Islam/Muslim Discussion Thread

[Ghuraba Al-Khorusani]

Rasoolillah(SAAWS) had prisons so therefore it is Sunnah.

But did the serve the same purpose as the prisons of today, to actively make a person serve a sentence for a time, or like a basic jail, to keep the inmate separate for a time until a punishment was formed?

Yes they did

[Mahdistan]

Don't see how making prisoners work as part of their sentence is the same as slavery.

But even if it technically would count as slavery, personally I wouldn't care. It's fine. Contributes to society, builds character and is generally a just way of dealing with convicts.

That's all I'm advocating. But people seem to believe I want to be sitten' on mah horse, wachin tha darks work tha cotin feeld.

[Ghuraba Al-Khorusani]

i got to go Ma'Salaama bro Inshallah we can talk later.

[Napkiraly]

Yeah, all the men of the Banu Qurayza, who were POWs, deserved to be executed, with their women enslaved (probably to be used as sex slaves by the holy followers eh?) along with their children.

Yeah, they were trying to kill them. So sorry he wouldn't release people who had killed Muslims, and would kill more, but I think he did the right thing. No evidence of these women being made 'sex slaves', some were married into other Muslim's families, others, particularly those who supported the old clan, became house-slaves, and the rest converted to Islam.

"They were trying to kill them" so are all POW's, it's kinda standard that the enemy tries killing. And he allowed another tribe exile instead. He killed POW's, enslaved their families.

Well knowing how female slaves have been treated in the Islamic world, not really a stretch to think they wound up as sex slaves. Perhaps that's another reason you want slavery back.

[Mahdistan]

i got to go Ma'Salaama bro Inshallah we can talk later.

Okay salaam, but I will search for such a Hadith.

[Napkiraly]

Don't see how making prisoners work as part of their sentence is the same as slavery.

But even if it technically would count as slavery, personally I wouldn't care. It's fine. Contributes to society, builds character and is generally a just way of dealing with convicts.

Ah, yes not surprised one of our resident "moderate" Muslims supports slavery as well.

[Mahdistan]

Yeah, they were trying to kill them. So sorry he wouldn't release people who had killed Muslims, and would kill more, but I think he did the right thing. No evidence of these women being made 'sex slaves', some were married into other Muslim's families, others, particularly those who supported the old clan, became house-slaves, and the rest converted to Islam.

"They were trying to kill them" so are all POW's, it's kinda standard that the enemy tries killing. And he allowed another tribe exile instead. He killed POW's, enslaved their families.

Well knowing how female slaves have been treated in the Islamic world, not really a stretch to think they wound up as sex slaves. Perhaps that's another reason you want slavery back.

So if guys are saying that they're glad they killed Muslims, and would kill more, then yes, it is perfectly just to kill them as they are prisoners. That said, not all tribes wanted that, so some were exiled. The families were given a choice to continue to support the decisions of their fathers/husbands/brothers, and if they did, of course their imprisonment was maintained, and slavery is a just punishment supporting killing people. And we're talking about the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), not some idiot 1,400 years later. He did different things, and a lot of Muslims today would prefer to ignore that so they could indulge themselves.

[Mahdistan]

Don't see how making prisoners work as part of their sentence is the same as slavery.

But even if it technically would count as slavery, personally I wouldn't care. It's fine. Contributes to society, builds character and is generally a just way of dealing with convicts.

Ah, yes not surprised one of our resident "moderate" Muslims supports slavery as well.

Then I should say the same of those supporting prisons. 'Look at these westerners, even their moderates support prisons!'

[Jochistan]

Don't see how making prisoners work as part of their sentence is the same as slavery.

But even if it technically would count as slavery, personally I wouldn't care. It's fine. Contributes to society, builds character and is generally a just way of dealing with convicts.

Ah, yes not surprised one of our resident "moderate" Muslims supports slavery as well.

Bite me.
I wouldn't call it slavery. Its just making prisoners work.

Actual slavery involves creating a caste where the position is inherited and created from innocents. Making prisoners work is...making prisoners work.

[Jochistan]

Don't see how making prisoners work as part of their sentence is the same as slavery.

But even if it technically would count as slavery, personally I wouldn't care. It's fine. Contributes to society, builds character and is generally a just way of dealing with convicts.

That's all I'm advocating. But people seem to believe I want to be sitten' on mah horse, wachin tha darks work tha cotin feeld.

Liberals tend to be very sensitive. It's better to use very soft, politically correct language.

[Napkiraly]

"They were trying to kill them" so are all POW's, it's kinda standard that the enemy tries killing. And he allowed another tribe exile instead. He killed POW's, enslaved their families.

Well knowing how female slaves have been treated in the Islamic world, not really a stretch to think they wound up as sex slaves. Perhaps that's another reason you want slavery back.

So if guys are saying that they're glad they killed Muslims, and would kill more, then yes, it is perfectly just to kill them as they are prisoners. That said, not all tribes wanted that, so some were exiled. The families were given a choice to continue to support the decisions of their fathers/husbands/brothers, and if they did, of course their imprisonment was maintained, and slavery is a just punishment supporting killing people. And we're talking about the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), not some idiot 1,400 years later. He did different things, and a lot of Muslims today would prefer to ignore that so they could indulge themselves.

Yeah the Banu Qurayza weren't pledging to kill all Muslims and agreed to accept a Muslim arbitrator. Muhammad was asked to shown leniency as he had before. He didn't. He executed POW's something I've been continuously told is against Islam. Wouldn't that make Muhammad himself not a Muslim for this?

Ah, yes not surprised one of our resident "moderate" Muslims supports slavery as well.

Then I should say the same of those supporting prisons. 'Look at these westerners, even their moderates support prisons!'

Prisons are not slavery.

Ah, yes not surprised one of our resident "moderate" Muslims supports slavery as well.

Bite me.
I wouldn't call it slavery. Its just making prisoners work.

Actual slavery involves creating a caste where the position is inherited and created from innocents. Making prisoners work is...making prisoners work.

I'm just pointing out you're only a moderate in the sense that the Westboro Baptist Church is moderate in comparison to the Teutonic Knights circa 12th and 13th century.

No, slavery doesn't have to be the creation of caste that is inherited. Most forms of slavery have been ones where it was just POW's that were slaves.

[Napkiraly]

Don't see how making prisoners work as part of their sentence is the same as slavery.

But even if it technically would count as slavery, personally I wouldn't care. It's fine. Contributes to society, builds character and is generally a just way of dealing with convicts.

That's all I'm advocating. But people seem to believe I want to be sitten' on mah horse, wachin tha darks work tha cotin feeld.

Slavery in any form is barbaric. It doesn't have to be the form seen in the South. Most forms of slavery were not like that. I would oppose the forms of slavery that existed in Sassanid Persia just as much.

[Napkiraly]

That's all I'm advocating. But people seem to believe I want to be sitten' on mah horse, wachin tha darks work tha cotin feeld.

Liberals tend to be very sensitive. It's better to use very soft, politically correct language.

Liberals tend to be sensitive? Please, people can't even draw pictures of Muhammad without their being global fucking outrage over it.

[The balkens]

Liberals tend to be very sensitive. It's better to use very soft, politically correct language.

Liberals tend to be sensitive? Please, people can't even draw pictures of Muhammad without their being global fucking outrage over it.

A PICTURE!?
TRRRRIIIIIGGGGERRRRED!!!!

[Napkiraly]

Liberals tend to be sensitive? Please, people can't even draw pictures of Muhammad without their being global fucking outrage over it.

A PICTURE!?
TRRRRIIIIIGGGGERRRRED!!!!

I wonder what would happen if I walked into a mosque and said Muhammad was a dick.

[The balkens]

A PICTURE!?
TRRRRIIIIIGGGGERRRRED!!!!

I wonder what would happen if I walked into a mosque and said Muhammad was a dick.

You'd be killed, but regressives would say that they are STILL oppressed.

[Jochistan]

Bite me.
I wouldn't call it slavery. Its just making prisoners work.

Actual slavery involves creating a caste where the position is inherited and created from innocents. Making prisoners work is...making prisoners work.

I'm just pointing out you're only a moderate in the sense that the Westboro Baptist Church is moderate in comparison to the Teutonic Knights circa 12th and 13th century.

No, slavery doesn't have to be the creation of caste that is inherited. Most forms of slavery have been ones where it was just POW's that were slaves.

So me thinking prisoners should work as part of their sentence is an extremist view...

You...you're serious...you're actually serious.

[Hoffenland]

A PICTURE!?
TRRRRIIIIIGGGGERRRRED!!!!

I wonder what would happen if I walked into a mosque and said Muhammad was a dick.

In that case, you would be the dick. However, if you do this, please get it on camera.

[Mahdistan]

So if guys are saying that they're glad they killed Muslims, and would kill more, then yes, it is perfectly just to kill them as they are prisoners. That said, not all tribes wanted that, so some were exiled. The families were given a choice to continue to support the decisions of their fathers/husbands/brothers, and if they did, of course their imprisonment was maintained, and slavery is a just punishment supporting killing people. And we're talking about the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), not some idiot 1,400 years later. He did different things, and a lot of Muslims today would prefer to ignore that so they could indulge themselves.

Yeah the Banu Qurayza weren't pledging to kill all Muslims and agreed to accept a Muslim arbitrator. Muhammad was asked to shown leniency as he had before. He didn't. He executed POW's something I've been continuously told is against Islam. Wouldn't that make Muhammad himself not a Muslim for this?

Then I should say the same of those supporting prisons. 'Look at these westerners, even their moderates support prisons!'

Prisons are not slavery.

Bite me.
I wouldn't call it slavery. Its just making prisoners work.

Actual slavery involves creating a caste where the position is inherited and created from innocents. Making prisoners work is...making prisoners work.

I'm just pointing out you're only a moderate in the sense that the Westboro Baptist Church is moderate in comparison to the Teutonic Knights circa 12th and 13th century.

No, slavery doesn't have to be the creation of caste that is inherited. Most forms of slavery have been ones where it was just POW's that were slaves.

The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) saw reason to execute them, and that's reason enough for me. If he had shown leniency, and then they left and killed more Muslims, than it would have been a greater tragedy. The Prophet, like all other Prophets, were the greatest judges on earth. He saw reason, and acted upon it, like any proper judge should.

And could you break down for me, within the limits of slavery I described, the differences between slavery and imprisonment?

[Napkiraly]

I'm just pointing out you're only a moderate in the sense that the Westboro Baptist Church is moderate in comparison to the Teutonic Knights circa 12th and 13th century.

No, slavery doesn't have to be the creation of caste that is inherited. Most forms of slavery have been ones where it was just POW's that were slaves.

So me thinking prisoners should work as part of their sentence is an extremist view...

You...you're serious...you're actually serious.

But even if it technically would count as slavery, personally I wouldn't care.

Not just this, but also your support for a religious based legal system. Once again, sure you're not Daesh or AQ. So congrats on that. You're the Phelps family or any other sort of American evangelist that calls for the Bible to be the law of the USA. Which is not a moderate position.

[Jochistan]

So me thinking prisoners should work as part of their sentence is an extremist view...

You...you're serious...you're actually serious.

But even if it technically would count as slavery, personally I wouldn't care.

Not just this, but also your support for a religious based legal system. Once again, sure you're not Daesh or AQ. So congrats on that. You're the Phelps family or any other sort of American evangelist that calls for the Bible to be the law of the USA. Which is not a moderate position.

Really, that extreme huh?

I still don't see how wanting prisoners to work (something plenty of non Muslims worldwide support) would count as something as extreme as that.

Think you're just overreacting.

[Jochistan]

I wonder what would happen if I walked into a mosque and said Muhammad was a dick.

You'd be killed, but regressives would say that they are STILL oppressed.

Probably wouldn't be killed. Just would have his ass kicked.

Really no different than what would happen if he was in any other religious establishment and did something similar.

Like if he walked into a Synagogue and did the Hitlergruß. Or went to a Hindu temple and started urinating on one of the Murti.

[Mahdistan]

So me thinking prisoners should work as part of their sentence is an extremist view...

You...you're serious...you're actually serious.

But even if it technically would count as slavery, personally I wouldn't care.

Not just this, but also your support for a religious based legal system. Once again, sure you're not Daesh or AQ. So congrats on that. You're the Phelps family or any other sort of American evangelist that calls for the Bible to be the law of the USA. Which is not a moderate position.

No smiley spam.

And an equal argument could be made for secularists calling for a secular government. The idea of removing religion from the public sphere was once as controversial as people today trying to implement. If we're going to go by the same standard, you, too, are an extremist. Not a bomb-slinging, church-burning communist, but a 'Sam Harris' or any other sort of secularist who calls for removing all religion from the state. And considering the treatment 'extremists' have received here, why should I care what you think?

[Jochistan]

So me thinking prisoners should work as part of their sentence is an extremist view...

You...you're serious...you're actually serious.

But even if it technically would count as slavery, personally I wouldn't care.

Not just this, but also your support for a religious based legal system. Once again, sure you're not Daesh or AQ. So congrats on that. You're the Phelps family or any other sort of American evangelist that calls for the Bible to be the law of the USA. Which is not a moderate position.

Christians wanting religious morals to be involved in governments where they are the majority is absolutely a moderate position. Provided they don't think gays, blasphemers and abortion clinic doctors should be killed and stuff like that.

[Novus America]

Not just this, but also your support for a religious based legal system. Once again, sure you're not Daesh or AQ. So congrats on that. You're the Phelps family or any other sort of American evangelist that calls for the Bible to be the law of the USA. Which is not a moderate position.

Really, that extreme huh?

I still don't see how wanting prisoners to work (something plenty of non Muslims worldwide support) would count as something as extreme as that.

Think you're just overreacting.

Requiring prisoners to work to offset the cost they impose on society and compensate their victims is not extreme nor religious even. Just reasonable policy.

Also requiring POWs to work is explicitly allowed by the Geneva conventions.