ISIS' reasons for enslaving women

[lucjoker]

Islam can be what it wants .

Let them have sharia in their part of the world.

BUT....kick every moslim (who is not working and properly adapted

to our western ideas )OUT of OUR countries (europe ,australia...usa......)

We wont do business whit them ,no consulates ,not help missions ,no immigrations on whatever ground...nothing .

If good meaning moslims dont feel safe there....well they will have to put up a fight themselves or obey to

the stronger group.

We wont report on the news about them.Let them do in their part what they want .

"we " can not find a solution to their problems ,so we must stay away.

"Importing them into our country only creates the same problems for us ,AND we dont want that !

If they cross our borders ...nuke them .

It is verry drastique ,but cutting of heads is also ,or do i miss something?

[KunMatt]

It has been a blood-soaked religion for 1,400 years.

Obama and Cameron keep telling us Islam is a religion of peace ?

As far as I can tell, the idea is that it will be a religion of peace, once they have gotten rid of or subjugated all the unbelievers in Islam, but not until then.

And killed all of the other sects within Islam, and killed all of the believers who don't interpret the Koran in the way that the leaders want, so basically when there are about 200 people left all believing the exact same thing in the exact same way THEN there will be peace because of Islam. So let the killings continue until then.

[Mot Dang]

During the days of the "Mother of all Wars" we were fed that Saddam believed himself to be the reincarnation of Saladin. We were also told that early behavior of this despot was based on principles that were several hundred years old. Example that kidnapping was a acceptable strategy. Remember the kidnapping of the plane load of Brits just before Desert Storm. Now there is ISIS. There horrific practices are based on some twisted view of the Shariah. Plus other practices that were considered to be legitimate in medieval times.

World Leaders do you have to be reminded this is the 21st century. These monsters must be eradicated now, if not now its going to be hell of a lot worse down the track. Look what happened when Hitler and his Brown Shirts were ignored in the early 30's. . How many parallels between ISIS and the Nazis must be drawn before countries develop the same will and conviction that eradicated the Nazis ? Get them now, ask questions later.

These monsters have no soul, no humanity, no empathy and are completely devoid of those qualities that make the rest of us human.

[Steely Dan]

You only need look in which Countries slavery is still practiced to conclude how hollow it is to claim it to be a perversion of Islam, unless of course there are a lot of perverts out there.

From The Global Slavery Index 2013

The countries with the highest numbers of enslaved people are (in descending order) India, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Russia, Thailand, Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar and Bangladesh. Taken together, these countries account for 76% of the total estimate of 29.8 million in modern slavery

Only two of those countries, Pakistan and Bangladesh, are predominantly Muslim; and only one other, Nigeria, has a Muslim population of 50% or more.

Surely even you cannot say that in the other seven it is only Muslims who hold people in slavery!

From Free the Slaves

Muslim voices have called for the abolition of slavery since ancient times. According to the Prophet Muhammad, "There are three categories of people against whom I shall myself be a plaintiff on the Day of Judgment. Of these three, one is he who enslaves a free man, then sells him and eats this money."

Many scholars note that the Quran "disapproves" of slavery and instructs Muslims to treat slaves humanely. Sura 90 in the Quran states that the righteous path involves "the freeing of slaves."

Slavery in Islam from the BBC

The legality of slavery today

While Islamic law does allow slavery under certain conditions, it's almost inconceivable that those conditions could ever occur in today's world, and so slavery is effectively illegal in modern Islam. Muslim countries also use secular law to prohibit slavery.......

Is slavery still legal in Islam?

The answer is that slavery is legal under Islamic law but only in theory. Slavery is illegal under the state law of all Muslim countries.

I have deliberately quoted from independent sources rather then Islamic ones in an attempt to avoid the quotes being dismissed as Islamic lies.

But I wont be surprised if some people still do so as the facts don't fit their prejudices.

Note that I am presenting facts, not supporting, apologising for nor excusing in any way slavery in any form nor the beliefs and actions of IS; though no doubt I will yet again be accused of so doing.

You neglected to mention North Sudan, Mauritania or the fact Saudi Arabia only officially abolished slavery a few decades ago. Never mind, a historical fact few Westerners seem aware of is that more slaves from Africa went East to Muslim Countries than went West, though for some reason the guilt assumed for this seems to be a western preserve.

One of your links actually makes my original point for me, slavery is in theory still permissible in Islam. You state it is almost inconceivable that slavery would be allowed in current circumstances. I put it to you that the declaration of a Caliphate and the offensive Jihad they have declared are precisely such circumstances.

Edited October 13, 2014 by Steely Dan

[darren84310]

It has been a blood-soaked religion for 1,400 years.

Yes, and what God fearing religion hasn't also been soaked in blood for about the same amount of time.... The sooner people dump religion out of their heads the better.

[7by7]

(Quotes from this post removed to comply with forum software)

You (7by7) neglected to mention North Sudan, Mauritania or the fact Saudi Arabia only officially abolished slavery a few decades ago.

I quoted the list of the top ten countries, which account for over three quarters of those held in one form of slavery or another. Look at the full list and you'll find the UK there, too!

Never mind, a historical fact few Westerners seem aware of is that more slaves from Africa went East to Muslim Countries than went West, though for some reason the guilt assumed for this seems to be a western preserve.

Isn't this topic about now, not the past?

I will be happy to discuss the history of slavery with you, but suspect that it will be deemed off topic; so await a ruling on that point.

One of your links actually makes my original point for me, slavery is in theory still permissible in Islam. You state it is almost inconceivable that slavery would be allowed in current circumstances. I put it to you that the declaration of a Caliphate and the offensive Jihad they have declared are precisely such circumstances.

I cannot counter your first sentence, as doing so would break Scotts prohibition above.

As for the rest; I don't state it; those whom I quoted, and presumably know far more about this subject than you or I, say it.

If, and it is a very big if, IS win and do establish a world wide caliphate then no doubt the circumstances you describe could come about.

But whilst we have fundamental differences on many subjects, I am sure we both agree that IS winning is not going to happen; especially as most Muslim countries, particularly those in the region, don't want that and. I believe, if it looks likely then more Muslim states will join those who are currently fighting them.

Even organisations such as Khilafah.com, whose aims I have absolutely no sympathy for, recognise that slavery has no place in the modern world.

The Islamic view on Slaves and Slavery

Slavery existed for thousands of years before Islam. When Islam came the sharia addressed the reality of slavery that was prevalent at the time by bringing new legislation on the treatment of slaves that aimed at raising their status and eventually their freedom.

Although nowadays there are no sharia circumstances where slavery can return, the issue of Islam and slavery is the subject of much misunderstanding and propaganda by the enemies of Islam. Some even go as far as believing a future Khilafah would re-introduce slavery to the world.

The following discussion will address the issue of Islam and slavery in detail from the sharia evidences and refute the idea that a future Khilafah would re-introduce slavery.......

[jacky54]

Still not read the Koran then have you 7x7!

[7by7]

Not all of it, no.

But I suspect that the author of that piece I quoted from Khilifah.com has read and studied it far more than you!

[Steely Dan]

"(CNN) -- In a new publication, ISIS justifies its kidnapping of women as sex slaves citing Islamic theology, an interpretation that is rejected by the Muslim world at large as a perversion of Islam."

As ive tried to point out in our forums jihadis will nearly always cite scriptural authority for their actions. This CNN drivel gaslights the ridiculous notion that there is an opposing majority of Islam- in this case an opposing majority of Muslims... who reject their own scriptural writings, Koranic exegesis, and Hadith. How utterly baseless and absurd. Indeed, it should offend Muslims that CNN declares they reject their prophets infallibility.

Of course the majority of the Muslim world does not reject these acts as a perversion of Islam; it's clear and unambiguous, and 1400 years of scholarly Islam elaborate this. Shar'ia proscribes such things. This is 100% PR packaging by liberal enablers. A majority of the Islamic world might not practice such repugnant acts but this does not equate to repudiating their liturgy- their divinely inspired word of God!

Perhaps when the wanton depravity jihad brings in its wake makes it to their part of the world they'll appreciate the divine authority to have Christian house slaves or idolaters as sex slaves. But the Muslim world has never repudiated their prophet. Clearly, CNN blasphemes.

With hundreds of millions of Muslims representing their minority in any event, this is more than enough to deeply appreciate the threat civilization is in (the elusive majority remain silent because they are simply unorthodox Muslims).

I couldn't have put it better myself. Incidentally the Arabic word for slave and black are one and the same. Then we have the Saudi opinion poll where 92% of those questioned believe ISIS were following Islamic law and were being true to its 'values', no amount of Taqiyya can explain that one away.

http://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/92-of-saudis-believes-that-isis-conforms-to-the-values-of-islam-and-islamic-law-survey/

Edited October 13, 2014 by Steely Dan

[jacky54]

Not all of it, no.

But I suspect that the author of that piece I quoted from Khilifah.com has read and studied it far more than you!

Well at least you are being honest here, you don't know what you are talking about, but you believe somebody else does. Why not have a night or two off and read it, then you might have a bit more creditability.

[7by7]

I couldn't have put it better myself. Incidentally the Arabic word for slave and black are one and the same. Then we have the Saudi opinion poll where 92% of those questioned believe ISIS were following Islamic law and were being true to its 'values', no amount of Taqiyya can explain that one away.

http://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/92-of-saudis-believes-that-isis-conforms-to-the-values-of-islam-and-islamic-law-survey/

You should read the whole article; not just the headline!

Unfortunately they have provided no details of their data (nor) where exact(ly) the 92% figure comes from,

Not very scientific! Bit like the poll quoted elsewhere recently showing the majority of British Muslim supported IS; a poll which only asked 500 people!

Had you read the article you would have seen that the anti extremist Sakina campaign will carry out it's own poll in Saudi.

I await their results with interest.

[powerkick]

Sam Harris, author of Waking Up and an expert of Islamic extremism, quantifies the percentage of Muslims supporting extremist ideology directly and indirectly (Skip to 4:05):

Liberals: BIll Maher agrees with him while whiny little Ben Affleck rambles, "We are endowed by our Forefathers..." 555 what a <deleted>

how many years has the expert Sam Harris (the son of a Jewish mother and therefore "de jure yahudi" a bona fide Jew) spent for his research in the Middle East or any other Muslim country?

Since at least 2001 when he was researching data for his 2004 book The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_Faith

Is that long enough for you?

[7by7]

Not all of it, no.

But I suspect that the author of that piece I quoted from Khilifah.com has read and studied it far more than you!

Well at least you are being honest here, you don't know what you are talking about, but you believe somebody else does. Why not have a night or two off and read it, then you might have a bit more creditability.

At least I don't claim to know more about it than actual Muslim scholars.

Are you a Muslim scholar? Are you a scholar of any description?

How much of the Koran have you read; not counting the bits you've picked up from the Islamaphobic websites you favour?

[monkeycountry]

From The Global Slavery Index 2013

The countries with the highest numbers of enslaved people are (in descending order) India, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Russia, Thailand, Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar and Bangladesh. Taken together, these countries account for 76% of the total estimate of 29.8 million in modern slavery

Only two of those countries, Pakistan and Bangladesh, are predominantly Muslim; and only one other, Nigeria, has a Muslim population of 50% or more.

Surely even you cannot say that in the other seven it is only Muslims who hold people in slavery!

From Free the Slaves

Muslim voices have called for the abolition of slavery since ancient times. According to the Prophet Muhammad, "There are three categories of people against whom I shall myself be a plaintiff on the Day of Judgment. Of these three, one is he who enslaves a free man, then sells him and eats this money."

Many scholars note that the Quran "disapproves" of slavery and instructs Muslims to treat slaves humanely. Sura 90 in the Quran states that the righteous path involves "the freeing of slaves."

Slavery in Islam from the BBC

The legality of slavery today

While Islamic law does allow slavery under certain conditions, it's almost inconceivable that those conditions could ever occur in today's world, and so slavery is effectively illegal in modern Islam. Muslim countries also use secular law to prohibit slavery.......

Is slavery still legal in Islam?

The answer is that slavery is legal under Islamic law but only in theory. Slavery is illegal under the state law of all Muslim countries.

I have deliberately quoted from independent sources rather then Islamic ones in an attempt to avoid the quotes being dismissed as Islamic lies.

But I wont be surprised if some people still do so as the facts don't fit their prejudices.

Note that I am presenting facts, not supporting, apologising for nor excusing in any way slavery in any form nor the beliefs and actions of IS; though no doubt I will yet again be accused of so doing.

I guess it depends alot on the definition of a slave.

If you are forced to marry another person, and subsequently required to do said persons bidding for the rest of your life, are you then a slave?

If you are not allowed to leave your home without first getting permission by and being escorted by your husband or male family member, are you then a slave?

If you are legally required to have sex with your husband, even against your will, are you then a slave?

If either of the above is included in the definition of a slave, then your list will be radically different.

[tifino]

I guess it depends alot on the definition of a slave.

If you are forced to marry another person, and subsequently required to do said persons bidding for the rest of your life, are you then a slave?

If you are not allowed to leave your home without first getting permission by and being escorted by your husband or male family member, are you then a slave?

If you are legally required to have sex with your husband, even against your will, are you then a slave?

If either of the above is included in the definition of a slave, then your list will be radically different.

this, above, looks more like the definition of a muslim wife...

... but, capturing, enslaving women of the opposition is a very convenient means of eventually eradicating 'others', by breeding them out.

[F430murci]

Not all of it, no.

But I suspect that the author of that piece I quoted from Khilifah.com has read and studied it far more than you!

Well at least you are being honest here, you don't know what you are talking about, but you believe somebody else does. Why not have a night or two off and read it, then you might have a bit more creditability.

At least I don't claim to know more about it than actual Muslim scholars.

Are you a Muslim scholar? Are you a scholar of any description?

How much of the Koran have you read; not counting the bits you've picked up from the Islamaphobic websites you favour?

Sometimes good old fashion common sense is more valuable than ridiculous so called "scholarly opinions" that completely dispense with concepts such as common sense.

Fact is real men don't do this and real men don't defend this.

[arjunadawn]

Not all of it, no.

But I suspect that the author of that piece I quoted from Khilifah.com has read and studied it far more than you!

Well at least you are being honest here, you don't know what you are talking about, but you believe somebody else does. Why not have a night or two off and read it, then you might have a bit more creditability.

At least I don't claim to know more about it than actual Muslim scholars.

Are you a Muslim scholar? Are you a scholar of any description?

How much of the Koran have you read; not counting the bits you've picked up from the Islamaphobic websites you favour?

It is poppycock to assert that because someone is muslim, and studies their scripture, their exegsis is beyond circumspection. An idiot can stay in college and finally get a degree. A zealot can worship scripture but have no context. A fool has a story too, yes, but the presumption that someone is inherrently beyond reproach because of their muslim-ness is unwise if not silly (perverse ethnocentrism). I have read all these "sacred" text of islam and other religions and hold three different advanced science degrees; my doctoral studies are in religious studies. I emphatically state I think I am qualified to observe 'their' knowledge of knowledge and comment- epistimology. You can dismiss me if you like but like you, I want to share.

A futility is conceded in that you think others lack the ability to examine and comment on both the scripture and its application in theology/theosophy. How awful to presume, therefore, that such knowledge must come from either those who pose the threat (perhaps), apologists, or those who visit loon websites. This may all be an intellectual bridge too far for some but it simply is not for others. One might have strong feelings about it, and great wisdom in other areas of life. But there are those of us who do have awareness of these occult-ish, arabic ideologies. Because, in my case, my conclusions result in great consternation, it does not follow that my knowledge fails or I am following whacky websites- or that I am islamophobic, in the sense you use the word. However, I do have great fear of Islam. Islam- fear-phobia!

It is an unfortunate truism that when someone throws "islamophobe" into the mix its like a fighter throwing in the towel in the ring; there's an element of intellectual defeat when having to toss pejoratives into the conversational ring (IMO). After all, most minds know "islamophobe" actually says nothing at all, nothing meaningful, and it is never productive- never. Since every single person called an islamophobe has the same sickened response that something vile has been cast at them then it is clear that the mere use of the word is the act of agression, not intellectual conversation. The use of Islamophobe is intended to ridicule or stiffle a respondent. Every single time; the use of the world Islamophobe says volumes more about the speaker then the recipient. Moreover, the world is on to this very pedestrian refrain. Everyone knows now that when person is called an islamophobe they should listen to the islamophobe, or dismiss the speaker.

[bangon04]

Im still bewildered as to why we place the same values that we place on ourselves onto others, the Middle East is not USA and if it wernt for thousands of years of meddling it might not be as bad as its got.

The area lacks education which is a key to freedom, Islam does appear to be a bloody religion but then again the Christans have a bloody legacy also.

If it wasnt for black gold no one would give a dam so lets get real, i dout that IS has the capacity to take the whole area but the very fact that the "allies" are back means were going to keep on feeding the fire of extreamisum.

Sad and depressing but probably true. On the other hand, how many women in "moderate" muslim countries like Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Indonesia, Malaysia, Morocco, Tunisia Libya etc etc are using their voting rights to introduce more Sharia law, more conservative islam, more gender bias, less education for girls?

Edited October 13, 2014 by bangon04

[cbluck58]

Definitely not enough chlorine in the gene pool here !!

[RigPig]

Im still bewildered as to why we place the same values that we place on ourselves onto others, the Middle East is not USA and if it wernt for thousands of years of meddling it might not be as bad as its got.

The area lacks education which is a key to freedom, Islam does appear to be a bloody religion but then again the Christans have a bloody legacy also.

If it wasnt for black gold no one would give a dam so lets get real, i dout that IS has the capacity to take the whole area but the very fact that the "allies" are back means were going to keep on feeding the fire of extreamisum.

Sad and depressing but probably true. On the other hand, how many women in "moderate" muslim countries like Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Indonesia, Malaysia, Morocco, Tunisia Libya etc etc are using their voting rights to introduce more Sharia law, more conservative islam, more gender bias, less education for girls?

I guess it saves them a beating from their husbands !!!

Have you seen them pulling their burkas off going across the bridge from Saudi to Bahrain? Have you seen the ques of men lined up at the boarder bridge on Thursday night going to Bahrain to drink and find a hooker?

Hypocrites...

[poweratradio]

The thing is: these are the same people who inhabited Iraq and Syria ten years ago before the US-led "Coalition of the Willing" invaded.

So the idea that this "IS/ISIS/ISIL" group mysteriously appeared out of the North like the Horde of Genghis Khan is a myth.

This group is comprised of the Sunni Muslims that have lived in that part of the world for over 1,000 years. They believed what they are now preaching 1,000 years ago and they believed it 15 years ago under Saddam (pre-US invasion).

The idea that they are some sort of <10% minority of the population that has the other 90% subjugated is a fallacy. Their believe system is supported directly and indirectly by at least 50% of Middle East Muslims. Direct support is perhaps only 20% of the population but with the "sympathy" of another 50-60%.

IS are the more extreme manifestation of Al Qaeda in Iraq, with a direct linkage in leadership/senior members. Al Qaeda in Iraq were defeated, perhaps better said to be significantly 'degraded', as a result of co-operation by the Sunni tribes in Western Iraq with US forces. Your observation on percentages is illogical

So then why are the same tribes rallying around this new "more extreme" manifestation? Could it be because they are no longer being paid off by Coalition Forces and have always believed this dogma?

Do you believe that approximately 4,000 days of Western intervention has changed these people from moderate and peaceful into extremist barbarians?

Do you believe that this new group is not comprised of citizens of the area it claims as part of its new "Caliphate?"

If you've answered no to both questions, then you might conclude that these people living in this region have believed in this ideology for hundreds of years, even before the first Crusaders landed a thousand years ago.

Hence the Kurds which to remain autonomist

[Rooo]

11) You will not post slurs, degrading or overly negative comments directed towards Thailand, specific locations, Thai institutions such as the judicial or law enforcement system, Thai culture, Thai people or any other group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

Posts removed.

[Strangebrew]

That's from drinking to much camel milk.

[Scott]

This is the final public notice to stay on the topic. This thread is not about Christianity. Continued off-topic posting will earn suspensions.

[7by7]

From The Global Slavery Index 2013

The countries with the highest numbers of enslaved people are (in descending order) India, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Russia, Thailand, Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar and Bangladesh. Taken together, these countries account for 76% of the total estimate of 29.8 million in modern slavery

I guess it depends alot on the definition of a slave.

If you are forced to marry another person, and subsequently required to do said persons bidding for the rest of your life, are you then a slave?

If you are not allowed to leave your home without first getting permission by and being escorted by your husband or male family member, are you then a slave?

If you are legally required to have sex with your husband, even against your will, are you then a slave?

If either of the above is included in the definition of a slave, then your list will be radically different.

It is not my list; the list was complied by the Global Slavery index, and their home page says

The inaugural edition of the Global Slavery Index 2013 provides a ranking of 162 countries around the world, based on a combined measure of three factors: estimated prevalence of modern slavery by population, a measure of child marriage, and a measure of human trafficking in and out of a country.......

What is modern slavery?

Modern slavery takes many forms, and is known by many names: slavery, forced labour or human trafficking.

•‘Slavery’ refers to the condition of treating another person as if they were property – something to be bought, sold, traded or even destroyed.

•‘Forced labour’ is a related but not identical concept, referring to work taken without consent, by threats or coercion.

•‘Human trafficking’ is another related concept, referring to the process through which people are brought, through deception, threats or coercion, into slavery, forced labour or other forms of severe exploitation.

Whatever term is used, the significant characteristic of all forms of modern slavery is that it involves one person depriving another people of their freedom: their freedom to leave one job for another, their freedom to leave one workplace for another, their freedom to control their own body, for their own personal or commercial benefit.

(My emphasis)

[jacky54]

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Slavery

Children between five and 12 years old are sold to wealthy men in Saudi Arabia, where they are held as sex slaves. When they reach maturity, and many are thrown on the street and they end quickly as a prostitute.

Save the Children appeal to the Norwegian and Swedish ministers take up the issue with their Saudi counterparts

Edited October 14, 2014 by jacky54

[7by7]

(Embedded quotes removed to comply with forum software)

It is poppycock to assert that because someone is muslim, and studies their scripture, their exegsis is beyond circumspection. An idiot can stay in college and finally get a degree. A zealot can worship scripture but have no context. A fool has a story too, yes, but the presumption that someone is inherrently beyond reproach because of their muslim-ness is unwise if not silly (perverse ethnocentrism). I have read all these "sacred" text of islam and other religions and hold three different advanced science degrees; my doctoral studies are in religious studies. I emphatically state I think I am qualified to observe 'their' knowledge of knowledge and comment- epistimology. You can dismiss me if you like but like you, I want to share.

A futility is conceded in that you think others lack the ability to examine and comment on both the scripture and its application in theology/theosophy. How awful to presume, therefore, that such knowledge must come from either those who pose the threat (perhaps), apologists, or those who visit loon websites. This may all be an intellectual bridge too far for some but it simply is not for others. One might have strong feelings about it, and great wisdom in other areas of life. But there are those of us who do have awareness of these occult-ish, arabic ideologies. Because, in my case, my conclusions result in great consternation, it does not follow that my knowledge fails or I am following whacky websites- or that I am islamophobic, in the sense you use the word. However, I do have great fear of Islam. Islam- fear-phobia!

It is an unfortunate truism that when someone throws "islamophobe" into the mix its like a fighter throwing in the towel in the ring; there's an element of intellectual defeat when having to toss pejoratives into the conversational ring (IMO). After all, most minds know "islamophobe" actually says nothing at all, nothing meaningful, and it is never productive- never. Since every single person called an islamophobe has the same sickened response that something vile has been cast at them then it is clear that the mere use of the word is the act of agression, not intellectual conversation. The use of Islamophobe is intended to ridicule or stiffle a respondent. Every single time; the use of the world Islamophobe says volumes more about the speaker then the recipient. Moreover, the world is on to this very pedestrian refrain. Everyone knows now that when person is called an islamophobe they should listen to the islamophobe, or dismiss the speaker.

If you say that you are a scholar who has studied Islam, then I will take your word for it.

Although when trumpeting your own qualifications, it's probably best to refrain from phrases like "An idiot can stay in college and finally get a degree" to demean others as others could turn that back on you and use it to describe you!

However, you cannot deny that the majority of Muslim scholars these days say that slavery has no place in the modern world. Or do you dismiss their words as 'poppycock?'

Neither can you deny that slavery is illegal in all Muslim countries.

Nor that slavery exists in non Muslim countries; as the list from the Global Slavery Index shows, of the top ten offending countries, only two are Muslim ones!

Islamophobia is a legitimate word; defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as "Dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force."

The OED gives as legitimate derivatives, Islamaphobe (noun) and Islamaphobic (adjective).

From the University of California, Berkley Center for Race and Gender

The term "Islamophobia" was first introduced as a concept in a 1991 Runnymede Trust Report and defined as "unfounded hostility towards Muslims, and therefore fear or dislike of all or most Muslims." The term was coined in the context of Muslims in the UK in particular and Europe in general, and formulated based on the more common "xenophobia" framework.

So it's not a new word; it's been in use for nearly 25 years.

Do you deny the legitimacy of similar words, such as xenophobia, homophobia and Judeophobia?

Do you use the same argument against people who use those words as you do against people who use the word Islamaphobia?

If someone uses, for example, the word Judeophobe, as one particular member has done many times in various topics, do you listen to the Judeophobe or dismiss the speaker?

Edit:

I should add, before being accused otherwise, that I am not in anyway excusing or apologising for the evil of slavery; whoever is guilty of it.

Edited October 14, 2014 by 7by7

[jacky54]

Edit:

I should add, before being accused otherwise, that I am not in anyway excusing or apologising for the evil of slavery; whoever is guilty of it.

Perish the thought, how could you when Muslims have been responsible for more slavery than anyone and the few countries where you can still buy another human today are Muslim countries. So you condemn the Prophet Mohamad then for owning slaves and raping them, good.

[7by7]

Edit:

I should add, before being accused otherwise, that I am not in anyway excusing or apologising for the evil of slavery; whoever is guilty of it.

Perish the thought, how could you when Muslims have been responsible for more slavery than anyone

Rubbish; slavery existed throughout the ancient and medieval world, and in most parts of the modern world up until the late 19th century; but as I said before, this is not the topic in which to discuss the history of slavery, unless given the go ahead by a mod.

and the few countries where you can still buy another human today are Muslim countries

More rubbish. As shown, from an independent source, 76% of those enslaved today are in just 10 countries; only two of those countries are Muslim ones.

So you condemn the Prophet Mohamad then for owning slaves and raping them, good.

Times have changed. Slavery is anathema to most people today; but we cannot judge the past by todays standards.

Do you condemn the emperor Constantine, the man who made Christianity the official religion of the Roman empire, because he owned slaves and no doubt, in your words, raped them?

[Steely Dan]

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Slavery

Children between five and 12 years old are sold to wealthy men in Saudi Arabia, where they are held as sex slaves. When they reach maturity, and many are thrown on the street and they end quickly as a prostitute.

Save the Children appeal to the Norwegian and Swedish ministers take up the issue with their Saudi counterparts

Good luck appealing to the Scandinavians, but they more than most are suffering from Stockholm syndrome and would probably jump to the Saudis defense as quickly as they would hide behind moral relativism to defend cannibals from PNG or heads Shrinkers from the jungles of Equador.