One does not need a guide when the village is in sight. it's well evident that Zionist gang controls USA to the hilt.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 11:21 am
You have a habit of believe things without evidence. If you went to your doctor with a sore finger and he said voices told him you needed to have your feet amputated and that you had to have faith and believe him, I suppose you would go along with that too.
We're not at war with Islam?
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
if you're right, then explain what are the economic principles of Christianity ?Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:26 am
Christianity was also at one time ideology, lifestyle, social project. Christianity experienced a Reformation , which the Ummah of Islam never did, but perhaps is experiencing now.
Islam was once a light to the known world but has since become the religious focus of warring political groups.
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
I definitely am no expert on the Sande Society, but I think this image says pretty much all that needs to be said; and of course, everyone can agree that Indonesia, Mindanao in the Philippines, and Malaysia aren't in Africa.Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 8:02 am Seleucid wrote:
My old friend who was Muslim was a Sierra Leonian and a Mende . The Sande secret society existed before Islamisation in Sierra Leone, I think but I will have to look it up. Meanwhile I think that it's possible that FGM existed in tribes other than the Ummah(worldwide tribe of Islam), possibly since long before Muhammad.In Liberia the FGM problem is in the N-W with the borders of Guinea and Sierra Leone which are of course Muslim majority countries. The latest stats are down to almost a quarter. Further on Liberia, the Sande Society is heavily involved in FGM, and as can be predicted "they may have significant Muslim populations".
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
Boca wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 2:52 pmif you're right, then explain what are the economic principles of Christianity ?Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:26 am
Christianity was also at one time ideology, lifestyle, social project. Christianity experienced a Reformation , which the Ummah of Islam never did, but perhaps is experiencing now.
Islam was once a light to the known world but has since become the religious focus of warring political groups.
Christendom was at one time the economic and political society of Europe. The Pope was more powerful than kings.
"Christendom" has referred to the medieval and renaissance notion of the Christian world as a sociopolitical polity. In essence, the earliest vision of Christendom was a vision of a Christian theocracy, a government founded upon and upholding Christian values, whose institutions are spread through and over with Christian doctrine. In this period, members of the Christian clergy wield political authority. The specific relationship between the political leaders and the clergy varied but, in theory, the national and political divisions were at times subsumed under the leadership of the church as an institution. This model of church-state relations was accepted by various Church leaders and political leaders in European history.
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
That's an awfully big place to be controlled by one little 'gang' of outsiders. And what's this 'hold' the 'gang' has over the entire United States? It would have to be pretty major, like for example owning every last oil reserve on the planet. I don't think Israel is even a particularly rich country. That's the trouble with having your brain scrambled with religious crap from a young age--you get taught to accept without question, which destroys the ability to think things through with any sort of depth or critical thinking. Fortunately it miraculously comes back when the religious rubbish is discarded, or perhaps the miracle occurs first and then the religion naturally follows. Who knows? I've also noticed that when it happens it's often the most deeply religious and hopelessly brain-washed who become the best critical thinkers, so I suppose the ability was lying dormant, just waiting for a trigger. The important thing is that the brain can recover. It doesn't happen often enough, but perhaps in time.... If there's any 'gang' that is pulling the power strings, and has been for longer than anyone alive today can recall, it's the arms industry; that evil but silent and virtually invisible enemy of humanity.Boca wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 2:32 pmOne does not need a guide when the village is in sight. it's well evident that Zionist gang controls USA to the hilt.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 11:21 am
You have a habit of believe things without evidence. If you went to your doctor with a sore finger and he said voices told him you needed to have your feet amputated and that you had to have faith and believe him, I suppose you would go along with that too.
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
And whose fault is that? (Rhetorical).
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
I always suspected as much. Don't worry, I won't tell anybody.
Maybe he did but you must have done something wrong to piss him off enough for him to ban you from eating bacon. Still, every cloud has a silver lining: more for the rest of us, yum.
God has created Earth to accommodate Humankind, and has created all sorts of provisions to feed Humans.
It's good to know there are some advantages to being stupid.Your low intellect isn't able to comprehend it.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6284
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
We haven't met before, so I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt. But you should bear in mind that I hate being bullshitted by lazy wankers and it tends to invite a surly response.Seleucus wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:41 amI think you are misrepresenting numbers.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 11:21 pmThat's not true. Muslims represent a third of the population in Ethiopia for instance, but 74% of women are genitally mutilated there.
Same goes for 50% of women in Liberia which is 85% Christian.
See here: https://www.unicef.org/media/files/FGMC ... EAD(2).pdf
See here: https://www.giz.de/fachexpertise/downlo ... iberia.pdf
See here: http://www.un.org/News/dh/pdf/english/2016/05022016.pdf
The old stats on Ethiopia would be for greater Ethiopia which are today Muslim Somalia and Muslim Eritrea (both very highest FGM rates). The latest stats for Ethiopia are about a quarter while the whole country today is about a third Muslim. In Liberia the FGM problem is in the N-W with the borders of Guinea and Sierra Leone which are of course Muslim majority countries. The latest stats are down to almost a quarter. Further on Liberia, the Sande Society is heavily involved in FGM, and as can be predicted "they may have significant Muslim populations".
Image on left is Islam in Africa, image on right is prevalence of FGM. Obvious correlation.
Sadly FGM is not declining but on the rise rapidly in South-East Asia among Muslims in Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore and Malaysia. There is no medical necessity for child circumcision at all. It's part of the us versus them gang mentality that seems to me to be behind so many elements of Islamic culture.
Look at your own link again.
See here: https://www.unicef.org/media/files/FGMC ... EAD(2).pdf
Look a the number for Liberia which is 50% of the female population age 15 to 49 in 2004-2015. Exactly as I stated and from the same source.
This is the religious breakdown for that country as of their census in 2008
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Liberia
Islam ... 12.2% of the population, FGM ... 50%
Now do the same with Ethiopia and, and don't pretend for bullshitter's convenience that it's a different country to the real one this time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Ethiopia
Islam 33%... in a nation with 74% incidence of FGM in the aforementioned age cohort.
You clearly quoted me quoting the claim Belinda made which I was disputing, so you have no excuse for not noting it, but as a little reminder.
My point was in reference to Belinda's claim that....
And I ask you now, how is that mathematically possible?
Are you now going to tell me that Muslim women have extra vaginas?
If you are going to make that claim, then congratulations for being interesting at least.
Otherwise.... not a good first meeting. Try harder next time.
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
I disagree with the numbers you are reporting. I stand by what I wrote above that reads, "The old stats on Ethiopia ... many elements of Islamic culture."FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:02 amlazy wankers and it tends to invite a surly response.
And I ask you now, how is that mathematically possible?
Are you now going to tell me that Muslim women have extra vaginas?
.... not a good first meeting. Try harder next time.
The rate of FGM is down to about a quarter in Liberia. That's in the third pdf link above on page 2. Looks like it comes from:
Sharpe, Melanie. (2016). New statistical report on female genital mutilation shows harmful practice is a global concern – UNICEF. UNICEF Eastern and Southern Africa. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/esaro/5440_2016_ ... n-fgm.html
The rate of FGM in Ethiopia is also down to about a quarter, that's in the first pdf link above on page 2. Looks like it comes from:
UNICEF Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS). (2017). Surveys. UNICEF. Retrieved from http://mics.unicef.org/surveys
That said, that fact that some obscure secret cult (which is heavily Muslim) in a tiny remote African country practices FGM doesn't mean FGM isn't predominantly a problem of Muslim culture. Just as because some remote tribe in Africa prefers fat women doesn't mean that male culture doesn't overwhelmingly prefer slim nubile ladies. Just because the odd woman is a pedophile or a rapist doesn't mean there isn't a sexual problem in male culture. Just because Japan also practiced colonialism doesn't mean the West didn't have a culture of imperialism. Not sure the name of this fallacy but it's a common argumentative trope.
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
Seleucus wrote:
I retract what I wrote about FGM being confined to Muslims. I was unable to find out if FGM existed among the Mende of Sierra Leone before Muslims arrived, which I presume was many centuries ago. However, cultural practices can arise simultaneously in different locations.
I don't know how to enlarge the maps image that you posted. Very impressive even what I can read of it. It seems to me that strict religiosity, low status of women (in which women are complicit) , and strict division of labour between men and women are all interlinked effects of those cultures where warriors have been needed to keep the societies viable. Muhammad himself was a warrior who needed to be a warrior in view of the prevalent pre-Islamic culture in Arabia at the time. Just an idea.
Neither am I however I did look up my copy of "The Mende of Sierra Leone" which is the definitive and most authoritative book on the Mende people. I looked for 'Moslems' and 'Sande'. Sande initiation for girls did indeed including excision of the clitoris. Islam was popular among Mende people for two reasons. One, both Mende and Moslems wanted women to be subservient to men.(The author did not say "subservient" and indeed maintains that West African women were self confident and assertive). And two , Islam was well thought of because Moslem soldiers were naturally high status. In the city where the higher status Creoles lived, Christian affiliations were of even higher status than Moslem.I definitely am no expert on the Sande Society,
I retract what I wrote about FGM being confined to Muslims. I was unable to find out if FGM existed among the Mende of Sierra Leone before Muslims arrived, which I presume was many centuries ago. However, cultural practices can arise simultaneously in different locations.
I don't know how to enlarge the maps image that you posted. Very impressive even what I can read of it. It seems to me that strict religiosity, low status of women (in which women are complicit) , and strict division of labour between men and women are all interlinked effects of those cultures where warriors have been needed to keep the societies viable. Muhammad himself was a warrior who needed to be a warrior in view of the prevalent pre-Islamic culture in Arabia at the time. Just an idea.
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
I've read that lip plates arose at least 7 times independently, from South America to Africa to Kamchatka.Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Sep 26, 2017 10:32 amI retract what I wrote about FGM being confined to Muslims. I was unable to find out if FGM existed among the Mende of Sierra Leone before Muslims arrived, which I presume was many centuries ago. However, cultural practices can arise simultaneously in different locations.
I like to think that warrior culture and status of women can exist together; Sparta might be an example?It seems to me that strict religiosity, low status of women (in which women are complicit) , and strict division of labour between men and women are all interlinked effects of those cultures where warriors have been needed to keep the societies viable. Muhammad himself was a warrior who needed to be a warrior in view of the prevalent pre-Islamic culture in Arabia at the time. Just an idea.
- Hobbes' Choice
- Posts: 8364
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
You are talking bollocks.Boca wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:04 amFirst, Islam isn't a religion like christinity, Islam is also ideology, lifestyle, social project, Science is no separate from Islam.Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 7:04 pm
Lol.
That's why religions fought against every single step that science has made.
second, Islam from the beginning was promoting science, and never been anti like Christianity or any other religion, but since you have no knowledge of history of muslim civilization, you're babbling out of ignorance.
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
Seleucus wrote:
I am so glad that you understand what I am talking about
Are you an anthropologist, if it's not an impertinent question?
I suppose that a very high status woman such as Boudicaa would have enough help with wet nurses or whatever so that she could be a warrior. Pregnancy is not a total bar to athletic activity anyway, so I suppose that a pregnant woman can fight . I wonder what the regulations are now that women are doing actual fighting in modern armed services.
I also suppose that rigid separation of gender roles is integral to the economy of certain societies . In "The Mende of Sierra Leone" the author , an anthropologist , assumes that relations between the sexes is integral to the social structure and the economy. I propose that Muhammad although he began a new religion in Arabia, retained the more ancient social structure in which the genders were very separate. Initiation into male, and female, adulthood by means of secret societies which include the bonding that follows on communal violence (some little boys died as a result of Poro initiation) , engender lifelong loyalties to the gender thus conferred.
Also, I remember reading that one of Muhammad's wives , I think the one who married very young, became politically influential. One of the perks of the rigid separation of sexes is that when a woman becomes old she is revered , and that ethic is taught to Poro and Sande; in effect the old woman becomes an honorary man.
I simply don't know. I fancy that there would have to be effective contraception for women to be warriors. In times gone by I thought women were nearly always either pregnant or lactating.I like to think that warrior culture and status of women can exist together; Sparta might be an example?
I am so glad that you understand what I am talking about
Are you an anthropologist, if it's not an impertinent question?
I suppose that a very high status woman such as Boudicaa would have enough help with wet nurses or whatever so that she could be a warrior. Pregnancy is not a total bar to athletic activity anyway, so I suppose that a pregnant woman can fight . I wonder what the regulations are now that women are doing actual fighting in modern armed services.
I also suppose that rigid separation of gender roles is integral to the economy of certain societies . In "The Mende of Sierra Leone" the author , an anthropologist , assumes that relations between the sexes is integral to the social structure and the economy. I propose that Muhammad although he began a new religion in Arabia, retained the more ancient social structure in which the genders were very separate. Initiation into male, and female, adulthood by means of secret societies which include the bonding that follows on communal violence (some little boys died as a result of Poro initiation) , engender lifelong loyalties to the gender thus conferred.
Also, I remember reading that one of Muhammad's wives , I think the one who married very young, became politically influential. One of the perks of the rigid separation of sexes is that when a woman becomes old she is revered , and that ethic is taught to Poro and Sande; in effect the old woman becomes an honorary man.
Re: We're not at war with Islam?
When I visited the local mosque, the young Muslim man who showed us round explained that Muslims believe that the world was made by Allah, and so it is reverence towards Allah's works that makes science appealing to Muslims. (Like the proof according to design). By contrast, there was an influence in the making of Christianity which actively disparaged the material in favour of the mental and spiritual, like what Nick is on about.Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Tue Sep 26, 2017 5:30 pmYou are talking bollocks.Boca wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:04 amFirst, Islam isn't a religion like christinity, Islam is also ideology, lifestyle, social project, Science is no separate from Islam.Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 7:04 pm
Lol.
That's why religions fought against every single step that science has made.
second, Islam from the beginning was promoting science, and never been anti like Christianity or any other religion, but since you have no knowledge of history of muslim civilization, you're babbling out of ignorance.