Bro Nur,now that you seem to enjoy encouraging the less talented ones in their annihilation, i´d like you to come out of your babble. Nur, your stance, that life without a religious beleif ( a purpose ) is empty, is a scornful and fallacious generalization that puts one's foot in one's mouth at best. It´s amazing though that your theistic, purposeful and supposedly good life has instilled such a contempt in your heart, that you´ve the need to level such a vitriol at other fellow human beeings who just happen to think diffrently than you do. Do you mind expounding the assumption that a religious person ( no matter in what s/he beleives in ?) has a richer and purposeful life than an Agnostic/Atheist?

Originally posted by S.O.S: Now, Naden is Muslim and believes in Allah, Paradise and Hell-Fire, so am I. We (Naden, I, other Muslims alike) believe that what Allah (swt) has prepared for His pious and obedient servants as a reward in Heaven, is something that “no eye has ever seen it, no ear has ever heard it, no heart can contain it and no mind can encompass it..†Even though you hate the sound of it, we just love it! Good S.O.S , you don´t have to state the obvious [ that both Naden,Azmaya and you are Muslims ], and try to associate your stance of the reward prepared for men to their questioning stance of it, thus you´ll be doing the ' moon walk '. My comment was on your words to Azmaya when she questioned the 'Prize' that is affirmed, namely the 70 houris plus the TWO beleiving women from this life prepared for Men,hence women ending up as beeing 'The Prize' itself instead of getting one as equally pious human beeing as Men. Instead of answering Azmaya´s question of why Men are rewarded in such you brought absurdity. Now, Muslim or not , Men or Women, your stance is, beside the already mentioned houris there is something that “no eye has ever seen it, no ear has ever heard it, no heart can contain it and no mind can encompass it..†in store for us. And it is your presentation of this vague something i question not your faith in it´s existance. Good S.O.S , what you´ve just presented is the impossible, what is something that no i can see, that no ear can hear, that no heart can contain, that no mind can encompass ? How can you possiblly precieve such a thing ? if what i HATE and you claim to LOVE is ' the impossible' then so be it otherwise i´d like you to enlight me about what is it that i HATE. Castro , i think Dr Turabi has a solid islamic knowledge to pioneer such point of view, actually the first ever humanly human Islamic scholar in my books.

No matter how you turn and twist it , Women are beeing demanded of blinding to the obvious abrusdity for the sake of pleasing a great deity and sweetly playing an intellectually dummy role, that is imposed on them by men, hence pleasing Men, or risk beeing accused of selfishness, jealousy and gender-awareness, and deficiency in what not, and worst of all, women are accused of beeing a burden on Men, while Men are beeing protrayed as the 'super gender' that sacrifices most and thus qualifies solely for the weird reward of having many of the opposite sex and at their best ages. this might sound 'normal' and acceptable to the meek and weak women/girls , but not to the dignified sel-respecting sharp women/girls, that it comes off as a plain insult is an understatement. Actually this kind of wicked view held by many morally corrupt Mullahs leads one into the absurd conclusion that Women are not just as formidable and worthy fellow human beeings of equal rights,but a 'Prize' for the Mullahs ( who might kill as many human beeings as possible ) to win the superstitious contest of pleasing an Omniscient,Omnipotent and and compationate Deity that demands the killing and harming other human beeings . I can´t help but wonder how my good freind Xiin (single-teethed rodent) could walk awy with the ice-lolly after paying a fake Canadian dollar, not only did he walk away with an unforgiveable contradiction of own class, but he left behind a flat electroencephalogram that can´t gnaw neither properly nor on a level. Before we take the single-teethed rodent to the dentist , let us toss a life-boat for brother SOS and save him from sinking in his Reductio. Originally posted by S.O.S: a/c naden, you write: "..equal responsibility and accountability of women and men in the Quran leads one to believe that they are considered equal in intellect." The above statement betrays your misconception of basic Islamic principles of responsibility, accountability and equality...which leads me to believe that you're a victim of your politically conditioned prejudices, but I hope that your enquiring nature may help you to become more inceptive to Islam as universal truth, rather than selective borrowing to suit your own personal ends. I say that because I can't see how a pious Muslim(ah) intending to please Allah can borrow a misconceived doctrine into which he/she tries to ridicule and disown inherent elements of Islam which stood firm for over 14 centuries of Islamic sciences of scholarship. Therefore, since you're not looking for answers, can you answer us the following (from your statement): What is the responsibility of men? What is the responsibility of women? And are they the same? If not, is there equality in one responsibility compared to the other, if by nature, the specialisation of the sexes per definition differ? Brother SOS, you have never acounted for how having politically conditioned prejudices relates to Naden´s statement ( the red text), You seem to be saying that Quran leads one to beleive contrary to what Naden has stated, namely inequality in intellect between the genders, but you lack or leave out ( intentionally? ) a key premiss, thus your conclusion is your OWN ( not Naden´s ) absurdity. You can´t conclude that Naden is not looking for answers,atleast not from what you´ve presented , and if you think sinking in the term " resposibility " in the equation you´ll justify the gender inequalities through relation to the strength of the responsibily , you´re far from cutting a swath becouse the strength of any responsibility is relative. Now,let´s get your stance slightly undressed : Originally posted by S.O.S: Allah (swt) committed Himself to please and be pleased with His righteous servants. How, what and why though, my dear sister, no eye has ever seen it, no ear has ever heard it, no heart can contain it and no mind can encompass it.. ..in that, I'm limited to offer you any explanation, but unimaginably pleased will he or she be when they're told to "enter in peace" w/c This is a classic theistic flaw , first you possitively claim that This Deity is for pleasing and getting pleased, then immediately you reduce yourself to absurdity about how, why and what such mutual pleasing might be like [ no eye has ever seen it, no ear has ever heard it, no heart can contain it and no mind can encompass it.. ]. Brother S.O.S, how do you define and grasp or even slightly be possitive about such a pleasing? worse , you´re deadly sure that some will unimaginably be pleased. stunned is all we can get !. Originally posted by S.O.S: (1) men were required to wage jihad and forsake their lives in great numbers, with the full knowledge of leaving their wives and children, ...the mentioning of multiple wives has the benefit of motivating men (ultimately a very simple creature) not to listen to their worldly desires and satanic whisperings. (2) Women were not required to give up their lives, and as such, Allah (swt) must have deemed unnecessary to motivate women under such circumstances in the same way as men (Allah knows best). w/c S.O.S, That your pretentious rationalization and justification as to why men should be rewarded more( better) than women/girls doese´t cut a swath is obvious , but when you claim that a compationate God MUST have deemed unneccasery to motivate women in the same and equal way as HE motivated Men , you´re not only asking women/girls to submit to God through men of know-how that can imparatively conclude what must a Deity deem. Now , it´d be intresting to see my good freind Xiin to not only regulate desires,imposes limitations and constrain human rights, but reconcile the notion that " gender is not an issue in Islam" and the notion "Islam imposes geder-based roles". from what i understand , it is in this spirit that women/girls were given the role of "The Prize" and denied the apparent role of " the partner ".

WB Cara , nice to have you back, and as always you pose valid questions , Though i do buy most of Naden´s line of thinking i´ve two more cents to spend. In the context of a patriarchal mind-set, complete freedom is too wild privilege of sort to understand and handle, so the type of fundamentalist women/girls who choose freedom through submission to God through Men are aware of the trade-offs, but find it somehow worthwhile, instead of facing the consequences of decision-making ( even in mundane things ), the hard work of constantly thinking critically and all the hassle that human fallibility connotes. Seen in that light ,though their freedom and choices are severely constrained by Men, the notion that some fundamentalist women might actually experience a sense of liberation, ain´t as paradoxical as it may first sound, what is deadly sick and paradoxical is, however ,that those very fundamentalist women/girls find it inconceivable that you among other women think diffrently. As for Men, an Omniscient, omnipotent and compationate God takes away some people´s lights to leave them intentionally in the dark, deaf and dumb, never to find out about the very message that he sent so many messengers (who had to do the impossible [sometimes even to kill] ) to spread on mother earth So much have i heard of encouraging questioning but what Khayr and Khalaf have shown is everything but that. ** JB is thankful that Naden has 6 fingers on her right arm, that the pocket-knife is under a firm grip is an insurance of sort. **

The inevitability of the dissonance is natural since it is about your faith, it is due to the mysticalness of the faith and your congenital naturalistic rationale. overwhelmingly latent, most people psycologically repress religious dissonance becouse it depicts painful and disturbing realities that need to be excluded from the embellished realities, somethig so dear and symbolic might get to give, and that is not even an option to be entertained, hence the latency. It is cogent to see how you enchantingly weave the relation between the infalliable messenger and the follies of ( parts ) the message. Where in the intellectual ladder you´ve placed the feet of the dissonance-crux , threatens to turn your point of contention to nothing but a great farce, however,you came off as genuine and cincere contemplator. Whenever the concept of “holiness,†acquires a rather benign metaphysical connotation, the mystical and inexplicable become the normative of the rationale, that is why it seems to me that you were hunting a Bear with a pocket-knife so to speak. WB Emperor Castro, and that SOL has suffered due to your absence, is an understatement.

Sometimes it is the most concise questions that produce and trigger the longest answers . originally posted by Socod_badne: How can FACTS be proven otherwise? Isn't fact what is already proven? Ladies and Gents , that was Socod_badne on facts.

Good Xiin , That the biggest ethical problem with our resident self-proclaimed "Mullahs" is hypocrisy is no secret, but your blind devotion to the intellectually abandoned hulk and it´s long buried superstitious saga comes off as a severe deficiency of sort, and self-disaffirmance at best. It is a ride on a lunatic crusade against civilization , free-thought and human intellectuality to possitively affirm that "women are inferior to men intellectually and physically" ,simply to gloriously justify a grim sexism and bloster a deep cultural murky pit in the name of the good . and no matter where of the intellectual fence such nonsense pops up, no matter how many less fortunate females that have subconsciously gluped it to their degradation due to fear ,dismay and what not, still, in my circles it falls way too short to be reffered to as an intellectually-stimulating and thought-provoking subject. Good Xiin,The bright light of the self-fueling bonfire of "what is knowable" has gone way beyond what was cooked those dark desert nights, centuries ago , so fame ,as we know it, is the last thing to look for among triggrer-happy militant theocrats who´d do anything for the delayed , but promised gratifications. [deleted] romp of young virgins , rivers of wine and what you not kill for of sort. To demand of me or anyone for that matter not to comment on the subject unless one has a so called "scholar" to quote is a plain protectionism and a futile attempt to discourage me from forwarding my thinking, and that reflects the fragility of the theocratic house ,so much for housekeeping as it were. That i´m badly versed in the " Scholar Abu Ngonge RA said so " type of mantra is no secret ,neither it is my point of contention.here , sister Blessed has already pointed at that , but if you wanna capitalize on that be my guest , but count on me and my own ideas and thinking on this part of the fence of scholar JB has alot to say unlike many here who do a wonderful and brilliant quoting. And Atheer as it originally were, metaphysics as it literally were, has wider range of grayzone to cover than you so wishfully limit it to. As for the topic at hand , we´ve YET to even elementrily rationalize not spritualize the notion that women are deficient in such and such so if they lead that nation fails. needlessly to remiand you that this msg is supposed to be a convincing and self-explanatory about it´s correctness and genuinity. I do understand and respect theistic life more than you credit me for, but i can live with that , as for the subject matter , you have to put up more than the merely applauding for bro Nur, either you clarify the creteria of acceptance for "hadiths" from companions who have bad criminal record or give in.

This is just Yummy , actually too yummy. Good Xiin, Military intelligence is a contradiction in terms so is Xiin housekeeping. more to come when i get home !!

^Ask the Experts This used to be my problem, but not anymore. I´d a diffrent sequence though, brain first beauty later, maybe i´d be luckier if i had beauty first , brain later.

Blessed, You´re right , i never heard of any battle of Camels or goats, and i don´t know the significance of that battle for women rights in Islam. You´re not implying that i´d to have heard about some battles to know why women are deprived some rights, are ya? That a woman is not allowed to lead is fine with me if the justification is aa "Allah says so", then it is a matter of have a faith or leave it, but when it is rationalized it´s then it comes off as an insult to my intelligence. As for Scarlet´s skirt, i guess it is huge enough for both of us , i sense that you´ve missed in my earlier post where i´ve accounted for why i made the sarcastic comment and what i see in the thread.

^ It´d be a waste of time and brain enegry to have read Scarlet´s post and miss the intellectual remarks she made. the way she intellectually brought her points forward yet faded back in the rear of the thread to let the contention point of the subject matter continue on a "scholar Castro RA said so and scholar Ngonge RA said si" level. ans last but not least Scholar [fill in any woman name] is feminist Blessed, you don´t wanna me let the guard of my sanity off and let demons reside in my virgin mind do you? Women,Muslim or not are too wonderful to be belittled and Scarlet as a person is a highly respected sister in JB´s circles.

the most natural word human have invented against nature is natural. Originally posted by Callypso: Right now I'm wearing a wool sweater. What animal kills another and covers itself with the hide of the dead animal? Ladies and Gents , that was Cally/ Cara on Human nature.

Originally posted by Scarlet: For myself I'm more concerned about a sister having the right to walk down the street without a mahram, get an education, work if she wants to, drive a car, go get her own groceries, not worry about being killed for 'honour', not being mutialted for 'culture', etc. When those needs are met then we can really think about the bigger fish. That is your delimma lil Scarlet , you can´t have it both ways, you can´t talk the talk of "Coffe Anan"´s women rights and walk the walk of a covered Muslim girl/women. your rights has been well taken care of Allah, now you don´t wanna question that do you? The role you been so justly allotted to in an Islamic society has been well defined. 1. Caretaker of Family 2. Education of Children 3. Advisor to Husband 4. Worshipper of Allah And if you girls/women happen to take Men´s role which most of you already happen to do , that is: 1. Win half or whole of the family bread and take care of home. 2. Defend the Family and Islamic values . 3. Abide by the Law and Order. 4. Worship Allah. then that is fine, since you only make it easy for men to concentrate on the god-given but un-accomplishable right of finding three more of your type, but never ever i repeat never ever threaten men´s holy role, that is to lead. You´ve never entertained the thought of what the Muslim world would look like, have Aisha won the "camel war", have you? I think the above plain sarcasm is intellectually called for , becouse what i see is a clear pattern of behavior, a willingness to deceive. Specifically a demonstration of Mullahs who are willing to pass themselves off as an authority on godly and spiritual things. I actually see little or no diffrence between the justification of the deprivation of women rights in Islam and the justification of the racial slavery,racial inferiority/supremacy in christianity. Having said that, i can´t help but conclude that something is contradictory about the idea of having total and genuine faith in Islam yet questioning it´s script. Faith is a confident belief in the truth or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing, idea in this case.

Kashafa, ofcourse i do understand that you and many muslims do claim that today´s bible is not the corrcet( original) bible , i also do understand that the story of Noah is not only in the bible of christianity, but also in the Quran , what i don´t understand though is you (as Muslim) getting utmost defensive, questioning my ( to be ) motives instead of putting forward (your belif) the Islamic account on the issue of racial slavery,racial inferiority/supremacy and eventual justifications in the faith. your defensiveness sends shivers down some spines , wonder , what you´re hiding?!. Haynes book 'Noah´s curse' may or may not be a "sheko xareero" ,that is a judgement for everyone who reads the book to make , but your apparent attempt to merely dismiss it´s point that there is/was a religious justification in slavery both in the Arabic culture and westren culture is fatal trifling and finger pointing at best. Originally posted by Kashafa: After getting thoroughly owned on other threads, you come at us with this bogus story of Noah's curse as evidence ?? I´ve known that you feel intimidated by my stance, however,i don´t understand that question, that is if that was a question , owned by whom? evidence for what? if i may ask. i hope that is not comming from another empty can, another Khayr or HA if u like.You´re good for dealing with the subject matter , not with my ( to be ) motives of posting The Ham tale was later conventionally trotted out as God´s reason for condemning generations of dark-skinned peoples from Africa to slavery.The Ethiopians( surely some skinnies too ) were the first black people held as slaves in Arabia, blackness became associated with servitude. Jews, Christians and Muslims had exploited this story for other purposes,often tangential to the later peculiar preoccupation. here i came to think of the parallel thought of the Somali clan degradation / Supremacy / hierarchy. Facts are hard to deal with, specially if it concerns something or somebody that is so dear to us. one´s mother is never ugly , but one knows that there are 'not so pretty mothers' out there . What does the slave market in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia tell you? give it a shot, i know you can do it. WaterLilly, you´re right , none will cut it for me, becouse it´s ambiguous to say it has been resolved. A) and B) Are you saying that a racial degradation / supremacy justifications were there but it was resolved.? ps. what is the Islamic account of Ham, son of Noah and the curse ? that´d be intresting.

After reading Noah´s curse , one is left with a raisen eyebrows about the justifications given to the deep racism that is engraved in some cultures. According to many Muslims and the general biblical account, it all started when Ham , a son of prophet Noah, found his father drunk and naked in his tent and told his brothers, Shem and Japheth about it. Shem and Japheth somehow embarrassed proceeded to cover their naked father without gazing him. Later when Noah found out what happened , he curses not Ham but Ham´s som Canaan saying " you will be the servant of the servants". Though no biblical information about Noah´s family in racial terms is revealed, Ham is /was presented as the black son of Noah, and there we´ve the justification of Slavery , racial inferiority/supremacy, racial hierarchy in the faith. From that tale to the "slave market " in Riyadh (kingdom of Saudi Arabia) to the churchs in the South (Alabama) the justfication is recorded and acted upon. Slavery was religiously justified both in east and west, otherwise it would never get rooted . though Muslims rather not dig the history of the early black Muslims , Slavery have mysteriously survived in Islam, so an examination of slavery in Islam though highly neglected holds some vital answers as to why it survived. The tale of Sam raises questions ,like ,where did Sam go wrong ? becouse he accidently found his father naked and drunk or becouse he shared the information with his brothers?and why the curse went to Sam´s son Canaan and not to Sam himself. Do you as black and Muslim find the punishment of Sam(the black son of Noah) justifiable? what is your take?

^Sorry YU, you sounded as if u were against the lil girl beeing dressed as such. U know we´ve to sift the Arabic culture/traditions from the faith( religion) and preserve our cultural/traditional identity. you sounded as if u wiped that Somali identity in the name of "modesty" . HA, the reason that good Somali name is rotting is becouse it comprises indivituals of your clibre that swarm over it.

Life is a wonderful thing, sometimes too wonderful to be defined,a constant thunde of wonders if u like. Originally posted by Castro: Speaking of death, when I went sky diving in 2003, for a few seconds I understood what was meant by "staring death in the eye". Would I do it again? Highly unlikely but I do understand the urge some people have to conquer their own fears. I now look at them and say to myself: been there, done that and got the DVD. Ladies n gents , that was Castro on life or was it death , oh well , you can´t have one without the other , now can you?

^sick !, and what wakes one´s animalia intrest in that child´s bare shoulders? she is not an Arab you know. Praise the mother that dressed that young girl, she makes me and millions of Somalis proud.

Khayr, What is it that she said that touched the nerve? what is the threat she poses on your Nur? critique him ?. that is our sport!, and beleive you me , nobody enjoys it more than himself. now answer me without talking about relativism, agnosticism , humanism and all those isms that turned you into an insecure MUllah.

Ahura, i coulden´t agree more , it´s just that it´ll cost and the price tag is not shy one, The naturally presuassive scientific health arguments are robust , even the theological ones, but then the msg is best carried by or deleivered through the same instrument that helped it get there in the first place, Price = run over the meek Mullah and use diffrent but highly resistant instrument or pay the price by way of delayed gratification.

^ Do you by any chance think that the women who are for FGM today hate their daughters? exactly , i don´t think so either. FGM is a hard to get rid of social ill, most social ills with a religious touch are such. unless the Mullahs start calling it 'haram', it is gonna be there, becouse the mindset of the Somali culture is either something is 'haram' or 'halal', meaning as long as practising FGM is not 'Haram' then it is atleast 'semi'halal', and that cuts for the rabbles. That those who would preach it´s ugliness and un-religiousness are advocating for it, and feeding those women who are for it with rubbish. I rather blame the Mullahs instead of the disinformed females.

Originally posted by NGONGE: ^^^^ You mean like Somali women evolved from eating hambo in the past to clearing the stuff remaining in the pot now? This ladies & gentlemen is Ngonge on the Somali women rights evolution.

Bro Nur, firstly i´d like to thank you for the swift remark of me beeing ' a good debator' , it might elevate my forum status in the eyes of E-Nuri subscribers , but i have to immediately express my slight disappointment in your post. Assuming that you´ve understood my point of contention, you´ve deliberately and intentionally lowered the rib of the subject matter and the rule of engagement to a personal level , a mud-wrestling level if u like ,where engaging you would symbolize two naked bulls fighting in an arena of intelligent females. and you seem to have forgotten that the wrapped girls/women spectators would have enjoyed your pant-pulling or my tearing of your 'khamiis'( learned it from Northrener) just as much as the normally dressed girls/women would. with this i´m trying to make you realize the other part of the 'hijab' equation, given that we share the basic view of men and women beeing equal human beeings with equal rights that only differ in gender. Bro Nur, you so willingly admit that you as a Muslim regard ' Hijab' as a functional means of safeguarding girls/women from the untrammeled sexual impulses of men ( like me and you ), but you´re not admitting that it is your duty as man/Muslim to control your desires,thus, put the responsibility on others (girls/women) not to tempt you rather than putting it on yourself,and not react to possible temptations, hence , as our most ardent SOL-Mullah i find your work patchy at best. No matter how many layers you put on girls/women they´ll always remain human beeings and the risk of men getting less tempted becouse of the number of layers you put on girls/women will always remain minimal,( it was on this very forum where i for the first time heard how covered girls turn some 'wadads' on ) unless Muslim men realize that it is NOT the girl/women´s fault to have born girl/women and womanhood is under no circumstance to blame. I maybe islamically ignorant but as a Somali i´m what you call a cultural relativist, This cultural attitude of blaming women for men´s impurity belies a fairly unevolved set of manners and wavering mores in a culture of far-off desert places (not Somali , mind you) , and if you insist it beeing Muslim manners and Mores then so be it ,that only reflects the culturally entrenched repression and abuse of women in Arabic/Muslim societies today. In my Somali culture , it is simple , ' you can see but you can´t touch ' is engraved in my way of thinking and never do i blame girls/women for beeing girl/woman (read : great). To explain why Hijab covers your thoughts of yourselves as well as your form/figure ,i´d say, when a girl/woman is lured to think and beleive that it is her duty to disfigure her natural female beauty becouse men get distracted and get impure thoughts, her women rights are violated , a violation that doesen´t extend to the male sphere. Men like bro Nur wanna see to it that no more evil happens, but not by controlling themselves, but by controlling Women. Strange as it may seem,the right to wear slacks ,short skirts 'idiracs' or 'guntinos' is actually part and parcel of the right of women to be fully equal members of society. it represents their ability to be seen on their own terms, rather than allowing men to determine how women should be viewed. Last but not least , they´re not less pious for not disfiguring themselves as u have admitted in your scenario. It´s nice to have made it clear that Modesty is not wrapping yourself with 10 meters long garment. Thepoint , am sorry , am not having that kind of discussion !!

One good reason for NOT wearing hijab would be : Hijab is everything but modest, Hijab does not only cover your body it covers your thoughts about yourself too, not to mention the unwanted attention it draws to you due to it´s strange looks. Modesty is marked by simplicity, Hijab ( the tent type -just diffrenciating types)is everything but simple, and you´re not a piece of meat to be covered but a free intelligent human beeing .

Surely Sol is ( has been for some time ) the battle ground of conflicting thoughts ,in the heat of exchanging fierce salvos, sometimes a nuggets of wisedom or of plian rubbish are dropped. It usually is hard ( and sometimes impossible) to mark the nuggets of wisedom by the time they´re beeing uttered , so i thought here we collect the nuggets of wisedom our fellow Nomads dropped. ponder on what the one and only Legend of Zu have to say . Originally posted by Legend of Zu: Remember Good intentions are not enough if the result is not the intended good outcome! Cheers Any nuggets you´ve noticed?