by mekrob » Sat 01 Sep 2007, 21:37:47
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he above verse shows that Muhammad expressly approved of the rape of female slaves.
Where does it say it's OK to rape slaves? It says it's OK to have intercourse with slaves, not
rape, which is condemned in Islam. Maybe you confuse rape and intercourse because they are the same thing to you. You can't get one without the other, huh?
Let's just hypothesize for a moment, PA, that you were right and Umar was killed because he was a cruel person. Well, my whole point at the beginning was that a leader who deviates from the law should be removed from power and that the leadership position should be small enough so that he could be removed; you, of course, rebutted this by going straight into the Stalin argument. So doesn't the supposed reason for Umar's death then justify my point that if and when a leader deviates from the law, there will be someone to make sure that he is deposed?
But of course I'm not saying you're right about Umar. The event occurred 1400 years ago and the history is sparse, so we'll never really know what happened; we can only ponder it.
And Bas is right. We should return to the original topic, instead of Islamic history. Feel free to start a new thread on it if you want.
I want to put out the fires of Hell, and burn down the rewards of Paradise. They block the way to God. I do not want to worship from fear of punishment or for the promise of reward, but simply for the love of God. - Rabia