Mona Eltahawy of NY takes action vs racism, inspires others.

[Sulamalik]

No, to be a Muslim you have to believe that the Qur'an is the word of God, not inspired by God, but the literal word. The Qur'an in its completed form was written after Muhammed's death.

Sez who exactly, a specific surah or the imam who told you so?

Sura 43.

[Northern Dominus]

Sez who exactly, a specific surah or the imam who told you so?

Sura 43.

And which verse specifically? Surah 43 has appx 90 of them.

Edit: Pawing through it now...gee there's a lot about luxury and ornamentation, nothing about literal translation.

[Sulamalik]

Sura 43.

And which verse specifically? Surah 43 has appx 90 of them.

[43:2] And the enlightening scripture.

[43:3] We [i.e. God] have rendered it an Arabic Quran, that you may understand.

[Northern Dominus]

And which verse specifically? Surah 43 has appx 90 of them.

[43:2] And the enlightening scripture.

[43:3] We [i.e. God] have rendered it an Arabic Quran, that you may understand.

And you know what, I trust the modern translations just as much as I trust modern biblical translations as well. Meaning: about as much as I trust FOX News' tagline.

Does that even nessicarily mean everything MUST be taken literally? That line reads more like "here we translated it so you could read the damn thing" at best.

And in any event any claim of divine writing is bunk because every single word has to pass through the brain and hands of human beings, and frankly humans are dumb capricious assholish animals who will kill each other over the slightest provocation.

[Sulamalik]

[43:2] And the enlightening scripture.

[43:3] We [i.e. God] have rendered it an Arabic Quran, that you may understand.

And you know what, I trust the modern translations just as much as I trust modern biblical translations as well. Meaning: about as much as I trust FOX News' tagline.

Does that even nessicarily mean everything MUST be taken literally? That line reads more like "here we translated it so you could read the damn thing" at best.

And in any event any claim of divine writing is bunk because every single word has to pass through the brain and hands of human beings, and frankly humans are dumb capricious assholish animals who will kill each other over the slightest provocation.

[2:23] And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah , if you should be truthful.

If you have trouble believing that the Qur'an is the word of God, that's okay. You're just part of the significant majority of human beings who are not Muslim.

[Northern Dominus]

And you know what, I trust the modern translations just as much as I trust modern biblical translations as well. Meaning: about as much as I trust FOX News' tagline.

Does that even nessicarily mean everything MUST be taken literally? That line reads more like "here we translated it so you could read the damn thing" at best.

And in any event any claim of divine writing is bunk because every single word has to pass through the brain and hands of human beings, and frankly humans are dumb capricious assholish animals who will kill each other over the slightest provocation.

[2:23] And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah , if you should be truthful.

If you have trouble believing that the Qur'an is the word of God, that's okay. You're just part of the significant majority of human beings who are not Muslim.

I'm not anything, including an Islamophobe.

What I am is an outsider....and I'm far enough removed to realize that debating the accuracy of Quran merits its own thread entirely thank you.

[Ethel mermania]

btw, the proper way to disagree with the jihadist's are savages posters,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05/pro-muslim-subway-ads-new-york-city-anti-jihad_n_1942009.html

notice it was the jews who paid for it.

[Sulamalik]

btw, the proper way to disagree with the jihadist's are savages posters,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05/pro-muslim-subway-ads-new-york-city-anti-jihad_n_1942009.html

notice it was the jews who paid for it.

Graffiti is more democratic.

[Des-Bal]

You can't deface an ad you disagree with. If you could I would spend all day drawing penises on Mitt Romneys face and defacing missing dog posters by replacing their number with my own and trying to get everyone who called to buy vintage action figures from me.

[IshCong]

btw, the proper way to disagree with the jihadist's are savages posters,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05/pro-muslim-subway-ads-new-york-city-anti-jihad_n_1942009.html

notice it was the jews who paid for it.

Graffiti is more democratic.

No, it's really not. The counter ads are precisely what should have happened to start with.
If you do not like something, you don't deface another's property or commit whatever other random crime you're inclined towards. You organize a group of like-minded individuals, gain funds, and put out ads or commercials or whatever explaining why it is wrong.

I salute both of the groups that put out the counter-ads.

[Srboslavija]

notice it was the jews who paid for it.

???

Not sure what you are trying to say with this comment but there's absolutely no need to propagate stereotypes associated with certain groups, especially in an anti-racism topic.

[Des-Bal]

notice it was the jews who paid for it.

???

Not sure what you are trying to say with this comment but there's absolutely no need to propagate stereotypes associated with certain groups, especially in an anti-racism topic.

Hah, those Jews are always preaching equality and fair treatment for people regardless of creed.

[IshCong]

notice it was the jews who paid for it.

???

Not sure what you are trying to say with this comment but there's absolutely no need to propagate stereotypes associated with certain groups, especially in an anti-racism topic.

He's trying to say the "Choose Love" ads were funded by two groups, the Rabbis for Human Rights North America and the Sojourners. The former is Jewish, the latter, Christian.

[Ethel mermania]

???

Not sure what you are trying to say with this comment but there's absolutely no need to propagate stereotypes associated with certain groups, especially in an anti-racism topic.

Hah, those Jews are always preaching equality and fair treatment for people regardless of creed.

Those Dastards.

[Ethel mermania]

???

Not sure what you are trying to say with this comment but there's absolutely no need to propagate stereotypes associated with certain groups, especially in an anti-racism topic.

He's trying to say the "Choose Love" ads were funded by two groups, the Rabbis for Human Rights North America and the Sojourners. The former is Jewish, the latter, Christian.

I should have added the second part, thank you for bringing it up.

[Sulamalik]

Graffiti is more democratic.

No, it's really not. The counter ads are precisely what should have happened to start with.
If you do not like something, you don't deface another's property or commit whatever other random crime you're inclined towards. You organize a group of like-minded individuals, gain funds, and put out ads or commercials or whatever explaining why it is wrong.

I salute both of the groups that put out the counter-ads.

Ads cost money to put up, money that many people don't have. Subway ads are a form of expression that favours the rich, while Graffiti can be made by everyone, regardless of their socioeconomic status.

I'm not even disagreeing with these new anti-racism ads. I'm just saying that Graffiti is a more equal medium for political expression.

[Ethel mermania]

No, it's really not. The counter ads are precisely what should have happened to start with.
If you do not like something, you don't deface another's property or commit whatever other random crime you're inclined towards. You organize a group of like-minded individuals, gain funds, and put out ads or commercials or whatever explaining why it is wrong.

I salute both of the groups that put out the counter-ads.

Ads cost money to put up, money that many people don't have. Subway ads are a form of expression that favours the rich, while Graffiti can be made by everyone, regardless of their socioeconomic status.

I'm not even disagreeing with these new anti-racism ads. I'm just saying that Graffiti is a more equal medium for political expression.

Subway ads are for the rich? Both, buys were for less than 6 grand. You don't have money, hold a protest infront of the ad. Defacement of the ad, is vandalism and the stopping the expression of speech of others. An act to be punished in a free society, not congratulated.

[Sulamalik]

Ads cost money to put up, money that many people don't have. Subway ads are a form of expression that favours the rich, while Graffiti can be made by everyone, regardless of their socioeconomic status.

I'm not even disagreeing with these new anti-racism ads. I'm just saying that Graffiti is a more equal medium for political expression.

Subway ads are for the rich? Both, buys were for less than 6 grand. You don't have mohold a protest infront of the ad. Defacement of the ad, is vandalism and the stopping the expression of speech of others. An act to be punished in a free society, not congratulated.

I don't know about you, but as a student I don't have six grand just lying around, I do have enough for a spraycan though. This isn't about if vandalism is right or should be legal, I'm just saying it's a more equal way of expressing yourself than subway ads.

[Caninope]

Subway ads are for the rich? Both, buys were for less than 6 grand. You don't have mohold a protest infront of the ad. Defacement of the ad, is vandalism and the stopping the expression of speech of others. An act to be punished in a free society, not congratulated.

I don't know about you, but as a student I don't have six grand just lying around, I do have enough for a spraycan though. This isn't about if vandalism is right or should be legal, I'm just saying it's a more equal way of expressing yourself than subway ads.

That assumes that poor people cannot act through organizations that have money though.

[Ethel mermania]

Subway ads are for the rich? Both, buys were for less than 6 grand. You don't have mohold a protest infront of the ad. Defacement of the ad, is vandalism and the stopping the expression of speech of others. An act to be punished in a free society, not congratulated.

I don't know about you, but as a student I don't have six grand just lying around, I do have enough for a spraycan though. This isn't about if vandalism is right or should be legal, I'm just saying it's a more equal way of expressing yourself than subway ads.

As a student, you can join an organization and solict cotributions to run a counter-ad. Or you can stand in front of the ad, and hand out leaflets.

It is about vandalism, because that is what ms. Elthaway did, vandalism, nothing more.

[Sulamalik]

I don't know about you, but as a student I don't have six grand just lying around, I do have enough for a spraycan though. This isn't about if vandalism is right or should be legal, I'm just saying it's a more equal way of expressing yourself than subway ads.

As a student, you can join an organization and solict cotributions to run a counter-ad. Or you can stand in front of the ad, and hand out leaflets.

It is about vandalism, because that is what ms. Elthaway did, vandalism, nothing more.

You don't seem to understand the point I'm trying to make. I'm saying that Graffiti is a more democratic way of expressing yourself than buying a subway ad. That's all.

[Ethel mermania]

As a student, you can join an organization and solict cotributions to run a counter-ad. Or you can stand in front of the ad, and hand out leaflets.

It is about vandalism, because that is what ms. Elthaway did, vandalism, nothing more.

You don't seem to understand the point I'm trying to make. I'm saying that Graffiti is a more democratic way of expressing yourself than buying a subway ad. That's all.

I think you said before you were not from america, (and that is one of the things that makes this site interesting, we are speaking the same language yet the words do not have the same meaning), America does not have the tradition of writing political slogans on the walls of the cities that exists in europe or latin america. Most american graffiti is by definition vandalism, and considered a sign of neighborhood blight. In the cities its street gangsters tagging their territory, not folks expressing themselves. Even when the tag's get to the level of art, and they do, some are quite beautiful, it's heart stems from vandalism not from the heartfelt political expressions of the masses


edit: added street to the gangsters line, to specify the kind of gang i mean.

[Choronzon]

What's a "sensitive" distance away from ground zero for Muslims to gather? I wouldn't actually care if it was in the lobby but if I were trying to be fair, I think I'd say about two city blocks sounds right.

Whatever the victims familie think is appropriate.

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that we let other people determine where we can or cannot practice our beliefs provided everyone is following the law.

Take your Satanist bullshit a respectable distance away from Christians who are offended by your blasphemy. We'll just let said Christians decide where you can practice your beliefs.

No, sorry, thats one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

[Long Island Nation]

SInce when is calling Jihadists savages racist? Is radical Islam a race now?

[Sulamalik]

SInce when is calling Jihadists savages racist? Is radical Islam a race now?

The concept of Jihad is practised by nearly every Muslim.

And I wouldn't give the creator of this ad the intellectual credit of knowing the difference between a Muslim and an Arab person.