Comments on Debunker and IA debate

Previous page 1 ... 3 4 56 7 ... 11 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #120 - June 28, 2010, 11:57 AM

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 11:52 AM
What a genius, so when God quotes the Pharoah saying: "I know no god for you other than myself", then the Quran is confirming this to be the truth?

Besides, the woman was married! The Egyptian women thought lowly of her because she was married and wanted to betray her husband with a lowly slave!

Not only are you a genius, you're also very knowledgeble of the Quran... (pun intended)

No, if Allah is quoting then they are someone else's words. I made a mistake, I meant verse 12:23 - those are Allah's words + the words of one of his prophets.

Quote from: IsLame on June 28, 2010, 11:55 AM
Its irrelevent anyway - the quran gives explicitly gives permission to men, but doesnt to women. Even without this, its pretty obvious that Mo would not have wanted wives to be shagging their slaves for fun. Come on guys.

12:23 *does* explicitly state Allah's opinion on the matter, so you don't need to dismiss your argument and change it to "what the Quran does NOT say".

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #121 - June 28, 2010, 11:58 AM

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 11:32 AM
So instead of answering my yes/no question with either a yes or a no, you answered by asking me a yes/no question. Anyway, here's my answer:

Yes. It's what I do. I'm rude.

Maybe the verse does and maybe it doesn't. But I think the one that Rationalizer posted certainly does. But I checked other translations and some of them give a different interpretation.

In any case, I think all the verses combined make it quite clear that what she was doing is seen (from Allah's perspective) as wrong.

I can hardly even be assed to argue about this, to be honest. I don't really care that much. But lemme look at some reasons you give.

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 11:32 AM
1- The Sura was re-telling the story of Joseph.
2- The Sura was quoting what people said.
3- The wife of the Aziz was already married. In that society, a married woman who has sex with other men is betraying her husband.
4- Joseph didn't want to have sex with her for two reasons: 1- He didn't want to committt fornication. 2- He didn't want to betray his master who was kind to him.

1- Yes.
2- The Qur'an often quotes people, particularly prophets when they speak, regarding their words as adhering to the views of Allah. Maybe you'll say that these people weren't prophets, but it's quite clear that the Qur'an does not disagree with their statement, and indeed, it certainly looks as though it endorses it.
3- Yes. And yet the Qur'an seems to agree with this attitude.
4- So it IS fornication for a woman to have sex with her slave, but not for a man to do so. He didn't want to betray his master? His wife is also his master, or mistress, and slaves are supposed to obey their masters in Islam. Even the ahadith support this.

Another thing. If Allah's prophets agree with Allah's morals, then they would know that it's acceptable for a man to have sex with his slaves. Yusuf's reluctance to have sex with his master's wife shows that it is wrong, insofar as Allah's morality is concerned, for women to have sex with their slaves.

Just my take on it.
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #122 - June 28, 2010, 11:59 AM

Quote from: IsLame on June 28, 2010, 11:55 AM
Its irrelevent anyway - the quran gives explicitly gives permission to men, but doesnt to women. Even without this, its pretty obvious that Mo would not have wanted wives to be shagging their slaves for fun. Come on guys.

I NEVER denied that Islam of course forbids married women from having sex with anyone other than their husbands AND that a single woman has to free her slave and marry him if she wanted sex with him... did you miss my post addressed to you?

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- Saif Rahman
- Ex-Muslim
- Je suis Haram
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #123 - June 28, 2010, 12:01 PM

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 11:59 AM
I NEVER denied that Islam of course forbids married women from having sex with anyone other than their husbands AND that a single woman has to free her slave and marry him if she wanted sex with him... did you miss my post addressed to you?

yes

My Book
My Blog
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #124 - June 28, 2010, 12:07 PM

@ Zebedee

No, in her case that would have been adultery.. In Joseph's case, it would have been a fornication and a betrayal of his master... He even said that prison is closer to his heart than obeying her in what she wanted.

And please don't play dumb! Of course he would have been betraying his master if he obeyed his wife who was asking for his love in secrecy! You'd have a point, that Joseph should have obeyed her, if her husband was actually blessing this sexual union between his wife and his slave.. It was the Aziz who bought Joseph and it was the Aziz he was his master.

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #125 - June 28, 2010, 12:12 PM

Quote
12:23 *does* explicitly state Allah's opinion on the matter, so you don't need to dismiss your argument and change it to "what the Quran does NOT say".

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!

Will you please stop playing the I-know-it-all part? It desn't suit you...

Joseph was saying: "NO! My lord was kind to me, it would be unjust!!!"

His lord here is the Aziz, Mr Genius!

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #126 - June 28, 2010, 12:17 PM

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 12:12 PM
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!

Will you please stop playing the I-know-it-all part? It desn't suit you...

Joseph was saying: "NO! My lord was kind to me, it would be unjust!!!"

His lord here is the Aziz, Mr Genius!

I really can't see the point of your argument. I am arguing that Allah says it is wrong for a woman to have sex with her male slave and you admitted it was. Joseph was a prophet of God, he wouldn't say it was wrong if it was okay - therefore Joseph and Allah are both in agreement that it is wrong, you even agree with me.

So explain why a woman cannot have sex with a slave but a man can. Are you really saying it is because it was her husband's slave and not hers? If that is the case then are you saying a woman who owns her own slave CAN have sex with him, or cannot?

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #127 - June 28, 2010, 12:31 PM

@ TR

Quote
I really can't see the point of your argument. I am arguing that Allah says it is wrong for a woman to have sex with her male slave and you admitted it was. Joseph was a prophet of God, he wouldn't say it was wrong if it was okay - therefore Joseph and Allah are both in agreement that it is wrong, you even agree with me.

So explain why a woman cannot have sex with a slave but a man can. Are you really saying it is because it was her husband's slave and not hers? If that is the case then are you saying a woman who owns her own slave CAN have sex with him, or cannot?

What a frigging idiot! Again you stupid moron:

1- Yes, Islam forbids a married woman from having sex with anyone except her husband.
2- Yes, Islam forbids a single from having sex with any man except if he's her husband and she can't marry him unless he's free.
3- The entire Sura of Yusuf has absolutely nothing to do with the above two points. And the verse you last quoted, quotes Joseph, basically saying: "No, I won't betray my master!" (how very dishonorable of Joseph!!!)
4- I already answered your stupid last question many time before. You stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, idiot!

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #128 - June 28, 2010, 12:34 PM

Hey Debunker no name calling.
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #129 - June 28, 2010, 12:41 PM

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 12:31 PM
What a frigging idiot! Again you stupid moron:

And there is an example of where you refuse to use manners and yet you demand them from me.

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 12:31 PM
1- Yes, Islam forbids a married woman from having sex with anyone except her husband.

And permits a married man to have sex with women other than ones of his multiple wives.

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 12:31 PM
2- Yes, Islam forbids a single from having sex with any man except if he's her husband and she can't marry him unless he's free.

And a man can have sex without marrying her, effectively getting around the "limit" of 4 wives.

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 12:31 PM
3- The entire Sura of Yusuf has absolutely nothing to do with the above two points. And the verse you last quoted, quotes Joseph, basically saying: "No, I won't betray my master!" (how very dishonorable of Joseph!!!)

He as a slave having sex with her is no different from a woman slave having sex with her male owner. Unless of course it is dishonourable because Joseph was her husband's slave and not her own, in which case is it also dishonourable for a man to have sex with his wife's slave? I don't know the answer to that one.

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 12:31 PM
4- I already answered your stupid last question many time before. You stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, idiot!

Your answer seems to be (in summary) that a man can fuck his slaves and not have to marry them, whereas a woman cannot. It's okay, you've agreed to the point people are making that the Quran gives men permission to put their dicks in as many women as they like (as long as they do the decent thing and enslave them first) whereas women have no such equal right.

Not only is the Quran man-made, it was made by a man.

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #130 - June 28, 2010, 12:42 PM

Quote from: BlackDog on June 28, 2010, 12:34 PM
Hey Debunker no name calling.

Water off a duck's back really. Personally I don't mind how abusive he gets with me, it's only others on this forum who seem to take offense to it.

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #131 - June 28, 2010, 12:43 PM

Sure but we don't want that kind of behavior.
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #132 - June 28, 2010, 12:58 PM

@ BD

Yes, I made a mistake, I mean when I saw him so "intelligently" trying to deduce the Islamic view on women and their slaves from a completely and entirely unrelated Sura, and when I tried to explain to his genius head, so many times, that that Sura has nothing to do with the Islamic view on this, I lost my temper. You're right. For the sake of my health, I'll just skip over any post by this genius. (this is what I usually do with Yezvee's posts, btw).

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #133 - June 28, 2010, 01:01 PM

I'm sorry for laughing Rationalizer (not that you care) but DB can be quite funny at times.
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #134 - June 28, 2010, 01:02 PM

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 12:58 PM
@ BD

Yes, I made a mistake, I mean when I saw him so "intelligently" trying to deduce the Islamic view on women and their slaves from a completely and entirely unrelated Sura, and while I tried to explain to his genius head, so many times, that that Sura has nothing to do with the Islamic view on this, I lost my temper. Your right. For the sake of my health, I'll just skip over any ost by this genius. (this is what I usually do with Yezvee's posts, btw).

Joseph as a messenger of God was saying this act was wrong, therefore it had Allah's sanction (because Allah did not then go on to say "But Joseph was wrong, it's okay"). You only refuse to accept the implication of the verse - unless as I said it was because Joseph was her HUSBAND's slave and not her slave, in which case I'd like to see where the Quran it says it is forbidden for a man to fuck his wife's slaves (are they not shared property)?

Quote from: BlackDog on June 28, 2010, 01:01 PM
I'm sorry for laughing Rationalizer (not that you care) but DB can be quite funny at times.

Humour is like the Quran, subjective

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #135 - June 28, 2010, 01:03 PM
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #136 - June 28, 2010, 01:04 PM

You can even have sex with your wife's slaves? I didn't think about that.
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #137 - June 28, 2010, 01:07 PM

@ BD

Quote
You can even have sex with your wife's slaves? I didn't think about that.

That is NOT true.

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- Saif Rahman
- Ex-Muslim
- Je suis Haram
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #138 - June 28, 2010, 01:08 PM

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 12:58 PM
@ BD

Yes, I made a mistake, I mean when I saw him so "intelligently" trying to deduce the Islamic view on women and their slaves from a completely and entirely unrelated Sura, and when I tried to explain to his genius head, so many times, that that Sura has nothing to do with the Islamic view on this, I lost my temper. You're right. For the sake of my health, I'll just skip over any post by this genius. (this is what I usually do with Yezvee's posts, btw).

Look stop apologising if you dont mean it.

This is the second time you have apologised for insulting him, yet you continue to do it. Either stop apologising or stop insulting.

My Book
My Blog
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #139 - June 28, 2010, 01:10 PM

@ Islame

Oh please, the last one wasn't an apology, I was just being passive agressive, insulting TR without breaking the rules.

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #140 - June 28, 2010, 01:10 PM

Quote from: debunker on June 28, 2010, 01:07 PM
@ BD

That is NOT true.

Prove it.
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #141 - June 28, 2010, 01:19 PM

What? you made the claim, you prove it, show me the verse that says one can sleep with his wife's slaves.

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #142 - June 28, 2010, 01:22 PM

Quote from: BlackDog on June 28, 2010, 01:04 PM
You can even have sex with your wife's slaves? I didn't think about that.

Why did you post it as a statement? I posed it as a question!

Still, debunker still seems able to see the discrepancy in men and women's rights.

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #143 - June 28, 2010, 01:27 PM

lol sorry confusion from my side.
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #144 - June 28, 2010, 01:30 PM

Quote from: BlackDog on June 28, 2010, 01:27 PM
lol sorry confusion from my side.

Don't worry, DB doesn't hate you so you don't need to prepare yourself from the onslaught of his abuse torrent You're allowed to make mistakes / misread stuff.

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #145 - June 28, 2010, 01:32 PM
- charlesmartel
- Member
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #146 - June 28, 2010, 05:33 PM

@Debunker,

I am still confused about the perspective issue. How do you know that when Allah was talking of imminent end times in Quran, he was talking from his own perspective?

Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.
- charlesmartel
- Member
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #147 - June 28, 2010, 05:35 PM

And also tell me how do you know that he was talking from Zul Qarnain's perspective when he talked of sun setting?

Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #148 - June 28, 2010, 05:53 PM

Quote
And also tell me how do you know that he was talking from Zul Qarnain's perspective when he talked of sun setting?

OMG! I heard that at FFI so many times but I never cared to comment as the argument was nauseatingly stupid!

The sun setting in a hot spring was a geographical description... the place where Zul Qarnain arrived to was bordered from the West by a hot spring... that's all.

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- charlesmartel
- Member
- offline
Re: Comments on Debunker and IA debate
Reply #149 - June 28, 2010, 06:02 PM

Quote
The sun setting in a hot spring was a geographical description... the place where Zul Qarnain arrived to was bordered from the West by a hot spring... that's all.

From whose perspective? I still don't understand your answer.

See, my question is very simple. Sometimes you claim that Allah spoke from his own perspective; at other times you say that he spoke from humans' perspective. How do you know?

Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.
Previous page 1 ... 3 4 56 7 ... 11 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »