Islam, Qur'an and liberation of slaves

[Matr]

brian2009 wrote:

<quoted text>blackbolt...in defense to the last poster you were conversing with. slavery in the moslem world was not entirely race base like in the americas, like she mentioned before you had european slaves as well. african kings in west africa both muslims and pagans had their share of slaves and concubines. in fact, west african muslim kings had slaves of various different races and nationalities. it had been reported by muslim writers in the middle ages, that one of the african muslims kings had many turkish and syrian women part of his harem. should we not blame them as well! it seems that you are awfully one-sided. as mentioned before slavey in the moslem world was not entirely race, as in the americas.

Will you condemm slavery as an evil? Will you condemm all slavers?

[jayrag]

brian2009 wrote:

<quoted text>lets not go bashing other religions. remember christianity was practiced in egypt, sudan, ethiopia and eritea before many european nations. in fact some egypt, and nearly the majority of ethiopian and eritea are still orthodox christians, my mother happen to be a part of the ethiopian orthodox. christianity in the nile valley was practiced way before islam. if you go to the sudanese national musem, you will see many christian painting of the second floor of the musem. which give you an indication that northern sudan was christian at first and then later change to islam around the 15th century. remember the sudanese christian kingdoms f makuria, and alwa.

North and East Africa had Christians before most of Europe. The Mid East had Christians long before Europe.

When Rome became Christian and then all of Europe....this totally changed Christianity.
Look at Christians, Jews and Muslims and people of other Religions who live in North Africa and Mid East.
If you didn't know who was who, you couldn't tell who practiced which religion.

[brian2009]

Matr wrote:

<quoted text>
Will you condemm slavery as an evil? Will you condemm all slavers?

forcing someone to become a slave is indeed a heinus act, and i don't condone it. however, not all forms of slavery was bad. For instance, in the past like now some people might fall on hard times and are unablee to pay their debts and are struggling to make ends meet. in the past those indivduals were willing to sell themselves temporiary to slavery until they are able to support themselves again. that form of slavery is similar to temporiary indenture serivantude.

[brian2009]

Matr wrote:

<quoted text>
Will you condemm slavery as an evil? Will you condemm all slavers?

who should we point to finger on in reference to slavery.\
european enslaved fellow europeans.
africans enslaved fellow africans
midddle easterner enslaved other middle easterners
indians enslaved indians
europeans enslave africans, as well as native americans
african muslim enslaved other africans as well few arabs, and few european women part of their harems
arabs, enslaved whites,africans, asian, the list is endless
aztecs indians in the americas enslaved other indians.\
who should we blame?

[jayrag]

brian2009 wrote:

<quoted text>forcing someone to become a slave is indeed a heinus act, and i don't condone it. however, not all forms of slavery was bad. For instance, in the past like now some people might fall on hard times and are unablee to pay their debts and are struggling to make ends meet. in the past those indivduals were willing to sell themselves temporiary to slavery until they are able to support themselves again. that form of slavery is similar to temporiary indenture serivantude.

The worst form of slavery was the type that happened in America. Where you had people of a different race who became slaves to another race. And the slavery was for a lifetime and the children were also enslaved.

In Africa and Mid east all races of people were enslaved by Africans and Arabs and they enslaved their own people also . But this slavery was a lot less destructive than the type that happened in america. In the Arab World and Africa you can seldom tell who were descendants of slaves and who was enslaver.

[blackbolt]

brian2009 wrote:

<quoted text>who should we point to finger on in reference to slavery.\
european enslaved fellow europeans.
africans enslaved fellow africans
midddle easterner enslaved other middle easterners
indians enslaved indians
europeans enslave africans, as well as native americans
african muslim enslaved other africans as well few arabs, and few european women part of their harems
arabs, enslaved whites,africans, asian, the list is endless
aztecs indians in the americas enslaved other indians.\
who should we blame?

My point is that the fact that there were different races and ethnicites each of whom who practiced slavery is an indictment of Islam.

Apparently the actual living practice of Islam has repeatedly managed to manifest itself amongst different peoples in such a way as NOT to function as a bar to their practicing slavery.

A religion worth a damn-to the extent that there is such a thing- WOULD have worked to act as a virtual bar to slavery.
(BTW..I have the EXACT same problem with Xtianity on this very point)

Muslims can't have it both ways...

Claiming that adopting Islam will enhance,strengthen and promote healthy growth of the basic moral fabric of a community and yet
refusing to acknowledge the blatant lack of the most elementary elements of moral fiber---e.g. FGM,slavery,vicious murderous internecine strife between muslin sects,abuse of women,concentration of wealth-----in societies that HAVE adopted Islam..

Far,far too many contradictions between elegantly phrased Quran/Hadith rhetoric and...

...REALITY

[Knottie]

jayrag wrote:

<quoted text>
The worst form of slavery was the type that happened in America. Where you had people of a different race who became slaves to another race. And the slavery was for a lifetime and the children were also enslaved.
In Africa and Mid east all races of people were enslaved by Africans and Arabs and they enslaved their own people also . But this slavery was a lot less destructive than the type that happened in america. In the Arab World and Africa you can seldom tell who were descendants of slaves and who was enslaver.

"In the Arab World and Africa you can seldom tell who were descendants of slaves and who was enslaver."

The Arabs Castrated The Black Male Slaves And Killed All Of The Black Slave Babies. Resulting In There Not Being Any Descendants, Which Is Probably Why You..."Can't Tell" Who They Are.

[Matr]

brian2009 wrote:

<quoted text>forcing someone to become a slave is indeed a heinus act, and i don't condone it. however, not all forms of slavery was bad. For instance, in the past like now some people might fall on hard times and are unablee to pay their debts and are struggling to make ends meet. in the past those indivduals were willing to sell themselves temporiary to slavery until they are able to support themselves again. that form of slavery is similar to temporiary indenture serivantude.

Temporay slavery is a contration.
You condemm all slavery even when the enslaved is a non-moslem?

[Matr]

brian2009 wrote:

<quoted text>who should we point to finger on in reference to slavery.\
european enslaved fellow europeans.
africans enslaved fellow africans
midddle easterner enslaved other middle easterners
indians enslaved indians
europeans enslave africans, as well as native americans
african muslim enslaved other africans as well few arabs, and few european women part of their harems
arabs, enslaved whites,africans, asian, the list is endless
aztecs indians in the americas enslaved other indians.\
who should we blame?

We should blame all who will not condemm it. Will you condemm all enslavers ? I do.

[Roger Length]

jayrag wrote:

<quoted text>
The worst form of slavery was the type that happened in America. Where you had people of a different race who became slaves to another race. And the slavery was for a lifetime and the children were also enslaved.
In Africa and Mid east all races of people were enslaved by Africans and Arabs and they enslaved their own people also . But this slavery was a lot less destructive than the type that happened in america. In the Arab World and Africa you can seldom tell who were descendants of slaves and who was enslaver.

Arab slavery 'less destructive'? Depopulating Central Africa wasn't destructive? Raping African women and killing African mean wasn't destructive? Leave the stupid propaganda behind and open your eyes.

[Malcolm]

Knottie wrote:

<quoted text>"In the Arab World and Africa you can seldom tell who were descendants of slaves and who was enslaver."
The Arabs Castrated The Black Male Slaves And Killed All Of The Black Slave Babies. Resulting In There Not Being Any Descendants, Which Is Probably Why You..."Can't Tell" Who They Are.

Would you like to explain how 130 million or even a few million Black men were captured and taken into the middle east without guns and castrated without a fight?

What were these men brought into the country for, we know that in the Americas there was a great demand for field labor, but in the Middle East their are deserts, so the majority of laborers would be house servants which is more a female role.

Would would so many millions of Black Africans serve as? And why is it that we have so many records of rebellions even whole islands like Haiti being taken over by slaves despite Napoleon's heavy weapons, but the Arabs were able to invade the jungles, and high grasslands of Africa hold it and at the same time take slaves without a fight.

I thought people were smarter than that, we all know that many arabs had a slave trade but it was small by comparison to that of the trans atlantic slave trade, and it was only possible for the same reasons that the europeans traded in african slaves and that is the cooperation of the indigenous people.

The population of Saudi Arabia in 1937 was estimated at 5 million people, the current population is 20 million and Iraq 30 million. So how did the Arabs bring 30 million Blacks into the Middle East at a time when their own populations would have been much smaller, some say even 130-140 million Black Africans, this figure is way off the charts ridiculous even 30 million is ridiculous.

[Malcolm]

brian2009 wrote:

<quoted text>blackbolt...in defense to the last poster you were conversing with. slavery in the moslem world was not entirely race base like in the americas, like she mentioned before you had european slaves as well. african kings in west africa both muslims and pagans had their share of slaves and concubines. in fact, west african muslim kings had slaves of various different races and nationalities. it had been reported by muslim writers in the middle ages, that one of the african muslims kings had many turkish and syrian women part of his harem. should we not blame them as well! it seems that you are awfully one-sided. as mentioned before slavey in the moslem world was not entirely race, as in the americas.

Both the Kings of Ghana and Mali had Arabo-berber slaves because it was traditional with African monarchs both muslim and non muslim to demand servants from those whom they governed, those of us who know Africa know that Mali and some of the of countries in the interior of West Africa have large arab/berber populations but they are still minorities amongst the Blacks, these arab-berbers served in various forms some were slaves, and some served in the armies of the kings.

The best source I've found for this is 'pre-colonial black africa' written by Cheikh Anta Diop

[Malcolm]

_Skittles_ wrote:

<quoted text>
I disagree. I think that Christianity is the only way to go.

That's what they told the Mexicans, and look at what's going on there, 16 homicides a day in Mexico city alone.

They were more civilized as pagans.

[Malcolm]

_Skittles_ wrote:

<quoted text>
It doesn't say in the Holy Bible. Where did you get that from? Here are a few verses on every race being accepted into Christianity and going to heaven:
Revelation 7:9-10
"After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from EVERY NATION, TRIBE, PEOPLE AND LANGUAGE, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb."
1 Sam. 16:7
But the Lord said to Samuel, "Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The Lord does not look at the things man looks at. Man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart"
Leviticus 24:22
"You are to have the same law for the alien and the native-born. I am Lord your God."
Amos 9:7
"Are not you Israelites the same to me as the Cushites?"
1 John 2:2
"He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the WHOLE world"
These are just a few of examples.
H

"No one born out of wedlock may be included among the Lord's people" Dueteronomy 23:2

Well that's 7 out of 10 African Americans out of luck, but in Islam all are born Muslims, but the parents lead them astray.

"There is no God in all the earth, but in Israel." 2 Kings 5:15

"Praise be to Allah the Lord of all the worlds." Holy Qur'an 1:2

"We ourselves, who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners." Galatians 2:15

"O mankind, verily, We have created you from a male and female and made you into peoples and tribes to know each other. Verily, the most noble of you is the most God-fearing and Allah is most knowledgeable and aware." Holy Qur'an 49:13

So one book deals with birth, the other with God fearing people, which is better for Gentiles?

Galatians isn't the Old Testament, that's the New testament and Paul's letter at that.

Islam is the way to go, even Jews acknowledge this fact

http://www.jews-for-allah.org/

[_Skittles_]

Malcolm wrote:

<quoted text>
"No one born out of wedlock may be included among the Lord's people" Dueteronomy 23:2
Well that's 7 out of 10 African Americans out of luck, but in Islam all are born Muslims, but the parents lead them astray.
"There is no God in all the earth, but in Israel." 2 Kings 5:15
"Praise be to Allah the Lord of all the worlds." Holy Qur'an 1:2
"We ourselves, who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners." Galatians 2:15
"O mankind, verily, We have created you from a male and female and made you into peoples and tribes to know each other. Verily, the most noble of you is the most God-fearing and Allah is most knowledgeable and aware." Holy Qur'an 49:13
So one book deals with birth, the other with God fearing people, which is better for Gentiles?
Galatians isn't the Old Testament, that's the New testament and Paul's letter at that.
Islam is the way to go, even Jews acknowledge this fact
http://www.jews-for-allah.org/

The bastard one you are way off. We are all a creation of God, but not all his children until we get SAVED. When he says no bastard he means no one that is not a Child of God. In order to become a child of God you have to be SAVED. I'll answer the rest later, because I have school.

[Mr Zack Smack]

Malcolm wrote:

<quoted text>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amend...
Except as a punishment for a crime, and the U.S has 22% of the world's prisoners, or as the U.S Constitution defines them 'slaves'.
And when a society practices mass incarceration as this one does, it is a form of human trafficking because those slaves are transported from their home districts to rural white areas these prisons act as attractions for businesses (mcdonalds, wendys', BK's, KFC's, post offices, hotels, motels), so jobs are provided to whites at the expense of blacks.

Yeah, because we catch more of our criminals then most other nations. For instance, in Russia some 80%+ of crimes go uncaught.

So don't blame us being better at busting people as a problem. You think DNA evidence is widely used in Mexico??? Do you know what the USA would be like if more criminals were not in prison?? Try Columbia circa 1980.

I agree about non violent criminals (drug addicts) though. But, still your prisons would be packed.

Arabs were the biggest slavers in history. They often castrated their slaves too.

[Donivan]

Malcolm wrote:

<quoted text>
You say,
""Look at the current state of Islamic nations. Women are not given any rights. They are not allowed to leave the house unless accompanied by a MALE family member. They are not allowed in many areas to attend school.""
There is no such thing as an "Islamic Nation", as long as the Holy Qur'an is absent as the highest form of legislation in that land. Who is soveirgn in Saudi Arabia, is it Allah or is it the royal family that is backed by your government?
It's a disgrace how non muslims will prop up so called "Islamic Nations" and then blame all the problems in that country on Islam instead of the true problem which is the absence of Islam.
You speak about God, but tell me when you think of God, does an image come to mind? Are you calling Black people to serve a white man? Do you see the racism of Western Christianity? Would Whites be prepared to worship a Black Jesus? Could this not produce an inferiority complex?
Now you talk about womens rights, tell me what does Christianity say about women's rights?
Lastly, the Muslim world isn't a monolith that's a very stereotypical thing to do, Muslims in China are culturally differant from African American Muslims, Muslims in Zimbabwe are differant from Muslims in Egypt etc.
Yet what is clear is a direct attack on the woman's rights in Islam so now you have opened the door for discussion, let us compate women's rights between Islam and Christianity, and I gaurantee you that you will want to change the topic back to slavery.

First off, you choose one out of many nations that incorporate Muslim faith into their laws. For your info. the religious establishment in Saudi Arabia has long been active in political affairs. I know this due to my aunt that lived in Saudi Arabia for several years as part of an assignment as a nurse. But if you do not believe me, lok it up.

BTW look at all the nations of the Middle East. They ALL have a government that has direct influence from the Islamic faith. In some nations, the government leader can not act without consulting or adhering to the wishes of the Islamic faith.(Sounds alot like Catholicism does it not)

Catholicism, may be grouped together with Christianity, however, many of the different branches of Christianity do not follow according to the Catholic church. Which many of your ideology stems from. And for the record on women's rights, no religion can brag about how well they have treated the women of this earth.

Many injustices against women were committed in the name of religion, be it Islamic or Christianity. That of course, is a BS excuse, if there ever can be one. Now some will say, that Islam teaches the man to respect and listen to his woman. Yet if you do look at the events that have unfolded over the years, women that stand in opposition of the Islamic practices are either assassinated or put in prison. Much like how Nelson Mandella spoke against Apartheid and he was thrown in prison. Yet his incarceration, was due to ignorance based on centuries of ignorance.

You say there is no such thing as an Islamic nation. Care to say that to those who brought you Islam. Guaranteed you would be executed on sight. Look at what was happening in Iran, the people were in essence ORDERED and MANDATED to keep their mouth shut. There are 12 individuals, allegedly mandated by Allah, to lead their nations. They decide who runs for President and other bodies of government. In other words, there is no free will. Unless you are selected by their council, YOU CAN NOT RUN FOR OFFICE.

[Donivan]

Malcolm wrote:

<quoted text>
Would you like to explain how 130 million or even a few million Black men were captured and taken into the middle east without guns and castrated without a fight?
What were these men brought into the country for, we know that in the Americas there was a great demand for field labor, but in the Middle East their are deserts, so the majority of laborers would be house servants which is more a female role.
Would would so many millions of Black Africans serve as? And why is it that we have so many records of rebellions even whole islands like Haiti being taken over by slaves despite Napoleon's heavy weapons, but the Arabs were able to invade the jungles, and high grasslands of Africa hold it and at the same time take slaves without a fight.
I thought people were smarter than that, we all know that many arabs had a slave trade but it was small by comparison to that of the trans atlantic slave trade, and it was only possible for the same reasons that the europeans traded in african slaves and that is the cooperation of the indigenous people.
The population of Saudi Arabia in 1937 was estimated at 5 million people, the current population is 20 million and Iraq 30 million. So how did the Arabs bring 30 million Blacks into the Middle East at a time when their own populations would have been much smaller, some say even 130-140 million Black Africans, this figure is way off the charts ridiculous even 30 million is ridiculous.

Consider this in terms of your population discussion.

America in 1940 had an estimated 132,164,569 residents. Reflect that to the 2000 census (Note 3 years after your census and 7 years before your current stat of Saudi Arabia) was 248,709,873.

In other words the children were growing up and having children. The population of Saudi Arabia has been steadily climbing by about 1.5 to 2 million people each year. And out of your 30 million people 5.5 million of them are foreigners. Just like an estimated 20 million here are foreigners or illegals.

No fights, but willing to submit themselves huh? In case you may not have realised that the majority of the slaves taken out of Africa by Arabs were WOMEN. Best estimates put the number of slaves taken by Arabs in Africa between 11 to 18 million. The trans-atlantic slave trade was between 9.4 million and 14 million. The Europeans taken as slaves during this time by Barbary pirates and Arabic forces was between 1 to 1.25 million between the 16th and 18th century.

Slavery was not abolished in Ethiopia until the invasion of Italian forces in 1935.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slave...

[jayrag]

Knottie wrote:

<quoted text>"In the Arab World and Africa you can seldom tell who were descendants of slaves and who was enslaver."
The Arabs Castrated The Black Male Slaves And Killed All Of The Black Slave Babies. Resulting In There Not Being Any Descendants, Which Is Probably Why You..."Can't Tell" Who They Are.

check out the picture in my avater....this is the picture of a Saudi Arabian black man. He is the Imam of Masjid al Haram.

The Arabs and Africans migrated back and forth prior to Islam and also after Islam. In Sudan the Arabs are Black. In Egypt and Saudi and Yemen and all over North Africa you have Arabs that in any other place they would be called Black.

The dumbest thing I keep hearing people repeat is that Arabs would castrate Black African slaves and kill black babies.
In the Arab World you are an Arab if your father was an Arab. Also if you speak Arabic as a first language then you are an Arab. Arabs in Africa are usually Black to light brown. Arabs in the Gulf are brown skinned. The lightest skinned Arabs live in the Sham(Lebanon, Syria, Palestine).
Arabs were originally a black and brown people but intermixed with the Persians, Turks, Assyrians, Jews, and also mixed with their European slaves.

In Iraq they did bring in slaves from East Africa. They still call their descendants Zanj(Zanzibar). But the Arabs praise the Zanj people for fighting the rulers of Iraq. Many Arabs joined with the Zanj in the rebellion. Most of the Zanj have intermarried with other Arabs so today its hard to tell who was who in Iraq. But they mostly lived in the Basra,Iraq region.

[slave hunter]

Malcolm wrote:

<quoted text>
Such 'rubbish', such non sense, such stupidity, such maniacal insanity.
The Qur'an above and beyond all other books acknowledges that women will be judged as equal with men and that they do have souls and will remain as women in Paradise, unlike the Christian perspective that teaches that no women but only 'the sons of god' will go to heaven.
In Islam women will go to Heaven, and some have been promised heaven like Khadijah the wife of Prophet Muhammad (p) and Asiya the wife of the Pharoah.

I'm sorry, but I find it hilarious that you're too stupid to realize that the term "sons of god" relates to females just as much as males. Perhaps some high school education would be in order before you try diving into studying religion. Hahahaha