids and adults.
