Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 40 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
What Islam and Paganism Have in Common
“If blood, suppuration, and pus, were to pour from the husband’s nose and the wife licked it with her tongue, she would still never be able to fulfill his rights over her.” (This Hadith is repeated, also with great reverence, five times by commentator Imam Suyuti who is regarded as one of the greatest of all Muslim scholars.)
The West often sugarcoats cultures with whom we are not well familiar. My local newspaper will do anything to make Catholic schools a hotbed of the most vile crimes against humanity. But “natives” in other countries are perceived as noble savages, above all criticism or condemnation — even they happen to, from time to time, eat other people. Or just the odd household pet.
But our inability to criticize Islam is a larger problem. Unlike when discussing quaint savages, even the most delusional liberal in the West understands that publishing a cartoon of Mohammed could lead to being stabbed or beheaded when they go out for coffee.
But Islam is not tame. It is not the Religion of Peace. It is, in fact, deeply tyrannical, especially when it comes to how men are supposed to treat women. Here are a few other tidbits:
“And the reason for having sex with the slave girls besides one’s wives is also given by Ghazali: “Since among Arabs passion is an overpowering aspect of their nature, the need of their pious men to have sex has been found to be the more intense. And for the purpose of emptying the heart to the worship of God they have been allowed to have sex with women slaves if at some time they should fear that this passion will lead them to commit adultery. Though it is true that such action could lead to the birth of a child that will be a slave, which is a form of destruction,…yet enslaving a child is a lighter offence than the destruction of religious belief. For enslaving the new born is a temporary thing but by committing adultery eternity is lost.”
…
“Whosoever female dies while her husband is pleased with her, will enter Paradise.”
…
“The prophet once said to a woman: ‘Watch how you treat your husband for he is your Paradise and your Hell.”
…
“The translator of Mishkat Al-Masabih wrote in a footnote of Fatwa by Qazi Khan that said beating the wife mildly is “allowed in four cases (1) When she does not wear fineries though wanted by the husband, (2) When she is called for sexual intercourse and she refuses without any lawful excuse, (3) When she is ordered to take a bath [to clean herself] from impurities for prayer and she refuses and (4) When she goes abroad without permission of her husband.”
I think we get the picture.
But what intrigues me is how Islam concluded that men could – indeed, should — treat women in this way.
I think I have an argument, as follows:
Allah made the world. Allah is perfect. Therefore the world is perfect. Indeed, whatever is natural must be good, and the expression of Allah’s will.
Since men are stronger than women, it is Allah’s will that men must dominate women. QED.
Think of the contrast with Judaism and Christianity, where we try to overcome our natures. Islam, on the other hand, is positively obsessed with making sure that the powerful must dominate the weak. It is obviously Allah’s will.
The woman who delights in submission and being beaten, then beating is her remedy. So the Qur’anic command: ‘banish them to their couches, and beat them’ agrees with the latest psychological findings in understanding the rebellious woman. This is one of the scientific miracles of the Qur’an because it sums up volumes of the science of psychology about rebellious women.”
This tells us that Islam’s view about women is pretty much the same as the classic pagan view: everything natural is good, and that includes giving into our desires. Well, giving in to the desires of the powerful. The weaker women? Not so much.
(I wonder whether Liberals in America might have a quiet yearning to be dominated by Muslims? Sort of the liberal equivalent of the classic [and much-disputed] rape fantasy, but on a societal level.)
This same pagan argument for “the way the world is constructed” also becomes the argument for the status quo. Everything we see is explained, “because Allah wills it.” This means that technological innovation contains more than a whiff of heresy. Just as it does with the liberal worldview, which insists on seeing anything Mankind does, especially engineering, as a disease that must not be trusted.
The only people who change the world are the people who think both that they can, and that they should. It is no wonder Muslims (and pagans) are almost nonexistent among the ranks of the inventive.
Published in General
These people keep stealing words and making them mean the opposite of what they should mean. For instance, “Progressive.” Yet, they are against true progress. “Liberal,” yet they are against liberty. Even “Socialist,” when they are against society.
This is the big point. We have a choice. A cat or a chimp does not try to overcome its nature. We can. We can work at that throughout our lives as individuals. But we can not overcome human nature in the aggregate, especially with Islam and the Pagans preaching to run with it.
Islam tells you to do what you already want to do anyway. It gives a divine commendation to your natural impulses. (Except maybe the desire to drink alcohol.)
I never understood why Islam attracts people like Cat Stevens and Sinead O’Connor.
I think that is mostly true for powerful men – though Tatbir really does not seem like fun.
Also: not for women, and certainly not for rebellious adolescent girls.
Allah is dominant. So submitting to Allah (including self-flagellation) is key.
Because most people really do just want to be told what to do.
Insightful. The affinity of the left for Islam is the shared denial of reason.
And the shared denial of original sin. The left since Rousseau has believed that people can be perfected. I am amateur when it comes to Islamic theology and culture but I never hear about original sin and I never hear the Jewish idea that G-d is totally good and we humans are not.
I think of Moses, David and Saul who were very flawed men but Muslims like to think of Muhammad as perfect. (He was not. He was a sinner on the level of David or Saul.)
It stinks that we humans will never be as good as we should be and we would love an excuse to not be good. Islam provides that excuse and it corrupts people. Christianity and Judaism are more difficult religions but they make better people.
The issue is theological voluntarism-
https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2014/11/voluntarism-and-psr.html#:~:text=By%20contrast%2C%20an%20extreme%20voluntarist,no%20sense%20bound%20by%20rationality.
https://www.wordonfire.org/articles/fellows/batman-vs-superman-a-theological-gladiator-match/
it is also why Muslim science is practically nonexistent- things only occur b/c God wills it- God wills no essential nature of things (much like the woke believe). So it is useless to investigate things b/c there is no underlying order-no essence- no logos except God’s arbitrarily willing something.
even more:
https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/03/razor-boy.html
https://jihadwatch.org/2024/08/video-robert-spencer-on-the-joe-pags-show-on-the-pro-hamas-protesters-at-the-dnc-and-more