Why Thanx Pelly, that was at least resembling a bit of good interaction :)

I'll try to be brief this time and not speak 'at' you (or others)..

The reason I am rather fixated on that particular bit of Islamic belief...(I could choose HEAPS of others..seriously) is the following.

a) It is the opinion of a scholar
b) He is recent.
c) He is making a very forceful declaration as follows:

Forgive me this time please..for quoting the whole paragraph...

//Therefore, making mention of the waiting-period for the girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl in marriage at this age but it is also pemssible for the husband to consummate marriage with her. Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Qur'an has held as permissible.//

The danger is in the last sentence.

I actually do understand why this must seem like nit picking cherry picking and sour grape picking :) to a person who does not live by a 'faith'.. after all...such things don't have any force whatsoever with them... even the Bible.. you for example probably feel you can take it or leave it.. no biggy.. but the person of faith...who's life and heart and mind is based 'on' such texts.. where their mind dwells in those pages.. where they 'live' the adventures of the 'Companions' for Muslims or the Apostles for Christians.. it's really different.

When I read of Paul being stoned at Lystra.... I think of how that is happening right now to Christians in India (Orissa)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaePT2uYMB8 The last part of that vid (which I made :) shows something of it.

I've referred to this b4, but in this vid.. the chilling reality of 'faith' as expressed by the student is spinetingling.. see the question and answer at around 2.30 to end...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fSvyv0urTE

blessings :) (aaarg..so much for 'short'... moan.)

Boaz: << Seems I wasted a whole thread some time back on 'how to interpret documents'..which is something any undergraduate has to know in order to write essays and produce meaningful research. >>

Er, how would you know that, Boazy? You've never been an undergraduate student, have you?

All you've done is some dodgy 'hermeneutics' subject at 'bible college'. Sorry old son - it's by no means equivalent. There's any number of techniques for analysis of texts, and hermeneutics is but one of them.

Speaking from the "dark side" of a strong (postgraduate) background in textual analysis, I have to say that your persistent, heavily biased approach is about the least likely to arrive at whatever 'truths' are to be gleaned from any document.

P.S. If you were to hit any child in Australia with a "rod", you'd be very likely to be breaking the law. I guess that's why you're lately circumspect at trumpeting your prowess in beating children.

Onya CJ... completely ignored the clear and unambiguous content displayed for all to see in my last post, but then.. to make yourself look completely silly.. you trumpet your academic qualifications as if that somehow transforms your abject failure to equal even pass a primary 6 comprehension test into 'plausable opinion'.

Seems all that work was for nothing mate.

If I was going to demonstrate my irrationality and absurd misundersanding of a document ...and even worse.. the opinion of an established recognized scholar (Maududi) ..the last thing I'd do is tell everyone how many degrees I have ..

Remember..I said I pity you ? not that is x2

If you had a gram or 2 of common sense and a few grams more of sincerity and a few kg less arrogant pride...u'd be able to recognize the following sequence

1/ TEXT....and the basic meaning of the sentences.(In context, both historical and grammatical)

2/ INTERPRETATION by one who speaks the original languages and who has studied the history of the times and opinions of all who formed the nucleus of that particular faith.

What do "I" and my education have to do with 'that' ?

Remember CJ.. SOG 'got it', POIROT 'got it' -clearly... others who read it.. will 'get' it.. if you with your string of apparently useless degrees cannot....then I'd ask for my educational costs to be refunded.. they clearly did you little good.

I report...you decide. (you bring this on yourself mate..sorry)

PELLY.. hope you will forgive this wasteful CJmanagement digression :)

Dear Al,

As you know, I did read the link you prescribed for me. And, yes, I understood what the passage was saying. I read it as a (modern) translation from an ancient text.
I think that CJ is just trying to fathom is why you have to keep making the same point, and why you aren't equally diligent in tackling passages from the Jewish or Christian scriptures that promote tenets or behaviours which would not be thought acceptable in modern western society.

Indeed, Poirot. Of course, if we were to apply a little discourse analysis to this thread, we'd see that Boazy, after blatantly attempting to derail the discussion about state-funded religious schools into completely irrelevant topics, has tried to turn it into a platform for his rampant Islamophobia.

He did so by equating Islam with cults like the Children of God, to which I responded by pointing out that the same equation holds true for his own cult, the Exclusive Brethren - which is in receipt of taxpayer funds to run its own religious schools. My position is that no religious schools should be funded from my taxes, whether they be Islamic, mainstream Christian or weirdo sect like the Brethren.

Boaz then reverted to type, focusing on some cherrypicked objectionable passages from Islamic texts. I responded by cherrypicking some of my own from his sacred text, the point being that there isn't much difference between them from an objective point of view. Indeed, that's one of the reasons that no religious schools of any persuasion should receive government funding.

Typically, 'Professor' Boaz then superciliously claimed some kind of expertise in analysis of documents, disingenuously implying that his knowledge of such is superior to that of an undergraduate student. I pointed out his (habitual) dishonesty, to which he over-reacted in his last hysterical post above.

As usual, Boazy doth protest too much, methinks.

Al
Point me to any person of any faith who is inciting hatred, violence, child abuse, wife abuse etc and I will take that on face value, but to point out selective passages from the Koran while ignoring similar passages in the Bible is a counterproductive.

The Bible and Koran are similar in they paint women as unclean, as submitting to the will of their husbands, menstruation is seen as unnatural, chastity is not expected of men.

"If however the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death..." Deuteronomy 22:13-21.

and;

"A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. She is to bring two doves or two pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean." Leviticus 12: 1-8

Thankfully I don't know any Christians who actually take this literally. I suspect most Muslims don't really believe that women are unworthy either especially those residing in Western democracies.

As an atheist I am less concerned with what is written (because it was written by 'men' of God without input from women) but rather what is practised and taught.

If the practise is vile I will naturally condemn it without fear or favour.