Rational discussion is one thing ... hurling and exchanging denegrating language and senseless argument quite another another.  It not civilise to discard the issues and become personal.  Whoever indulges in this, they are not enhancing the ´Forum´.

My comments are NOT directed at anybody, they are meant to be a general plea.

I have no doubt been hurt by many unjudicious remarks directed at Religious personalities [of whichever religion] ... because the tone of comments seemed to inflame opinions rather than meant examine issues.  Nothing ought to be ´OUT of BOUNDS´, but suitable language is advocated when touching upon sensitive subjects.  If I visit someone in Turkey or Japan, and if they ask me to take off my shoes, I ought to respect them.

Religion, despite all said and done, is a metaphysical topic, which needs careful and sensitive handling.  I respect the feelings of Hindus, Jews, Budhists, Sikhs, Christians, Muslims, Parsees and people of no faith.  And, wish to advise fellow members to kindly observe a modecum of good sense.  Every right carries with it a reciprocal obligation.  One should always keep this in mind.  One being a Muslim implies that one does not subscribe to any other faith, but one does not go about denegrading other faiths.  Ostensibly this not ´being FRANK´ rather it is being rude.  To wear a dress to cover one´s nudity is not same as hypocracy.

Muslims love ALL the prophets of Allah and hold them very dear.  If one wishes to criticise any of them ... they should be aware of this ... and consequently moot the topic in a spirit of civilized enquiry rather than expressing a controversial opinion just to sensationalise and shock.  Within these parameters, everything is acceptable.  Good sense is all that matters ... and it is hard to define it.  Please, be sensitive regarding sensitive matters.

Tazx1 

 Are you sure? Sura 5, 51....

Again, you are wrong. You are employing the "you did too" defense mechanism, which is really immature. All the problems you mentioned are of course present in the US. And the fact that there are so many problems only reminds us that criticism of ourselves is always extremely important. That free speech is extremely important, so that we can speak about the real causes and real problems freely, which is a must if we really want to solve anything.

However, if we judged any Muslim country by the same standards, or even an average Muslim family, I think you would have to admit that their problems are much bigger. Sexism, racism, militaristic history, inequality.... all these things are there, often much worse then they are here. So if you truly care about the Muslim people, if you truly want them to have better lives, you have to be honest about the problems of muslim communities. Even if Muslim women do obey their husbands, believe me, both men and women would be much happier if they respected their women more. And we can go on about this...

Tazx1

I am not sure you are aware but what you are saying is almost what the original article was talking about.

You are trying to thwart and silence an opinion by saying that ´you have to respect what I believe and you are not allowed to talk about my religion and my prophet´

There is no controversial opinion here.
But there is an opinion and IT HAS TO BE RESPECTED BY EVERY ONE.

The opinion mentioned in the article is nothing to do with being rude. It is just an opinion!!

How can you say that ´you are hurt´ with just ´an opinion´?

Well, if a person, just expressing his opinion like -Johann Hari did-´hurting your feelings´ then we can not talk anything about religion or islam or mohammed..

Your idea is the idea, prompted that article to be written in the first place.
I gave another link there a little girl forced to be married at 9 from yemen.
Dont you see that you hundreds of thousand of little girls have been abused because mohammed or religion are not allowed to be critisized properly by the muslims.
Then, How are they going to learn what is what if nobody critisize these things?
Critisism is always necessary as it is the only way to advance for better. You will look at the things, you will find the faults in them, you will critisize and in the end, things change..

You are giving this funny example about taking your shoes off in order to show your respect in other countries.
How can you relate critisizing the abuse of little girls all over the world with shoes and slippers?
Are you saying that we had to respect and do not critisize what they are doing in yemen to those little girls because it is the custom there?

You alose said that "Rational discussion is one thing ... hurling and exchanging denegrating language"

can you just tell me what is not rational in these posts?

I will copy the paragraph from my initial post again about "why critisisim is necessary":

Some people will instantly ask: why bother criticising religion if it causes so much hassle? The answer is: look back at our history. How did Christianity lose its ability to terrorise people with phantasms of sin and Hell? How did it stop spreading shame about natural urges pre-marital sex, masturbation or homosexuality? Because critics pored over the religion´s stories and found gaping holes of logic or morality in them.

double entry..

a bug report..going back in history with you back button refreshes the page and then creates another entry...

 Are you sure your just not trying to get your point accross.. (wink wink)  sorry don´t have emotion icon. hahaha

shhhhh...

dont tell anybody!! (and stop winking at me )

 I´m not getting into this anymore than to mention that the author of this article is, from what I can see, a male, and a noted secularist. I only mention that due to the fact that you say otherwise. Did I miss something?

 The person i quoted is a very well knowledged and very good person... he was one of the best persons for islam in Turkey... he was an old head minister of all imams and religious workers in Turkey...

he basically explains that Mohammed was not together and married to Aisah at the age of 9...

he says that we can find how old Aisah was according to her older sister´s(Esma) biography.

Esma was dead at the age of 100 and the hicret ( the big travel from Mekke to Medine) was 73 years ago from her death and Aisah was 10 years younger. so when hicret was done Aisah was 17 years old. And Mohammed was married to him 8 monthes after the hicret...

and he also says that Aisah was engaged to another one before!! when there was not islam in that city properly!!!!

so you cant make islam responsible for early marriages too.

thats the math and with the true sources... i think and most of people thinks that he is one of the trustworthy persons for such occasions...

Sui

You can say whatever you like but there are many other sources claim the opposite.

This is a contraversial issue , i dont think it will be solved easily and I dont think we will have an idea which will be known as ´a 100% fact´..

And also, aishe´s age is one of the hundreds of contraversial topics. (how many wives Mohammed had, how many childeren, was he a dudu when he was marrying hatice, how did he get married to his step son´s wife, why suddenly there was something before god which allowed him to marry her etc..)

Basically, all these have to be discussed without fear and being told of ´ah you are NOT respecting my religion´

 Fine then...you can keep your yellow roses. hahaha