Wrongdoing is that which violates another's rights. Rights violations require action. You quoted me as listing "fantasy," "delusion," and "mental defect." These are not actions. These exist in one's mind alone, even if they may exist in the minds of many, as is the case with organized religion. One may act upon what exists in one's mind and one's actions may violate the rights of another, but thought alone does not. Thought may be incorrect but it cannot be wrong.
Yes. Bad deeds and wrongdoing are two separate terms and I apologize for the confusion this has caused. English is my second language so forgive my mistakes and ask for clarification if something doesn't sound right.
Correct. Do you disagree that these things, in their having required specific action which violates the rights of others, are distinct from what may exist in one's mind?
Well prior to committing the deed there definitely was intention. When God was all knowing He already knew what a person's thoughts and intentions were and only when said person commits the deed is when he will be punished for it, first on Earth and if he gets away with his deed in this world only God can exact justice in the Hereafter. I hope this answered your query.
Well, no. It's the answer you gave me. Not everyone who has a monotheistic belief shares your belief. Belief in a singular deity does not require belief in an afterlife, especially one which bodes eternal punishment. I gather Judiasm is an example where the two don't correlate, and it's a pretty major one.
Are Muslims, Christians or Jews really monotheists if they don't believe in the afterlife? It's an essential part of faith to believe in the afterlife and those who separate the two don't believe in God as they don't believe in His ability to resurrect the dead for judgement.
The point of the afterlife is to exact justice and differentiate the good from the bad. The good ones being the ones who promoted virtue and prevented vice, performed their prayers and stood up to the weak and poor without prejudice.
I mean...okay? A common theme in religious doctrine is placing itself over that of other religions. That doesn't mean it's true. Religious doctrine contains all kinds of falsehoods and fantasies. I kind of laugh it off as competition for who can be the most deluded.
It never was a competition. Religion is one and it's 'Submission' which translates to 'Islam' in Arabic. All prophets and messengers came with the message of submission ever since Noah's passing, and every single one of those prophets and messengers were mocked and dismissed by the elites and leaders of their people until they suffered God's wrath. Look up: "The people of Lut" , "People of 'Ad" ,and "People of Thamud". It's an interesting historical read.
That adherents to some religious beliefs place theirs over the beliefs of others has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I'm aware that this is common but I don't particularly care about it, especially to the degree that I'm compelled to research it. I think it's all delusional.
Can you provide specific text? Is it proscribed specifically or is it more of a vague gesturing in the direction of proscribing it? How is rape defined in such text?
As a Muslim and from what I have read, it falls under "Adultery" and here's the sentence according to Muslim scholars (translated from Islamweb Arabic):
"If what is meant by rape is an obscene act of adultery with one party coercing the other, then this is a grave crime. God Almighty threatens its perpetrator with punishment in this world and the hereafter. As for in this world, it is a flogging of a hundred lashes if the perpetrator is a virgin. If he was married, then he should be stoned to death if the legal conditions for that are met. The rapist also requires the full dowry, and the woman is obligated to purify herself with three menstrual cycles.".
Despite the above we don't see stoning or flogging performed too often and are substituted with prison sentence or ?execution?
That doesn't answer my questions. Any of them. And you're speaking in absolutes again, which I'd suggest is...unwise.
I'd agree that child rape is unjustified.
What justification does adultery require? I can understand one whose trust has been violated may want an explanation from that who violated it, but that isn't to say that it's required. Adultery is mere consensual sexual intercourse between a man and a woman, where the woman is married to a man other than the man with whom she's engaged in adultery. The bible specifies a married woman, but not a married man. Not that I think anyone should be stoned to death for engaging in consensual sexual intercourse, but it's curious that a woman who has been similarly wronged (where her husband has been adulterous, and the woman with whom he's been adulterous is unmarried) is not offered the same kind of relief.
Adultery is forbidden because it eventually leads to lost lineages, grudges and murder. It simply leads to the downfall of societies regardless of consent and safe sex.
Also you say "sin" like it's supposed to mean something to me. I mean I'm familiar with the notion of "sin," but I'm also aware that it's very subjective. Sometimes "sin" is that which violates another's rights, in which case it needs no additional denotation (as "sin"), and other times "sin" is that which one who adheres to particular religious doctrine believes their sky daddy--or cross daddy, or...whatever--won't like and so it makes the believer cry like a little bitch. That something makes you cry like a little bitch does not make that thing wrong.
Any action which violates others' rights and crosses the red lines set by God are called sins. Examples of sins are:
Polytheism
Adultery
Witchcraft
Killing a soul which God has forbidden except by right.
Usury
Consuming an orphan's wealth
Why? Why didn't you say anything about this when you invoked eternal punishment in the afterlife as the answer to child rape?
Again, why? If you believe something, why do you need to prove that you believe? And why must you prove that you believe by throwing stones at an individual who perpetrated no rights violation at all, much less one who didn't violate your rights, until the individual expires from your attacks?
Yeah, no...they absolutely must not abide by it. Killing someone just because they do something that makes you cry like a little bitch is wrong, and it concerns me that you have to be told as much.
I hope those questions were sufficiently answered above. If not I'm happy to respond to further queries.
You spoke of the Quran in such a way that makes me think you place doctrine espoused therein above other religious doctrine. Are you Muslim?
Yes. I didn't place the Quran on top of any other holy book. I can't and won't force Islam on people of the book as they already have a book and submit to God. If they're interested in knowing more about Islam then and only then I'm open for queries.
How do you feel about women? Are they individuals or are they possessions of men? How does it make you feel when a woman doesn't conform to religious doctrine to which you adhere? What of when women don't wear particular coverings in public?
1. They're human beings like men with equal rights in education and occupation.
2. No they're not the possessions of men and if she wasn't happy with her spouse she can seek divorce and take legal action if she was abused.
3 and 4. Lower the gaze and pray for their guidance. Why pray for their guidance? Because selfishness is disgusting and Hell isn't a fun place to be thrown in. Love for your brother what you love for yourself.
How do you feel about the gays? What punishment does the Quran say you must mete out when one man has engaged in sexual intercourse with another? If I were to approach you and inform you that I, a man, had engaged in consensual homosexual intercourse--whether I had or not shouldn't matter if I'd confessed to having done so, right?--would you be compelled to mete out particular punishment? Would the likelihood that I'm armed and willing to neutralize an immediate threat of physical violence? What about proving your faith? Are you picking up on what I'm trying to drive home?
1. Homosexuality is forbidden in Islam, Christianity and Judaism, and the story of the people of Lut is a textbook example of homosexuals who refused to repent and thus were wiped off of the face of the Earth.
2. If you were proven guilty of homosexuality then its sentence is death.
3. Why would anyone confess something which they haven't done? If you weren't proven guilty and had had sexual intercourse with a man then God's punishment is far greater than a death sentence.
4. If that's not violence and hostility then what is it? I didn't get the question.
5. You prove your faith by abiding by what's written in your holy book. Those books weren't written by men but were written by God long before His creation of the universe.
Life is nothing but a test of a person's faith and resilience. Proof lies in the Quran in: 5:48, 6:165, 11:7 and 67:2.
Thank you for taking the time to read this long reply.
