Chocolate and Honey
Nomads-
Content Count
2,259 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Chocolate and Honey
-
Anyway, we're not talking about the veil (that's Ibti's department ) but I'm curious... you don't believe that it be made obligatory, but many other Muslims do, what if the majority of those Muslims, as per their view, decide that it be made mandatory on all women in the country? I dont believe it's obligatory. And the beauty of Islam is neither MAJORITY nor MINORITY RULES: what rules is the already written and decided upon rules. So you see, NO ONE can decide for me. I have a choice to either wear it or not. I also have a choice to decide what I consider Hijab(is it a shaal, big garbasaar, cabaayad, Pakistani style or the current one you see on Somali women?). And yes! Live and let live,that's fundemental in Islam.
-
According to you; domesticated husband = submissive and servant.....so, what does that mean for women who do exact thing? Duh!! They're domesticated women dee. This is why I convulse at the mere mention of "Raaliyo", "domesticated" "traditional," "Nurturers" etc. :mad: Arent you domesticating him by training him? Only I wouldnt tell him I'm domesticating him
-
&H- I wasn’t limiting myself to Somali women; I was talking in the broader sense. Preach on to other women! But leave Somalis alone, ok? Anyhow, in the Somali case- their already doing that anyway without the perks don’t you think? First what diamond ring, I’ve yet to meet a halimo with an impressive ring on her finger, half of the time one has to employ visual aid to see the darn thing. Second, for the 5-star hotel….dear one, me and you both know that in most cases this is subsidised by a loan/hagbadh that the dude/in most cases the Mrs will be paying for in the many years to come. See? We are already having our issues. Imagine if big forheaded Farahs didnt even want to pretend anymore? Thirdly, what criteria are you employing when establishing whether a man is in-fact “manly”? Untill we adapt egalitarian society, I define Manly-man actions as the following: Makes decent money, buys diomand rings, flowers, dinners, cars, wedding gifts, grills meats, looks under the hood of my car( even if he has no clue as to what to look for) changes tires, lifts any heavy objects, builds something in the garage somewhere, drinks plenty of shah, gosh... am forgetting alot! A farax, proposes, visits the family/asks for her hand, gives a xalimo the diamond ring and a weeding to make her friends jealous…….then what happens next? Atleast let them do this much. Xalimos tend to get the wedding and never the marriage and in these cases I never know who to blame…but nonetheless they lose. So why not marry them anyway, and maybe shame them via the process; granted their already doing just that in some parts of the world without the necessary benefits….. I dont know what you're proposing here(kidding! but dont want to entertain it really) and whose fault is such failure? We can pretend to debate but we all know the answer: certain big-forheads. Anyhow, a kept man/staying home husband has his perks and I for one applaud women who have managed to bag a fully domesticated husband. Is he less of a man? And if his less of a man for staying home, then what does that mean for women who opt to do the exact What perks? What can I get with a domesticated husband(submissive one? No thanks, not interested in servants. Fully cooked meals, warm bed and laundary? who said I cant have that with a working Farah granted I have to train him?).
-
Let me as you though, since we're on the matter of percentages and consensuses. What do you think of the recent Swiss ban on minarets? I don't believe the minarets add or take away any value to the legitimacy of Masjids. So I care less. And the French ban on the hijab? What if the US, or rather the Minnesota, where you are, would vote for a ban on all forms of the Muslim veil since it's a majority Christian Since both the French and the U.S. boast freedom and democracy and preach individual freedom, I think it is hypocracy at its best that the French goverment concerned itself with such trivial thing as how a woman should dress. Also, you assumed that I believe the veil to be an obligation: I dont! Would that be fair? or would it be an infringement on your rights? It would be violation of my rights as the constitution makes it clear. However, If I moved to say,Vatican city(where there were clear laws put in place stating that I couldnt wear a head scarf, I would certainly either abide by the laws or move). There isnt really a double standards when it comes to following rules as the West would have you believe. It's all about social contract. For instance, if a certain Muslim country dictates that you must wear a head scarf as a non-believer to enjoy that country and they dont promote individual choice, then thats what must be done. To you be your Way, and to me mine. chap. 109, verse 6
-
Why not C&H? Do you mean why not accept marriage proposals, diomond rings from women? umm.. because we(Somali women)are already carrying an awful a lot of burden(working inside and outside of the home) and you SURELY dont want to convince Farahs they're worth Diomonds and 5-star hotel weddings, ok? Whats next? Your family asks his family for his hand? Also, it is not Manly(shush... dont ruin it, male ego deep message in session here).
-
Aww... did I touch a raw nerve? Well..hmm.. your beleifs are relevant because we're discussing a country thats 99% Muslim and when and if given the chance will likely choose the Sharia Law. Secondly, your beliefs matter because if you are a non-believer, ofcourse you would push for secular goverment! Well, here is my contribution in a sum: I vote for a goverment that adheres to the Sharia laws because I believe Islam is a way of life, complete with laws and governance. I believe the Qur'an we read today is the word of ALLAH. And certainly Allah's laws are far superior to man-made laws. No need to modify or improve something that has already reached perfection: This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; Surah 5: Verse 3
-
Gabdho sayid wuu idinka sax san yahay as far as buying Rings is concerned. You dont want to teach Somali men to accept proposals and expect women to pay half iyo wax daran ok. Yes Zayid, she is insulting your manhood if she ever does such thing as buy a ring for you or propose she'll pay for a wedding.
-
Freedom of choice is a right, regardless of what we think of peoples decision; It just gives me a headache that people who are against Taliban or Alshabab can then advocate for a ban. so we've come full circle. Freedom of choice!
-
See, there needs to be a clear base when two people are debating a certain matter. I'm getting confused here because you dont believe the Qur'an is literally from Allah(which then makes you a non-believer) and you dont want to go the atheist route. You're mixing things because you want to argue on the basis of this religion(citing verses, certain interpretations of Imams, etc)which you dont beleive in. Before you take on this issue, please jump the fence and admit to yourself that you're either confused about your religion or reluctant to admit to yourself that you dont beleive anymore. If you dont believe anymore, we can take a look at what irks you about this religion. If you believe in Allah(you cant pick and choose what you agree or dont agree with. You dont have the liberty to do so once you develop faith), then we can discuss how and why secularism is beneficial to US than the Sharia Law.
-
Morning folks. A DIOMOND ring? I need to switch careers ASAP! Lately I'm becoming obssessed with Diomonds. Everywhere I look I see them.
-
C&H, fair enough. I just wanted to preempt any troll-like behavior on your part
-
Awww.... sanka dheera i dilay and how happy and radiant she looks, awwwww!!
-
Lol@ aflagaado. Walaalo, between you and me, everyone can see who likes aflagaado iyo cay. You calling people of faith "faith-heads," "bimbos" and "barbaric" doesnt exactly make you a gentleman now does it? All I asked you was "why are you so angry"? Just like the other thread, you're not adding anything of value. You're just calling people names and going on a binge. The poster and I are having an intelligent discussion, please don't ruin it with your tiring rants.
-
By the way, whose interpretation of the lovely old book, the Quran, would take precedence, since it's all mired in opinion: sufis, wahhabis, shias, or ahmadis? Somalis need more seculairty and less religiosity. It's refreshing to see that there are many free-thinkers on SOL - a much needed presence in the face of self-righteous faith-heads Still ranting? Obsessions? Why so angry?
-
I didn't say Islamic laws are completely inadequate, many Muslims lead pious lives by following them. The problem arises with the "ease" with which emotions come into play when formulating laws. LOL! Ok, ? If you dont beleive they're inadequate, why are you againt Islamic states? Second, what's with this emotions you keep reffering to? Are you saying, religious people are emotional? I almost fell off the chair with this one. Islam is God's religion is it not? Islam is the straight path to God is it not? Islam is not God. I'm glad you didnt fall of the chair and harm yourself. Let me slow it down for you: The Sharia laws are written in the Qur'an and the Qur'an is God's words precisely. So if you criticize or disagree with the Qur'an, you're disagreeing with God. I hope I'm clear enough. One can criticize Islam while keeping one's faith just like one can criticize a government for ill-doing while one's keeps his/her citizenship. Again, I'm confused. How are you seperating Allah from his religion? And no, criticizing man-made laws and goverments isnt the same as critiquing Almight God, OK? But that inst possible in a Sharia country because the laws are God's laws and one cannot question them. This is a very easy path to unaccountable power. Yes! Once you accept they're God's laws and you cant question God, we can talk about corruption, human errors, checks and balances within Islamic states, interpertations of laws and who is in power. Objectively means not being swept up in religious emotions. Here you go again with emotions. How about you take emotions such as "inhumane, unfair, should's and shouldn'ts " out of this issue? And discuss on the basis of facts and proposals? quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you're questioning God's laws (by the way do you believe they're God's or someone's opinion?) you're certainly questioning the competance of such laws, God. I mean you dont exactly believe they're just right? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No, I do not exactly believe that "they're just right", nothing is "just right", unless we're talking about cloth sizes Sorry for the confusion I have caused. I meant, YOU dont believe these laws are just(as in fair), right? And I don't want to answer the question of "the laws being God's or someone's opinion" because that's going to open a whole new can of worms which is whether or not the Quran is the literal word of God or if it contains human elements. So, you're not exactly sure if the Qur'an is from God but you "believe"(I put this in quotations because to believe means to accept blindly the unknown) in Islam? Hm....
-
You are not a true Italian, you are a black African
Chocolate and Honey replied to N.O.R.F's topic in General
What's the serious issue that demands our full attention? Italians are biggots? And...they've always been and will be biggots. Who is next? Arabs, Jews, Asians? Everyone stereotypes against dark-skinned people. People should go on with their lives. -
You are not a true Italian, you are a black African
Chocolate and Honey replied to N.O.R.F's topic in General
Have you seen Christiano Ronaldo? Sorry I forgot this isn't the ladies' section. looks too boyish. But Bekham is grown and sexy -
I almost missed this one. Why do you assume I'm an Athiest? I didnt say you're an atheist. I merely meant if you want to take this discussion on the "Islamic Laws are inadequate and cannot deal with today's problems" route. Just because I raise questions? Because I criticize Islam? See, you can't criticize God(Islam) period! You can criticize how Muslims act, what they practice and their interpration. Why? Because I am for secular governance? This is exactly the problem... just because one steps out of his/her religious emotions and tries to look at things objectively doesn't signify a loss of faith. Does it? I didnt say you're not Muslim because you call for secular goverment. But you're tredging on dangerous waters here when, as you put it, "Step out of your religion" and by the way, what is looking at things objectively mean? I am not questioning the existence of God, neither am I questioning Islam as a religion. What I am questioning (and I am getting tired of saying this over and over) is the control of governance by religion. If you're questioning God's laws(by the way do you believe they're God's or someone's opinion? you're certainly questioning the competance of such laws, God. I mean you dont exactly believe they're just right?
-
No it doesnt. Personal experiences are irrelavant to this discussion. BTW, I assumed that you were after a genuine discussion on these issues but the fact that you agreed with Raamsade(who denounces anything Islam)tells me that my efforts were wasted. If you want to go that route, please visit the thread about Atheism. Have a lovely day sis.
-
You are not a true Italian, you are a black African
Chocolate and Honey replied to N.O.R.F's topic in General
Beckham is an eye candy, realy. As long as he struts his stuff in Hollywood, the Americans has no objections. That anorexic wife of his, now thats another matter all together. -
You are not a true Italian, you are a black African
Chocolate and Honey replied to N.O.R.F's topic in General
Of all the nationalities ee aduunka jooga, who wants to be Italian bal? -
They said a lot of guys believe that they are God’s gift to women and they don’t have to do or be anything else. “You’ve got me baby, what more do you want”? OMG, I actually had a guy say that to me once(to his defense though Calvin K male models have nothing on him) and then, he went into shock for months to come when I said I didn’t want to have him. He brought so much light out of her that she didn’t even know she had. Before he came along, she had given up on Somali men. They had a lavish wedding paid by her of course, and he moved in to her house. She bought him a new car and he agreed to find his calling in life with her help. She even set up a room for him and his friends to chew chat. Every weekend she put on a Dirac and Uunsi, and looked beautiful for him. She made tea and set up the mood for him and his friends to enjoy them selves while chewing Chat which he probably bought with her money. She gave him everything he wanted. She put up with him while he was trying finding his so call “calling” in life. This sounds so one-sided. He didn’t exactly bring “so much light” did he? And it is not all that shocking really because she sacrificed herself. He probably left her for a woman with dignity. This story reeks judgement and too much emotions. Correction: these men(the ones who skip responsibility and marry single mothers)are older, uneducated, hidious-looking men :eek: . The younger, educated and ambitious men arent attracted to that at all. Also, I think she heard too much calaacal. Women who are in those kind of situations, mostly put themselves in those situations by deciding any man is better than no man :rolleyes:
-
@Curly, Must you confuse them even more with pushing for genderless society"! Stay home woman(perfect your cooking, paint your nails, practice soothing voices, in fact, watch Martha Steward re-runs on your spare time, For God's sake familiarize yourself with your role as a woman!)or, or you'll become* Eerie music playing* (gasp!)a SPINSTER!
-
You're right it would be discrimination and outright wrong to deny a practicing person a government position, and I wasn't specific as to what I meant. Let's try again... By religious authority I meant a hardwiring of religion into government decision-making. Shoot! I thought we settled this issue when you agreed if and shoud the masses vote on Sharia Law, then it's their choice, no? What do goverments do by the way? They serve the needs of its citizens and protects its interests, right? So if a certain society decides they want to follow the Sharia and elect leaders whom they trust, who is to say they're wrong? Choice, Choice. As to your point B... I am not assuming but it's a fact that some Muslims are ignorant of their religion, just take a look at what is happening in the world today... Yes, some are indeed ignorant. But it is changing now. The days where people followed clerics blindly are over with. And enlighten me on whats happening in the world today? In what area are you guiding to take a closer look? pstt... I will continue to ignore the videos as they have no merit. More like opinions. And I can afford to do that because I know my religion and I have commonsense. Check this out regarding the proper "punishment" of your wife: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yl8g8S6F3do and this one at a Friday sermon: ... Imagine if that guy was the Minister of Religious Affairs in a Shariah country? --- You’re playing the “if I see it, then it must be true” game here. You certainly can debate better than this. Personal opinions and interpretations are not of importance. I put out those videos for two reasons; first one being that I anticipated the response of "Islam doesn't have priests"... we don't but we do have clerics which is rather synonymous who give religious decisions e.g. fatwas and the like and who's instructions are obeyed... Fatwas are issued and discredited by Clerics on a daily basis. The issues they issue the Fatwas on are rather mundane issues. Most legal and important issues have already been decided on and clarified by the Prophet(ppuh). So dont concern yourself too much with the Fatwas. the second reason was to give an example of what happens when the state supports a particular religion, you will inevitably get people who stand at the podium and preach religious interspersed with their personal opinions. The simple solution to this probmlem is to educate the masses and to elect people who are not set on their ways. And in Islamic goverements, why are you assuming there are no checks and balances? One example is Iran. Take a closer look at their constitution, preferably from non-Western source.
-
Profiling Yemen: 'From bikinis to burkas'
Chocolate and Honey replied to LayZie G.'s topic in General
If some half-literate bimbo, presiding in the West, wants to wear a Burka, or defend its misogynistic underpinnings, then she should not be afforded the 'luxury' of wearing it. There are many cogent arguments to be made in this regard - both legal and ethical. My obsession with your English comes from the fact that you(just like the unfortunate, countless masses who populate the West)get your information from the media, sort of like tube-feeding. It must've taken you a long time to compile such "clever sounding" nouns and adjectives. I can plug all the words you used in your post in say, Wikipedia and get the exact same sentiments expressed by small-minded people united under the umbrella of ‘Freedom.” You’re not contributing anything of worth to this discussion really. Faith-heads often mistake the principle of freedom, of choice, of conscience, of religion, as a license to practise barbarities and attrocities. You are free to sing obscure hymns, bow and dance, prostrate and jump, and peform all varieties of strange ritual and prayer. Um... Never mind the "dancing" and "singing," whats "prostrating and jumping"? Stop watching those shows on the Travel Channel. I'll have you know, Christians do more "dancing and singing" than us. We're rather serious, really. But you cannot use religion as a trump card for wearing Burka, killing apostates, lapidating people to death, engaging in jihadism, and the like. Oh(in the words of our beloved president)Yes We Can! C&H, there is not much I can do for someone who washes her hands off reading posts that pertain to her questions. I simply told you, C&H, read my posts as that addresses all of your questions, with the exception of the personality questions, which I already said will not do because it will take the focus off the Burka.(maybe another thread, you can ask all the questions that your heart desires) But I'm curious C&H, why did you refusue to read my post from yesterday(the one I posted before you), why is that sister? (its only on page 2) Again, there is not much I can do about someone who wants to hear herself, in this case, read her writings when she refuses to engage the other person on the basis of what they are writing, after all, it is difficult as it is to debate in a forum(with people logging on different times). Don't make this more difficult than it already is, time is ticking, lets hear your position and your supporting arguments already? To give you the benefit of the doubt, lets dismantle your so called argument: LayZieG says: Burka is not obligatory, therefore its irrelevant and should not be forced in women's throat. I too believe that it is not obligatory and that it shouldn’t be forced on women. The water gets muddy when women choose to. In addition, Burka is a middle east phenomena and therefore it should be dismissed, unless the few women who wear it feel that they need to continue supporting the material as a way of life, an attire that identifies the woman within the confinement of her society, other than that, total ban should be called on the attire. Regardless of where it originated from, more and more women all around the world are opting to wear it. What now? In the west, I think the garment should totally be banned but if few women decided to wear it and do so with the understanding that it is a personal decision, they can do it within the confinement of their home. First of all, you don’t make sense here. You stated it should be banned, ok? So The reality is that when you go to an Arab country, as a woman, you have to cover up(gaal or no gaal), more or less, and in the west, when you are here, you have to take off the burka. I disagree with the practice of forcing gaalo or Muslim women to wear the Burka. And this is something the said country and its citizens should work on. Before we establish such ruling, I suggested that we should debate the relevance of the Burka, is it obligatory or is it voluntary? Once we reach an understanding, only then can we take a vote on the total ban of the garment. I believe that the Burka is voluntary, so it becomes a personal choice really. So now, lets debate on the basis that it is voluntary and some women choose to wear it. 2) So far, the case was made for those that only do it because they were ordered to do, but if you want to make the case for the other side, by all means, I'm all ears. Generalization here! Show me all the studies, statistics, and surveys that say those who do it are forced. 3) It is harmful to children, young females and it should only be worn with the understanding that it is not obligatory and then see how many women keep it on. How is it harmful? LG, While I hold high regards for you, I can only state my state of :confused: . I mean, I read your post.Speaking of hearing oneself, why must you always retreat to attack anyone who holds opposite views. Have you ever heard of counter-arguing? I mean, Somalida waxey dhahdaa i jiid aan ku jiidee waa gacmo daalis. We're on third page, and you still refuse to argue on the basis of freedom of choice. Your rants are useless. " How do you go from wearing Bikini to Burka," Oh the horror and shock!
-
Popular Contributors