Atheist unite!!

[bellbird]

Was just stopping by to wish my fellow free-thinkers a nice day, and saw I'd missed some messages from when I was in hospital for surgery :)

How goes the celebrations planning, @Chiqui ?

 

[Deleted member 42984]

*

 

[Deleted member 42984]

I tried to post an image here but something went wrong. Oh well. It basically just said "stand up for science!" :-)

 

[bellbird]

Feeling a mixture of shock/disbelief, anger, frustration and disappointment.

The NZ government is wanting to implement hate speech laws in our country, following the Christchurch massacre.

Maybe I should have seen this coming, but honestly I did not see our country headed this way and giving up the right of our people to freedom of speech.
A right that we only have, because people in our past have fought and died for it.

And now our government wants to give it away.

What happened in Christchurch was an awful awful thing, but the response has gone too far.

Non-muslim women in NZ have been encouraged to wear head scarves.
This is NOT a symbol for togetherness; it is a symbol of oppression. Women in many Arabic countries are JAILED and KILLED for taking their headscarves off.
Atheism, too, is punishable by death in a number of Arabic countries, and the Qur'an instructs the cutting of the throats of those "infidels" who leave Islam.

Just recently, Brunei has implemented Sharia law, to make homosexuality punishable by stoning.

Religion... all religion... MUST be subject to criticism, and certainly NOT protected against those who speak out, particularly when such atrocities as the above are occurring every. f*cking. Day.

Because I am a postgraduate student, I receive staff emails from my university.
One week following the Christchurch massacre, our national radio broadcast the Islamic call to prayer to the whole nation.
The staff at my university were sent an email saying that they should stop their lectures at that time, so that they and their students should go and listen to the call to prayer where it was being broadcast on campus.

I've been at home recovering from surgery, but had I been there I would NOT have moved. Just like I sat with my butt glued to my high school chapel pews every time they did communion.

The world is moving in a very scary direction.

 

[Sideways]

This is NOT a symbol for togetherness; it is a symbol of oppression.

Disagree on this one. In some places in the world it is a symbol of oppression.

In predominantly non-muslim countries with the kind of civil liberties protections that NZ has? It’s more of a symbol of faith and belonging. Like a simple statement: I identify as a female muslim.

Historically, and still in many parts of the world, the various forms of headdress of Islamic women are very much used as a weapon of oppression. But I think if you asked most NZ women why they choose to wear their headscarf (and for most, it is, relevantly, their personal choice) it is as much about pride in their faith and ethnic identity as anything. The type of headdress worn is oftentimes a clue to the woman’s ethnic background, rather than just her religion, similar to the types of culturally distinct dress.

There is a fair amount of at least anecdotal evidence that many muslim women in countries like NZ and Australia choose not to wear their headscarf because of the negative treatment they get as a result. So in that respect, wearing the headscarf in those parts of the world has almost become a symbol of religious freedom, where a religious minority feels safe enough to dress in an identifiable way, like the orthodox Jewish communities in Victoria.

In that respect, NZ should be proud that women in the Islam minority feel safe enough, and free enough of oppression and stigma, to be openly part of a very small ethnic minority.

 

[bellbird]

I've read your position, @Sideways , but I will stand by my original one.

In some places in the world it is a symbol of oppression.

In all places in the world, it is a symbol of oppression. In some places of the world, some women have the choice to not wear the hijab/headscarf without penalty.

Some proponents of the hijab argue that it is simply a means of modest dress.
But, Islam is an incredibly patriarchal religion, highly oppressive of women.
The forms of the hijab, up to the burqa as the most-covering, reflect one form that that oppression takes.

It’s more of a symbol of faith and belonging. Like a simple statement: I identify as a female muslim.

Sure, like how Muslim women are not allowed to pray in the same room or same mosque as men, or in some situations where they are "allowed" to do so, they must be at the back of the room.
Yes, some women may see that as a symbol of their faith and belonging, but that doesn't take away from the fact that at a fundamental level, it is facilitating the oppression of women in Islam, as is outlined in the Qur'an.

There is a fair amount of at least anecdotal evidence that many muslim women in countries like NZ and Australia choose not to wear their headscarf because of the negative treatment they get as a result

Yes, such evidence exists.
However, that "negative treatment" is nothing on the consequences faced by the majority of Muslim women worldwide should they remove their hijab.

Nasrin Sotoudeh has been sentenced to 38 years in jail and 148 lashes and sentenced to jail simply for defending Iranian women who chose to not wear their headscarves.

That evidence is far greater than anecdotal.

In that respect, NZ should be proud that women in the Islam minority feel safe enough, and free enough of oppression and stigma, to be openly part of a very small ethnic minority.

Yes, they should.
But that is not achieved through promoting the hijab. Not even for one day.

Those non-muslim NZ women who wore the hijab on that Friday, and then were seen in town the following day? Were not abandoned/beaten/raped/jailed/tortured/murdered/et al. as a result. There are appropriate ways of showing support that do not completely disrespect the utmost bravery of Muslim women, worldwide, who have done exactly the same? And faced one or many of the consequences listed above.

 

[Sideways]

But, Islam is an incredibly patriarchal religion, highly oppressive of women.

We’ll have to agree to disagree.

We’re on the same page that in many parts of the world, Islam is used as a tool of oppression against women.

But this certainly isn’t the case everywhere, and is dependent largely on the cultural interpretation of the Koran being used in any given place.

Having lived in Indonesia (largest Islamic population in the world) with a muslim family, it was very apparent to me that the oppression of women was dependent on the cultural interpretation of the religion. It would be very jard to argue that Islam is being used as a tool of oppression in most parts of Indonesia, the far west possibily being the exception (again, for cultural reasons).

Actually, when compared book against book, it can be argued that the Koran is less oppressive to women than the bible, and certainly the bible continues to be used in many parts to women with equal vigour, depending on the cultural interpretation you’re looking at.

 

[bellbird]

We’ll have to agree to disagree.

Yes, I think so.

But this certainly isn’t the case everywhere, and is dependent largely on the cultural interpretation of the Koran being used in any given place.

When we visited Bondi Beach one summer, there was a Muslim woman and her husband walking along the beach; the woman, dressed in a thick black burqa. Her husband, in a singlet and shorts, adorned in gold jewellery.

I would argue strongly that that woman was not wearing her burqa as a sign of belonging to her faith.

The culture of that place, had no influence on the presentation of that woman, and the outrageous juxtaposition with that of her husband's.

interpretation of the Koran

Speaking directly to this phrase, "interpretation" I think is more accurately replaced with "cherry picking".

The truest manifestation of the Qur'an is when its words are taken at face value. After all, it is an instructive manual at its heart.

Muslim women worldwide who are the lucky ones, are so because they are able to ignore the many oppressive passages without dire consequence.
Passages such as:
2:228 men have a higher status than women
4:34 men are superior to women and have control over them
4:34 also instructs men to beat their wives if they merely fear that she may become highhanded (-- ie. the exact behaviour it repeatedly instructs men to have!)
4:11 a woman is entitled to only half of a man's
2:282 the testimony of a woman is worth only half of that of a man's
4:24 female slaves are the sexual property of men
4:3 a man may marry up to four wives
4:129 a man may get rid of one of those wives if he wants to
65:1 men can marry girls who have not yet gone through puberty.

In the Hadith:
-the majority of hell's inhabitants are women
-women are one of three bad omens (along side horses and houses)

The only way you could possibly "interpret" those as not being oppressive of women is by ignoring them. And I don't consider turning a blind eye to be a method of interpretation.
Particularly when the Qur'an states that no one has the right to go against what is permissible by the Qur'an.

Actually, when compared book against book, it can be argued that the Koran is less oppressive to women than the bible

Yes, the bible also contains atrocious instructions for the oppression of women, but given the selection of the above Qur'an passages? I would strongly caution against anyone who would make such an argument.

They are both oppressive of women.

Their major difference being that Islam has now taken over from Christianity to become the major militant religion by the highly politically-driven implementation of the "pure" interpretation of its religious text.

I think if you asked most NZ women why they choose to wear their headscarf (and for most, it is, relevantly, their personal choice) it is as much about pride in their faith and ethnic identity as anything.

Deep down, though, it would be hard to verify that.
I'll switch to Christianity to give an analogous example.
Going to church on Sunday = one example of pride in their faith for many Christians.
but that same religion also teaches people from a very young age that they are sinners from the moment they are born, and that they will burn for an eternity in hell should they not follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.
It is very hard, therefore, to identify such an action as true "pride" without acknowledging the fear created by these religions that runs so deep that it can subconsciously mould one's answer to that question whilst they are a member of that religion.
(Speaking as someone who has seen exactly this IRL).

 

[Deleted member 42984]

Re: Christianity. Jesus died for our sins. So we are not punished, God always forgives, according to Christianity, right? That we are sinners I interpret as just another way of saying that we are imperfect as human beings.

 

[Friday]

@ziter threadbanned.

This thread is for Atheist’s discussion only

 

[Chiqui]

Sorry, but I don't get the point. What I'm missing?
Is it an on going discussion about which religion is worse? Are not all of them a perverted fairytale?
I would think they are for an atheist.

 

[bellbird]

Is it an on going discussion about which religion is worse?

I had brought up Islam specifically, because of my frustrations with how it has been infiltrating our largely secular nation of NZ in ways it really shouldn't have been, of late.

Are not all of them a perverted fairytale?
I would think they are for an atheist.

But yes, I would agree. Fairytales with very disturbed ideals.
This world would benefit tremendously from the absence of all religion.