Islam and Christianity [SPLIT THREAD]

Welcome to UKHIppy2764@2x.png

UKHippy is a long running online community and of likeminded people exploring all interpretations on what it means to be living an alternative lifestyle -- we welcome discussions on everything related to sustainability, the environment, alternative spirituality, music, festivals, politics and more -- membership of this website is free but supported by the community.

  • Quote from magicmonkey

    I know that Islam gets it's fair share of greif but they at least have many spiritual aspects which justify it as a religion rather than the bunch of rich men trying to rip you off that christianity is.

    Discuss!



    What 'spiritual aspects' do you mean?

    reconsider what you have learned about life - choose to listen to nature's broadcast - the voice of earth....

  • Quote from Shaman

    What 'spiritual aspects' do you mean?


    Well it's a very broad-ranging religion in that respect, a whole spectrum of beliefs are there from the sufi's at the more spiritual end to the fundamentalists at the more 'social' end. To contrast that, christianity is a very two dimentional relegion with any off shoots exploring a more relegious interpretation branded as 'cults'.

  • Quote from magicmonkey

    Well it's a very broad-ranging religion in that respect, a whole spectrum of beliefs are there from the sufi's at the more spiritual end to the fundamentalists at the more 'social' end. To contrast that, christianity is a very two dimentional relegion with any off shoots exploring a more relegious interpretation branded as 'cults'.



    Ah ha. I thought maybe you meant stuff like punishment by mutilation, female circumcision, jihad etc.
    I question that there is a spectrum of beliefs in Islam. Mostly it's totally based on the koran. And on fear of hell and a vengeful god.The sufis are probably pre-islamic in origen, and are regarded by many orthodox muslims as elitists and even heretics.
    Christianity is certainly very limited too - but I really don't see Islam as in any way superior. Also, christianity has had its fangs pulled - western culture has moved beyond it. The pope etc are simply cultural conservatives trying to keep the past alive.

    reconsider what you have learned about life - choose to listen to nature's broadcast - the voice of earth....

  • Quote from Shaman

    Ah ha. I thought maybe you meant stuff like punishment by mutilation, female circumcision, jihad etc.
    I question that there is a spectrum of beliefs in Islam. Mostly it's totally based on the koran. And on fear of hell and a vengeful god.The sufis are probably pre-islamic in origen, and are regarded by many orthodox muslims as elitists and even heretics.


    There are the extreme ends of Islam which don't agree with each other yes, but my perception of Islam is that it is much more unified than Christianity in general although there are some aspects of it which the majority disagree with. Christianity though is like a shattered window pane lying around in pieces, there's far too much in-bred criticism between the branches for me to even consider it a single religion.


    As for the Sufis, they are pretty much an extreme as far as I know. My only real knowledge of them is through reading a few Indres Shah books and a little general knowledge so I'm not really much of an authority to talk on them in great detail but from what I've understood they're generally accepted by the majority of Islam.


    Quote from Shaman

    Christianity is certainly very limited too - but I really don't see Islam as in any way superior.


    I think that the reason for my seeing Islam as 'superior' (I'm using the word in it's loosest sense here:)) is the depth of belief among it's followers, that just doesn't exist in en-masse Christianity today and for a religion to be lacking in belief if for it to be lacking as a religion. I don't mean that the set of beliefs of either are better or worse than the other by this as I have no belief in either really.


    Quote from Shaman

    Also, christianity has had its fangs pulled - western culture has moved beyond it. The pope etc are simply cultural conservatives trying to keep the past alive.


    I agree with you entirely here and I’d even take it a step further to say that the cultural balance which has been sought by the church has been at the expense of it's followers, I'm not advocating fundamentalism here but merely pointing out that the church has always changed to accept as much power as it can get people to offer it or grovel to the people when it can no longer hold any real power. Unfortunately Christianity has also never allowed it's followers to explore spirituality before laying down the guidelines, even as very young children most people in the UK will have an awareness of the basic concepts of the church like heaven and hell etc. which to me reads more like brainwashing that true conviction on belief



    I'm going to split this off into another topic as we seem to be heading quite a bit off topic, hope you don't mid

  • When I looked at the other thread I thought i'd been deleted for a moment....:reddevil:

    The thing is that the unity of Islam and the depth of belief you mention are in my view negative factors for the world as a whole. When religions get too big and powerful they cause trouble, as is the case in to-day's world. I'd rather have a lot of disparate cults because none of them is likely to offer much of a real threat.
    Also, Islam lags behind the rest of the world - what is seen as perfectly acceptable in Islamic countries is considered human rights abuse in the west. It is becoming more and more politicized too, which is a very dangerous thing.

    I'm not advocating catholicism or any branch of christianity either - but the thing is that in most christian countries, power is in the hands of secular forces, thus laws etc are dictated by more rational factors, whilst in the case of Islam, religion and political power are increasingly one thing. Alternatively, as in the case of Saudi Arabia, the autocratic authorities use it as a very effective tool for the opression of their own people and a means of retaining power for themselves.That can only lead to stagnation of the socities, and in cases like Iran, a full blown police terror state.

    BTW -What I said about Sufis being regarded as elitist and heretical was actually told to me by an orthodox muslim.

    Just to add - I think that the problem is that the old religions like Islam and C/anity developed in a pre-scientific world, where really nothing was known about things like the stucture of the universe, causes of illness etc. They both believe more or less in a vengeful god who will throw people into hell if they don't follow what is said in their respective books, or reward them with heaven if they do.
    I think it is difficult for any modern rational human being to accept such a scheme, unless their lives are governed by a basic fear.

    Neither of them really offers much for today's world, and they can't really deal with the real problems we face because they are obsessed with irrelevant and even imaginary issues - such as 'does hell contain limbo'. This is all utterly irrelevant to the needs of the planet at this stage in our development. It belongs to an age of superstition and fear.

    And many of the extreme elements on both sides actually desire ardently 'the end of the the world'.
    So- I think they are in fact enemies of mankind who want to keep us all in a miserable medieval mindset which says the world is basically bad and evil, and our only hope is death.

    reconsider what you have learned about life - choose to listen to nature's broadcast - the voice of earth....

  • Quote from Shaman

    When I looked at the other thread I thought I’d been deleted for a moment....:reddevil:


    Sorry about that, I should have sent you a PM really :o

    Quote from Shaman

    The thing is that the unity of Islam and the depth of belief you mention are in my view negative factors for the world as a whole. When religions get too big and powerful they cause trouble, as is the case in to-day's world. I'd rather have a lot of disparate cults because none of them is likely to offer much of a real threat.
    Also, Islam lags behind the rest of the world - what is seen as perfectly acceptable in Islamic countries is considered human rights abuse in the west. It is becoming more and more politicized too, which is a very dangerous thing.



    From a ‘world’ point of view it’s a pretty negative thing, agreed. But at the same time, from the ‘religion’ point of view it’s exactly what they’re after. Probably the worlds biggest conflict of interests methinks! Which particular religious practices do you mean when you refer to human rights issues?


    Quote from Shaman

    I'm not advocating Catholicism or any branch of Christianity either - but the thing is that in most Christian countries, power is in the hands of secular forces, thus laws etc are dictated by more rational factors, whilst in the case of Islam, religion and political power are increasingly one thing. Alternatively, as in the case of Saudi Arabia, the autocratic authorities use it as a very effective tool for the oppression of their own people and a means of retaining power for themselves. That can only lead to stagnation of the societies, and in cases like Iran, a full blown police terror state.


    Christianity has also had it’s age of dictating the law, they’re not there at the moment but there were some pretty dark times when they did, particularly in countries with low general wealth like Russia for example. The point being that it's possible that Islam will follow a similar path in decades/centuries to come and evolve into a religion which in possibly better for the world but worse for the religion itself. That's pure speculation though ;)

    Quote from Shaman

    Just to add - I think that the problem is that the old religions like Islam and C/anity developed in a pre-scientific world, where really nothing was known about things like the structure of the universe, causes of illness etc. They both believe more or less in a vengeful god who will throw people into hell if they don't follow what is said in their respective books, or reward them with heaven if they do.
    I think it is difficult for any modern rational human being to accept such a scheme, unless their lives are governed by a basic fear.



    I've heard the pre-scientific argument a few times before and I think it's a load of bull, there are other pre-'golden age' religions which have come through without the desire to control the world and the ridiculous need to have everyone be part of their 'gang' and no one else’s (I'm trying to think of a word here, begins with 'e' but I've completely forgotten it!). I do think you've hit the nail on the head with the whole heaven/hell thing; sure there are other religions which use this but none so much as the two most warmongering religions known to man!

    Quote from Shaman

    Neither of them really offers much for today's world, and they can't really deal with the real problems we face because they are obsessed with irrelevant and even imaginary issues - such as 'does hell contain limbo'. This is all utterly irrelevant to the needs of the planet at this stage in our development. It belongs to an age of superstition and fear.



    I’m in two minds about this really. I mean, you could argue that religion brings the 'light of wonder' or whatever into people lives which I think is a great thing, possibly a bit 'brain washy' but great none the less. However, I don't think this is the case for the majority of believers, in fact, I've seen more believers who see their religion as a chore than as a blessing.

    As for religion and it's relevance to today’s world, I think there is still some, not much but a bit. I think it's true to say that most people brought up in this country have had a 'moral code' which holds its roots in Christianity, all the 'thou shalt not' etc. but beyond that I see religion as something set to fade away (not for a long time though) in favour of personal belief systems, but that's probably just wishful thinking on my part.


    Sorry this is a bit disjointed, I wrote half at work and half at home...

  • Quote from magicmonkey


    From a ‘world’ point of view it’s a pretty negative thing, agreed. But at the same time, from the ‘religion’ point of view it’s exactly what they’re after. Probably the worlds biggest conflict of interests methinks! Which particular religious practices do you mean when you refer to human rights issues?



    I mean things like the status of women in general, inhumane punishments, attitudes to gays and other religions.
    You could say none of that is spiritual, and I'd agree - but the fact is it is in the Koran, and in many Islamic countries, it is thought that failure to execute Islamic law would be displeasing to Allah.
    I could give many instances of abuses which are due to Islam, from the stoning of adulteresses in Iran to amputations of limbs in Saudi Arabia.


    Quote


    Christianity has also had it’s age of dictating the law, they’re not there at the moment but there were some pretty dark times when they did, particularly in countries with low general wealth like Russia for example. The point being that it's possible that Islam will follow a similar path in decades/centuries to come and evolve into a religion which in possibly better for the world but worse for the religion itself. That's pure speculation though ;)



    I'm not so sure that Islam has any potential to evolve. In fact, I don't think any of the western religions has much place in a harmonious future, because they are based on too narrow a cultural take on reality.
    I should add too that I think potentially American style fundamentalist christianity is just as much of a threat, and I've seen a US fundie interviewd on TV by Richard Dorking say he's support death for adultery in the case of women.

    Quote


    I've heard the pre-scientific argument a few times before and I think it's a load of bull, there are other pre-'golden age' religions which have come through without the desire to control the world and the ridiculous need to have everyone be part of their 'gang' and no one else’s (I'm trying to think of a word here, begins with 'e' but I've completely forgotten it!). I do think you've hit the nail on the head with the whole heaven/hell thing; sure there are other religions which use this but none so much as the two most warmongering religions known to man!


    In the renaissance and after, in the west, it was really science that broke the church's monopoly.
    But to move onto your other point here, I guess you mean religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism
    But the whole psychology of the founders of these religions was totally different from that of the founders of Islam and C/anity.
    They are less dogmatic, they are focused more on personal development and enlightenment than so called 'salvation from sin'. Generally, they don't believe in heaven and hell in the same way western religions do. They are alos more into concepts such as harmony with nature and compassion for all beings.
    This is in marked contradistinction to both Islam and C/anity.
    Particularly in the case of Islam, it could only be imposed even on the prophet's own tribe by means of warfare. Various Hadith record sayings of his which encourage martyrdom in the Jihad to spread Islam. He himself took part in the execution of un-armed prisoners, and married Aisha when she was only 9 years old.
    In Islam as in C/anity, you get only one bite at the apple. One life followed by an eternity of reward or punishment dependent on if you believe. Eastern spirituality speaks of the evolution of the soul through many lives. And generally, it hasn't been spread by force.

    Quote


    I’m in two minds about this really. I mean, you could argue that religion brings the 'light of wonder' or whatever into people lives which I think is a great thing, possibly a bit 'brain washy' but great none the less. However, I don't think this is the case for the majority of believers, in fact, I've seen more believers who see their religion as a chore than as a blessing.



    I don't share your faith in the capacity of western religion to instil a sense of wonder. The universe of the fundie christian for instance is only 6,000 years old and really, very tiny. To me, it all looks a bit dim and grey. Reality is far more wonderful than medieval fantasy.
    In terms of spiritual experiences - I don't think the spiritual experience of most mainstream religious people is anything very special at all. Mainly, it seems to me like emotionalism, and often it can lead to attitudes that actually disempower people from full participation in life.



    Quote


    As for religion and it's relevance to today’s world, I think there is still some, not much but a bit. I think it's true to say that most people brought up in this country have had a 'moral code' which holds its roots in Christianity, all the 'thou shalt not' etc. but beyond that I see religion as something set to fade away (not for a long time though) in favour of personal belief systems, but that's probably just wishful thinking on my part.
    Sorry this is a bit disjointed, I wrote half at work and half at home...



    I hope you are right. And I agree, morals etc were at one time dictated by religion, but less so to-day. My objection is as I said before - it is mainly a morality based on fear. Perhaps it's true to say it all had its place in history, but IMO in a bygone era.
    As we determine more and more as a spieces about the true nature of the universe, I think our need to believe in a mono-theistic creator god who is also the source of our morals will dissappear. If we can gradually establish fairer conditions, and a better life for all the world's population, as I beleive could be done, people may simply loose interest in the old religions - as they seem to have already done effectively in this country. The religious are in a minority here these days.
    And of course, the morals of trad religions have been flawed, and secular culture has had to embrace new values, as in the case of gays.
    I think each one has to determine their own morals. The spiritual seems to me more to do with being than morality.
    If the state is going to adopt a moral stance, it should be to protect freedom, not to impose some outmoded religious code.

    reconsider what you have learned about life - choose to listen to nature's broadcast - the voice of earth....

  • Quote from Shaman

    I mean things like the status of women in general, inhumane punishments, attitudes to gays and other religions.
    You could say none of that is spiritual, and I'd agree - but the fact is it is in the Koran, and in many Islamic countries, it is thought that failure to execute Islamic law would be displeasing to Allah.
    I could give many instances of abuses which are due to Islam, from the stoning of adulteresses in Iran to amputations of limbs in Saudi Arabia.



    I'm not so sure that Islam has any potential to evolve. In fact, I don't think any of the western religions has much place in a harmonious future, because they are based on too narrow a cultural take on reality. I should add too that I think potentially American style fundamentalist christianity is just as much of a threat, and I've seen a US fundie interviewd on TV by Richard Dorking say he's support death for adultery in the case of women.



    I think it’s the ability of Islam to evolve which will ultimately dictate the continuation of the inhumanity (few too many long words in that sentence for my liking!). Should they evolve then I’m sure it will become more peaceful and eventually slip away into the background, much as Christianity is doing at the moment but there does always exist the possibility of it going the other way or even just staying as it is, I’m a hopeless optimist (as I’m sure you’ve guessed!) so my bet is on evolution rather than devolution. I don’t see staying the same as much of an option really, there are too many specific pressures in our current world influencing this and they can’t be sustained indefinitely (although that’s a whole new topic on it’s own)


    As for the American fundamentalism, I don’t see it lasting much past the Bush administration and I really hope I’m right, it’s possibly the most damaging situation in current affairs, far worse that Korea getting a nuke!





    I agree with you entirely here, it’s hardly surprising that beliefs born in times of violence and despair with our humanity carry great amounts of that with them, it is a terrible shame though.

    Quote from Shaman

    I don't share your faith in the capacity of western religion to instil a sense of wonder. The universe of the fundie christian for instance is only 6,000 years old and really, very tiny. To me, it all looks a bit dim and grey. Reality is far more wonderful than medieval fantasy.
    In terms of spiritual experiences - I don't think the spiritual experience of most mainstream religious people is anything very special at all. Mainly, it seems to me like emotionalism, and often it can lead to attitudes that actually disempower people from full participation in life. .



    Emphasis added…


    I think you’ve got a very good point here, my ex was very Christian and always found a way to belittle the people she was trying to help (terms like ‘oh he/she/it’s sooooo cuoote, I just want to hug him, ahhhhh’ whilst talking about the homeless shelter she was working in!). don’t get me wrong, I think there are still people out there who have genuine religious experiences from all religions and all walks of life, I also think it has very little to do with the actual religion itself, I see the attachment of the experience to a religion as an attempt to understand something that has happened to them.



    Quote from Shaman

    I hope you are right. And I agree, morals etc were at one time dictated by religion, but less so to-day. My objection is as I said before - it is mainly a morality based on fear. Perhaps it's true to say it all had its place in history, but IMO in a bygone era.
    As we determine more and more as a spieces about the true nature of the universe, I think our need to believe in a mono-theistic creator god who is also the source of our morals will dissappear. If we can gradually establish fairer conditions, and a better life for all the world's population, as I beleive could be done, people may simply loose interest in the old religions - as they seem to have already done effectively in this country. The religious are in a minority here these days.
    And of course, the morals of trad religions have been flawed, and secular culture has had to embrace new values, as in the case of gays.
    I think each one has to determine their own morals. The spiritual seems to me more to do with being than morality.
    If the state is going to adopt a moral stance, it should be to protect freedom, not to impose some outmoded religious code.



    Morality based of fear is still the main way of teaching discipline in the west (I have no idea about the east I’m afraid, never lived there), if you’re in a supermarket and a kid starts screaming you’ll probably see and example of this in action (don’t do that or you’ll get no pudding, this is going to hurt me more that it’s going to hurt you etc. we’ve all heard these phrases at many points in our childhood). I think that my point was really that this is a part of the teachings Christianity has passed down to us through our culture rather than through religion and is therefore almost impossible to remove or even separate the two completely.


    I suppose my general view on religion currently is that it’s a shambles but I have high hopes for it tailing off in the next few centuries!

  • All monotheist religions are basicly the same but interpreted slightly differently Jewish, christian, muslim, rasterfarians all belive in god, allah, jaa, gaia. Its all basicly the same so why can't they settle there differences. I personaly dont belive there is one god. but there are bits of most religions i like such as the 10 commandments in christianity.

  • I think you guys will find, if you look, that religion encompasses a LOT more than you think...and that so long as there is law and order, and the call for it, to make the world safe and secure, then there will be "Religion".....:whistle:

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Coyote

    I think you guys will find, if you look, that religion encompasses a LOT more than you think...and that so long as there is law and order, and the call for it, to make the world safe and secure, then there will be "Religion".....:whistle:


    Psst, Coyote, ever noticed that there is more than one definition of "religion" in your dictionary? Most people don't use it as such a blanket term in the way that you do. ;)

  • Quote from Darkflame

    Psst, Coyote, ever noticed that there is more than one definition of "religion" in your dictionary? Most people don't use it as such a blanket term in the way that you do. ;)


    There are indeed....and most of them are woefully inadequate (as we rapidly discovered in the "Introduction to Religious Studies" module :harhar::reddevil: ). But if you look at what they are actually used for then you start to see a "definition" that isnt as hobbled as trying to fit one around "beliefs" and "gods" and "rituals" :D

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Coyote

    most of them are woefully inadequate

    No disagreement there. However, I suspect that when you make claims like those above, without people knowing your commonly used definition, there is a lot of room for misinterpretation. That could be why you get into so many arguments on the subject and end up reduced to quoting dictionary definitions to defend your argument. Just a thought ;)

  • Quote from Darkflame

    No disagreement there. However, I suspect that when you make claims like those above, without people knowing your commonly used definition, there is a lot of room for misinterpretation. That could be why you get into so many arguments on the subject and end up reduced to quoting dictionary definitions to defend your argument. Just a thought ;)


    Sadly, there's not a lot I can do about that, as the standard state of education on religion in this country is dreadful :( so you end up with the same hackneyed definitions being bandied around that actually are little more than a smokescreen for some flavours of religion to be used to get one up on other flavours.


    So you end up with people sounding off against "Religion" whilst advocating a different flavour of religion without realising they are trying to do exactly the same things, at root, as the flavour of religion they are slating. :insane:


    I dont know whether to :madlol: :cry: :rolleyes: or :smartass: :D

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Maybe it'd be more accurate to use the term "meme" to instead of your definition of religion? I suspect that fewer people would have a clue what you were on about but at least they'd go look it up and the standard definition of religion does, as far as I can tell, fall under the definition of a meme.


    **Could a mod split this as we've now snuck rather OT**

  • Quote from Darkflame

    Maybe it'd be more accurate to use the term "meme" to instead of your definition of religion? I suspect that fewer people would have a clue what you were on about but at least they'd go look it up and the standard definition of religion does, as far as I can tell, fall under the definition of a meme.


    **Could a mod split this as we've now snuck rather OT**


    You could possibly use the term "meme" instead of 'Daemon' but not instead of religion; because the latter is an activity (of imposing a highly insulating and binding order on the inherently very "loose" and "intimate"/"exposed" universe, in accord with the meme/daemon/"god"), not simply a coalesced thought entity.... :D

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Darkflame


    **Could a mod split this as we've now snuck rather OT**


    I was wondering that, but they did stray off the christy/islam stuff into general relgion first :whistle: :D

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Coyote

    You could possibly use the term "meme" instead of 'Daemon' but not instead of religion; because the latter is an activity (of imposing a highly insulating and binding order on the inherently very "loose" and "intimate"/"exposed" universe, in accord with the meme/daemon/"god"), not simply a coalesced thought entity.... :D


    Surely though the religion can be seen as the personification/embodiment of the will of the "god" so religion can be seen as a meme as it spreads and acts in much the same way?

  • Quote from Darkflame

    Surely though the religion can be seen as the personification/embodiment of the will of the "god" so religion can be seen as a meme as it spreads and acts in much the same way?



    Substitute the word God for the word Man and you'll have got religion about right.:whistle:

  • Quote from the gardener

    Substitute the word God for the word Man and you'll have got religion about right.:whistle:


    That's not necessarily strictly true....:whistle:

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from the gardener

    then that must mean "that is un-necessarily loosely false":whistle:


    :D:harhar:

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • as a druid and 3rd degree witch i have always been i dont care what religion younare i will always be great with you
    then last week i saw the crap we as the alternative religions get given and and a lovely lady i know went to a meeting with the liverpool multi faith council and we tried to give a presentation and we got half way through and were harrnaged with questiions on faith diety and other there was one man that was a complete arogent bastard and wouldnt let my friend speak the fact that dr khan is muslim may have something on it women are 2nd class citerzens etc
    we tried to speak and i told them that there is more faith in my little finger than in the whole bunch of gob shites so i know if we are let on it then we will shake there world with the real truth about pagans if not themn bollocks to them (sorry to swear guys) :gaf: :rtfm:

  • I'm not greatly keen on the muslim religion....or christianity for that matter but i want to talk about the muslim one as the other one has been done to death (mostly by atomik ranting over 26 pages :p )
    I've been questioning why i don't like it and it's fundamentaly come down to the sexist view that women are second class citizens. At least thats what i thought, but i don't really know that much about it so i could be totally wrong. Which means this post is going to be a lot of speculation and questioning. Is the religion itself sexist or is it more to do with the countries in which it is the main religion? Is it just the way that the religion has been interpreted by some controling self interested men? Are the veils an infringement on the womans right to wear what she wants when she goes out, or a sensible idea that stems from concerned family telling their daughters to cover up as the more revealing they are the more unwanted attention they are likely to get from unsavoury men? Is it true that all muslims think that theirs is the only religion and all others must be wiped out or is it just extremists misenterpreting for their own ends. I'm quite overwhelmed with just how much i don't know for sure to be honest.

  • Quote from Hedgewitch

    Is it true that all muslims think that theirs is the only religion and all others must be wiped out or is it just extremists misenterpreting for their own ends.



    one of my best friends at school was a muslim and that wasn't true for her or anyone she knew (well, that's what she said at least!) maybe it's different living in the east, but i think in the west and esp. in areas where there's a mix of religion everyone's is accepting of everyone else.
    one guy i spoke to in new york, said islam taught that all religions were the same with the same God under a different name. I dunno the accuracy of that though, I've never studied it in depth!!

    But when it comes to women being '2nd class citizens' then that seems to be true. my friend didn't get any say in her future - she wasn't allowed to go to uni, whereas her brothers were. she had a female cousin who fell in love with an English (white) guy and was completely disowned from her entire family... but it might be cultural rather than 'cause of the religion

    we reenact Noah's ancient drama, but in reverse, like a film running backwards, the animals exiting

  • In my experience, the people in the middle east are pretty much the same as people in the west. You get those who don't care about religion but celebrate the festivals, you get those who care about their religion but don't make an issue of it and then you get the extremists who want everyone to live under religious law ... The main difference is that the extremists in the east tend to have a much bigger say in the way people run their lives.

  • Quote from Paul

    In my experience, the people in the middle east are pretty much the same as people in the west.


    hear hear! It's people that are the problem, not the labels they choose to justify their lack of humanity with in my eyes.