Posts Tagged Islam
Did you hear the news? Religion has killed humanity in broad daylight…
Posted by Pepper in Atheism, Irrationality, Religion, WTF on May 31, 2010
One of the reasons religion bothers me so much is the way the same people who react so vehemently about ‘drawing their prophet’ are so silent when their fellow-believers massacre innocent people of another sect mercilessly in broad daylight.
When the priority of being a human-being with active conscience is replaced by the one of being a member of a particular faith… there is something wrong indeed. There has to be something wrong; I always wondered why more people cannot see it. Is there anything really over humanity? Isn’t that the reason religions were created in the first place- simply put- to serve as a guidebook to being a more humane human?
I just wish you’d remove that veil and see where you are taking this world to… it’s time you woke your conscience that’s been sleeping for centuries, it’s time you shook out of that trance, it’s time you looked around… and realize that the brain that you have, it’s for reasoning things out for yourselves…
And who knows, it may even not be too late….
Honour?
Posted by Pepper in Culture, Irrationality, Religion on November 25, 2009
There is something inexplicably sad about honour killings; may be because of its very nature that the murders are carried out by the immediate families of the victims. I’d have thought that families that are supposed to protect, not kill!
Is there no one we can trust and turn to, when the whole world we grew up knowing turns into the faceless enemy? It should not be that way… not a bit, no; it’s such a betrayal of trust, such a violation of human rights.
Take, for example, the incident of Ahmet Yildiz from Turkey, who was killed by his father in an effort to save the family from shame when he came out as a homosexual; or the sister who was stabbed to death by her brother for ‘knowing too many men’; or Tuley Green who was killed by her gambler father because she wanted to marry a man of her own choice, who was not ‘honourable’ enough in his bizarre standards.
When will the whole group of brain-washed people start thinking with their brain and heart, and use logic other than what they perceive their religion and customs tell them… and those the crazy voices inside their heads?
I am not sure anymore that the day will ever come.
The Bra Boys of Islamic Extremism
Posted by Rugrat in Irrationality, Religion, WTF on October 18, 2009
Islamist hardliners have always gone out of their way to dictate how women should live, eat, drink, sleep and ‘most importantly’, how they should dress up; or dress down or wait, dress is for humans, women should just cover, yes, cover, cover, cover… head to toe, left to right, diagonally, horizontally, vertically… cover, cover, cover, cover… how dare they even be a three dimensional figure…
No wonder, pretty soon the cavemen were bound to be hit by boredom with their utterly monotonous and vapid vogue that is known as burqa, the sole outer garment option for women in their stone age. And yes, they have apparently gone bored… The next ‘logical’ step for them was to dictate undergarments and that’s what they are doing now in Somalia.
Bra is the latest enemy in their egregious quest for male supremacy. But this time it is not about covering, it is rather about removing. They want all the bras gone. Bra is the latest tool of devil in their pea brains as those apparently ‘violate Islam by constituting a deception’ (yes it is confirmed, pea brains also produce signals, very weak nonetheless). Or it might be the case that the Captain Caveman got his lice infested beard stuck in a bra clip while trying to ‘covet’ one of his wives and hence the sudden rage against the brassiere.
Nevertheless, they had to do something to rid the society of this ‘evil’. As usual, an age old proven idea does the trick even with this ‘nouveau overture’: lets harass some women…
Yes, they are now monitoring the firmness and movements of women’s breasts in the streets. If those appear to be ‘firmer’ then those women are whipped by masked men. Then they are told to remove their bras and shake their breasts.
No, I am not talking about a fictional sadomasochistic porn flick, it is indeed happening in Mogadishu. Gone are the days when bra burning used to be a part of feminist movement. The boneheaded zealots have snatched it too from their utmost adversaries.
Sex: the dread of the religious lot
Posted by Rugrat in Irrationality, Religion, Society, WTF on October 11, 2009
Sex. Calling it an anathema to the religions will not be much of an exaggeration. The religious lot has always demonstrated an incessant need to curb and control human sexuality. In a religious society, they can turn blind eye to terrorism, abysmal corruption, hunger, poverty etc… but one should not be able to have sex freely. Who cares if hundreds die in an act of terrorism or thousands perish of hunger; but people having non-marital (I have reservations in using ‘pre-marital’ as a general term as it fallaciously presumes marriage as an inevitable and necessary eventuality in one’s life) sex must be kept in chains, if not killed. It comes hardly as a surprise that in the epitome of a theocratic hegemony called Saudi Arabia, a man has been sentenced to five years of incarceration and a thousand lashes for merely boasting about his sex life in public. How is it even remotely justified to take 5 whole years of life out of a ‘braggart’ (along with this inhuman corporal punishment) who at the very most is just a nuisance? His actual ‘crime’ was that he had some sex and was stupid enough to brag about it.
Well, what is there to expect really from this country? This is a kingdom where sexual segregation is a way of life, women are deemed inferior, human rights are every so often abused. Some megalomaniacal God rules this petroleum fuelled monarchy via proxy of some obscenely rich ‘royal’ nitwits. This is where human rationality is often regarded as an alien concept. They would rather read, reread and reread and then read again a 1400 years old book than give their brains a chance to think rationally. They would have no qualms about funding a medieval madrassah to preach their intolerant agenda where students would only learn to hate and kill, but they would do their utmost to control and subvert someone’s wish to have consensual sex freely. And yes, then they would read the book again.
I do not want to generalise and I am sure there is a significant number of sane and progressive individuals in Saudi Arabia. And I do empathise with their agony and frustration.
Anyhow, this sort of close-mindedness isn’t really limited to Saudi Arabia (although no other can surpass the Kingdom in the severity of it). Sex without marriage is a taboo that dwells the religious mind in every part of this planet. Fornication is the pet-word that the religious orthodoxy has been using to denote sex without marriage; the reason behind obviously is to give it a pejorative connotation which doesn’t really effect a liberal mind; if Jack wants to have sex with his girlfriend Shelly and she with him, they wouldn’t really care whether it is being called love-making, having sex or fornication; while the local clergyman may bump up his blood pressure, condemning them to hell with a pale blue shuddering face, ruminating over the ‘diabolical ills of fornication.’
This brings me to a discussion thread entry by someone obviously pious that I’ve read few days back. And it is not the first time I came across this, “Fornication is a root of evil in the society!!!”
Really? Care to elaborate? How does an unmarried couple having consensual sex construes as evil? Do people explode while having sex? Do they die of hunger because of too much sex? How exactly? No seriously, tell me?
Forget sex out of wedlock. This sanctimonious bunch even shudders at the mere mention of the word ’sex’. Try uttering the words like ’sex education’, ’safe sex’ etc. on their face; they’d jump like they are stung by a jellyfish, some might leave your presence and immediately perform an ablution in order to cleanse their ears of the ’sinful’ utterance. I guess if one sadistic individual is to torture them, one of the most effective ways would be to record the word ’sex’ and play it in an infinite loop (hence one must never do that). Then comes the clergymen, the most pernicious and the most sly of the bunch across all religions; they wouldn’t talk about sex education or the necessity of having a good sexual health, but rather exert their repressed desires on the weak by the means of rape and paedophilia.
This makes me think, why? Why such dread of sex in religions, especially non marital? In my opinion it comes from the chauvinistic patriarchal misogynistic attitude of old times (which is unfortunately residing in the mental psyche of many even to date) when these religions were in their inceptions. Needless to say that all religions have been engineered by men. In their own narcissistic chauvinism, men have considered women vile, unclean and villainous. And the union with women have been considered a treacherous act that men couldn’t abstain from. In this sordid guilt-ridden affair of men, sex has become a matter of angst along with women. It would be fair to mention here that the status of women has improved with each subsequent religions but it has never been even close to be good enough, let alone rightful. Same can be said about sex.
The Christian concept of ‘Original Sin’ is another revolting piece. Saying that human birth comes with company-manufactured-box-packed-sins is very disturbing. In a multitude of religions many of the ‘pures’ were needed to be born by virgins or non sexual means: the most popular one being Jesus who was born from the ‘Immaculate Conception’ of Virgin Mary, Krishna (ironically, who himself was a philanderer) was born of Devika via some sort of ‘mental transmission’ as Bhagavad Purana recounts. All the Pandavas of Mahabharata were essentially gods’ children by Kunti and Madri as their husband Pandu was cursed to death if he ever had sex with his aforementioned wives. Even Buddha was also of a miraculous birth who is said to have been conceived sans coitus. Seems like in order to be great, one must not be a product of sex.
Abrahamic religions do their best to regulate sexuality more than anyone else. Setting aside their vociferous prohibition of sex out of wedlock, they even go on to prescribe on how to have sex as a married couple. I wonder why these sort of explicitly detailed diktat isn’t given in matters of abolition of slavery, poverty alleviation, corruption etc. All these come to me as telltale signs of anthropomorphic roots of these religious texts that demonstrate the attribution of significant ‘real estate’ to typical human psyche within the confines of our human imagination. Even the prized heavens of Islam are filled with promises of debauchery and indulgence that are so heftily prohibited on earth. So essentially you get a cookie for not eating the cookie. I often wonder what is the use of these bodily, earthly, material indulgence for the ‘pure souls’ that would ramble around in those opulent heavens? Couldn’t God come up with a bit more out of the box originality? Well, of course not…
Human is a sexual being. Sex is a perfectly natural and normal process. There is nothing to be ashamed of it, no reason to dread it or feel guilty about it. Other than serving as the instrument of our survival as a species, it is also an important tool for our mental, physical, emotional wellbeing. Repressing this completely natural biological drive is unhealthy and immoral. The prevailing hush-hush and obscurantism (and many a times unabashed sophistry) with regards to sex and sexual topics is risky, detrimental and utterly imbecilic.
So a request (in all likelihood a futile one) to the exemplars of piety: Please, please, please, do away with those shudders, broaden your outlook, educate your children about sex (please don’t read ‘abstinence’ here; that doesn’t work), discuss sex freely just as you’d discuss the weather. And while you never miss a chance to utter how great your God is, it wouldn’t hurt to let one talk about how great sex is…
Mannequins with hijab to curb some hormonal bubble-dance
Posted by Rugrat in Irrationality, Religion, WTF on October 5, 2009
Let’s not kid around. Women do get a tough time on this planet that we call earth. One might think, how hard would it be to be a female wooden/fibreglass doll? Well think twice… it isn’t a rosy path either. Say for example, in Iran, now mannequins are being forced by the authorities to wear hijab.
There’s this growing tendency in the Muslim world to categorise everything in just two mutually exclusive categories: ‘Islamic’ or ‘Un-Islamic’. It is the latest good/evil, yin/yang, light/dark in the current Islamic zeitgeist. Just a while back in Pakistan some so called top Islamic clerics issued a decree stating theft of electricity a sin; funny that there was felt a need to issue such decree where common law and above all common sense sufficiently covers. Nowadays, every debate tends to float around this very branding with every sect, denomination or authority coming up with their ‘highly investigated’ arguments (of course within their self imposed constraint of Quranic injunctions). The ever-growing shroud of this utterly myopic and vacuous branding is like a voracious monster that doesn’t know where to stop.
Keeping true to this latest vogue, now in Iran (if not in some other countries), mannequins without hijab over the head are branded as ‘Un-Islamic’ by the authorities. Ironically, mannequins without a head are spared, even though they are still not allowed to show their bodily female curves (how uncannily similar to what is often expected from the human females).
I wonder why? Were those inanimate mannequins donning those artificial locks and curls giving the males in the Islamic regime some hormone infused bubble-dance (I didn’t mention females as Ahmadinejad claims that there are no homosexuals in Iran :p, while the truth lies somewhere here)? Or, have they taken the tacky 1987 Kim Cattrall movie ‘Mannequin’ (where Kim is a mannequin that comes alive) too seriously and are afraid that hundreds of cheesily dancing Kim Cattralls would be too much handle in the cities that forbid any affiliation with sex? Apologies for my lame attempt of a pun at ‘Sex and the City’. However, Let’s take a glimpse:
If this video is what prompted their decision, I wouldn’t hold it against them.
The moral police of God
Posted by Bee Zee in Irrationality, Religion on October 3, 2009
Prostitution is considered as a grave sin among Muslims and hence is banned in most Muslim countries. So much so that in the latest occurring of Phul Nagar, a small town few kilometres away from Lahore in Pakistan, four women were punished for their alleged involvement in prostitution by forcing them to walk naked on streets by an angry mob.
Intriguingly, an inquiry into Quran suggests that there is no mention of discouraging or banning of prostitution and punishing prostitutes. I wonder where do these guys get all their ideas from, clearly they don’t get from their holy text.
PS: It’s all for God…
After much pondering and re-pondering Malaysian authority decided to go ahead with Kartika’s ‘caning’ after all.
What was the crime? Drinking beer despite being a Muslim. Quran says ‘no’ to alcohol and hence she gets to get caned.
I thought religion should be a personal matter and what one does or does not do, is something between the God and that person. May be I thought wrong… or maybe I’m just one of those exceptionally insightful people… and I just don’t GET them!
Blah. Don’t mind me. I flatter myself on a regular basis! After all who will do it if I don’t?!
Jokes apart though…. I thought a little further… and further…
Here’s what I concluded when I was finally able to take a peek in those zealot’s heads- they do these to make God’s job easy or to play God. Your pick, you choose either. As for me, the difference between the two is almost as much as ‘tomato’ and ‘tomah-to’… or well… ‘tometo’… as ‘some’ parts of the world know it as.
Whatever…
After all, I get it (or DO I really?), if YOU punish a human in THIS life, God will not have to- in AFTER life. Or does it not work this way?
Thoughts, perhaps?


Recent Comments