Amazon.com Widgets

Sunday, April 27, 2008

In the NY Times, Barry Gewen describes the similarities and the differences between "Muslim Rebel Sisters" Hirsi Ali and Irshad Manji:

Both Ms. Hirsi Ali and Ms. Manji come from non-Arab Muslim backgrounds. By itself, this may be one reason for their opposition to Islamic orthodoxy, which they see as inherently Arab, or Arab-dominated. Ms. Hirsi Ali was born in 1969 in Somalia, and lived in Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia and Kenya before fleeing to the Netherlands when she was 22 to avoid an arranged marriage. When her family was in Saudi Arabia, she remembers her father's complaining that the Saudis had perverted the true Islam. "He hated Saudi judges and Saudi law," she writes. "He thought it was all barbaric, all Arab desert culture."

Ms. Manji was born in 1968 in Uganda, but her family, part Egyptian and part Indian, moved to Canada when she was 4 to escape Idi Amin. She is even more insistent than Ms. Hirsi Ali in drawing a distinction between Islam and Arab tribal culture, its "dictatorship from the desert." Who elected the Saudi monarch "to be Islam's steward?" she asks. "We're not in the Saudi sand dunes anymore."

Ms. Manji has a broader and more flexible idea than Ms. Hirsi Ali of what Islam is and can be. Ms. Hirsi Ali says, "Saudi Arabia is the source of Islam and its quintessence." Ms. Manji, on the other hand, is convinced that her religion can escape what she sees as its Arab domination. "We need a take-no-prisoners debate about Saudi Arabia, a cauldron of duplicity." ...

...No element more thoroughly informs the work of both women than feminism; its influence on their thinking can hardly be overstated, and in this sense they might be considered crown jewels in the history of the modern women's movement. Yet because they are risking their lives for their beliefs -- constantly, every day -- they may have more in common with antitotalitarian dissidents like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn than with Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan. As feminists, Ms. Hirsi Ali and Ms. Manji are demanding more than equality; they are very self-consciously challenging the foundations of an entire way of life....

...Clearly, this is a debate of importance not only to Muslims but to non-Muslims as well, and for a Westerner listening in, the best way to understand it may be to translate it into the language of European history. Irshad Manji sees herself as moving Islam into the 16th century; Ayaan Hirsi Ali wants to move it into the 18th. It's as if Luther and Voltaire were living at the same time.

Comparing these brave women to Luther and Voltaire is more appropriate than comparing them to Steinem and Friedan. This is definitely an article worth reading.

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Feminists who do speak out against oppression.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.solomonia.com/cgi-bin/mt4/mt-renamedtb.cgi/14623

In the NY Times, Barry Gewen describes the similarities and the differences between "Muslim Rebel Sisters" Hirsi Ali and Irshad...

Read More

7 Comments

Comparing these brave women to Luther and Voltaire is more appropriate than comparing them to Steinem and Friedan. This is definitely an article worth reading.

true, except for the fact that voltaire and luther passionately hated jews.

Well, then I guess the comparison doesn't work so well, since Ali and Manji aren't anti-Semitic.

they are comedians.

can I call christianity as the main reason for the decline of the roman empire after it embarrassed christianity


or europian 10 centuries decline due to christianity.

or can we say that japan polytheist religoen is the reason for its rise in the last century, and say its better than other religons. or is it reliegon is the reason of decline only .

making religoen as the main source of decline is easy. infact its the easiest way to explain things. although some people say aging of empires and countries.....ext, but making relioegon the sole purpose is the easist, and that is the tactic of da..pi.. and others that follow his strategy.

back to the to ladies.

Ms. Hirsi Ali says that islam is the main source for 9/11

she contradicts herself, although now she may say that muslems are orderd to kill all non-beilevers and call them infedals.
we will surely see her tommorow crying that dhimmi laws are not fair.

now who contradicts hisself?
where islam is the only religon on earth that accepts others, and the verses in the quran about killing infedals were directed certain people not a generaliaztion.


Ms. Manji
whants a reformist in islam like luther to catholics.
is islam in need for reforms? the answer is no, islam has no reason to reform since it never contradicts with rationality, reforms are needed in govermental issues, and thats way most elections end up electing islamist parties,
and if those parties didnt abide by their promises then its their problem not the problem of islam.

in the end I would like to say that making realtions between the backwardness in some countries to islam is easy, but can anyone rational make the true realtion between the rise of the arabs due to embrassing islam and directly after embrassing islam in all fields of sciens and philosophy and engineering and translations....?
and this is not the field of counting them but a starter would be dante divine comedy, which he stole from islamic litriture, percisley from ibn arabi.

the field is very large to talk about, but I would say that any reform to the scripture of islam is and will be foreever a taboo . because we beilieve in its diventy, its not our problem that others dont bielieve in its divenity, or their religons divinety.


reforms on other fields is the key to making islamic countries rise economically at least not islam.

for example egypt, a seculer country, islam is said to be the reason,
syria a seculer country, islam is said to be the reason, lebanon the same,

but saudia withc has a high GDP according to other countries in the reigon islam is not said to be the reason for its being well off though its the only country applying shariee.... what a contradiction.

good bye

Arabian says:

"islam has no reason to reform since it never contradicts with rationality,"

I have a few questions:

Why is rational for women to be forced to cove thenselves from head to toe, cover their faces, and not as protection from the cold but from men's eyes?

Why is it rational for a Muslim man to marry many wives but a muslim woman cannot marry many men (simultaneously)?

Why is it rational to call Jews sons of apes and pigs and then claim that Islam is "the only religon on earth that accepts others"?

Why is it rational to insult other religions but get all exercised when your prophet is insulted?

Why is it rational to stone adulterous women, hang homosexuals and cut a person's arm because of stealing? Has the absence of an arm ever stopped anyone from stealing if he wanted to?

arabian - Both Ali and Manji focus on the fact that Saudi influence has a malign effect on the religion of Islam. They do this because they're both intelligent women.

Putting the Saudis in charge of Mecca and Medina was the worst mistake the British ever made. It was the moral and tactical equivalent of putting Nazis in charge of the Vatican.

but saudia withc has a high GDP according to other countries in the reigon islam is not said to be the reason for its being well off though its the only country applying shariee.... what a contradiction.

This Saudi saying...

My grandfather rode a camel. My father rode in a car. I fly a jet airplane. My grandson will ride a camel."

..was very prophetic.

"arabian - Both Ali and Manji focus on the fact that Saudi influence has a malign effect on the religion of Islam. They do this because they're both intelligent women."

Ok.....Iam not that stuiped to not understand what they are taking about. they dont want islam to be practiced in saudia or they want it tailored to their desires of lesbiansim or .....

I explaind already that islam is not the reason, if there are wrong things its in the dectatorships....repeat again, egypt is a seculer country and its 50 years behind saudia, which is a sharie practicing country. but there are people that dont want to understand things in their right way.

secondly if this type of writing is not new its repeated all the time and the aims are the same although the ways of presenting the thoughts differ.


Putting the Saudis in charge of Mecca and Medina was the worst mistake the British ever made. It was the moral and tactical equivalent of putting Nazis in charge of the Vatican.

Go read history before bluffing false information, advise you to read post-colonization books and see where were british protectorates and protected states, and mecca was under who. I asure you mecca came by the will of ibn saud only.
I think there is a bigger mistake done by the british in the middle east.

"but saudia withc has a high GDP according to other countries in the reigon islam is not said to be the reason for its being well off though its the only country applying shariee.... what a contradiction.

This Saudi saying...

My grandfather rode a camel. My father rode in a car. I fly a jet airplane. My grandson will ride a camel."
"
..was very prophetic.


Good bye

Arabian says:

"islam has no reason to reform since it never contradicts with rationality,"

I have a few questions:

Why is rational for women to be forced to cove thenselves from head to toe, cover their faces, and not as protection from the cold but from men's eyes?

Why is it rational for a Muslim man to marry many wives but a muslim woman cannot marry many men (simultaneously)?

Why is it rational to call Jews sons of apes and pigs and then claim that Islam is "the only religon on earth that accepts others"?

Why is it rational to insult other religions but get all exercised when your prophet is insulted?

Why is it rational to stone adulterous women, hang homosexuals and cut a person's arm because of stealing? Has the absence of an arm ever stopped anyone from stealing if he wanted to?


this type of questions Idont like to answer really.

1) because I assume you have the answers or googling can solve everything
2) even if I answerd in the religous content of islam, their will be questioned raised on the accuracy of the text, divinity, truth, ....... unless we both believe that it is accurate to site from,(islam and quran).
3) all in all these type of questions are problematic.

I will just answer the first wich is always raised question.

there is a verse that says a group of jewish people went fishing on a day that they are not allowed to work, so god turned them to apes.
those were a group of men only, and they died.

its not allowed to call all jews by this nameing)sons of apes and pigs)
its just done by people that are attacked by israel as a way to express anger, although its not allowed.


good bye.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Search


Archives
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]