You meant rephrased by an Islam. Of course, it's expected that Islamic followers will defend its declaration of human rights since Islam probably has its own definition of universal as well. So it will be difficult to come to a consensus of what universality is.
A better way to distinguish the two declarations would be calling it "declaration of the gender rights" for Islam vs "declaration of the human rights" for the rest of the world, since woman under Islam is technically only half human :)

theanalyzer wrote:

... because those rights do not differentiate religion.

You should listen to yourself sometimes. You do realize that it is not called "The Universal Declaration of Religion Rights". We are not talking about rights of various religions. Every religion has different rights/beliefs over another, and they should be respected; there's no point in discussing that. But humanity is not a religion. Human is a being; we are talking about the rights of human beings, not rights of the religions. Why? It's because not every human being has the same religion, and following a particular faith doesn't change you into a super-human, nor a lesser-human.

If that's too hard to grasp, then think about animal rights. When we talk about animal rights, they are rights of the animal - not the rights of the religion of the animal.

Another example, if I were to compare my weight with yours then both of us would strip naked and get on a scale and weigh. There's no point in comparing if you wear a 10kg training jacket or I'm wearing the 50kg training shoes in 9Dragons; if we were to do this, we would be comparing our training gear weights, not our weights.

People don't like my walls of posts so I'll keep it short and not shoot down things preemptively. (Bad chess move that is but meh)

Yao wrote:

So it will be difficult to come to a consensus of what universality is.

1. What is Universality?
a. Humans only?
b. Animals + Humans?
c. What time period because the "rights" change, right?

Yao wrote:

A better way to distinguish the two declarations would be calling it "declaration of the gender rights" for Islam vs "declaration of the human rights" for the rest of the world, since woman under Islam is technically only half human :)

2. Fail.
a. The number of times the word Man has been used in Quran = Number of times woman has been used.
b. Women do get more liberties and freedoms (AS EQUALS) in Islam, than any "democracy" in the world today. "Lower your gaze and guard your modesty" Means, sexual harrassment, begins when a guy "checks out" a girl. Stop right there, sonny, don't do it.
Even conservative laws allow a male or female to ask a male or female 2-3 times after which it becomes harrassment in the workplace. Non-work place, nothing is stopping you with the exception of a harassment suit or stalking suit. The legalities differ.
My point.
Islam = Men, women, I don't care, respect the other one and don't fantasize, that's invading their rights to exist.
Laws = Fine, hit on em. Back off if they say no enough times. Smart people take advantage of the vulnerables ones, so get with it mate, lets play chess and monopoly with body parts.

Yao wrote:

You should listen to yourself sometimes. You do realize that it is not called "The Universal Declaration of Religion Rights". We are not talking about rights of various religions. Every religion has different rights/beliefs over another, and they should be respected; there's no point in discussing that. But humanity is not a religion. Human is a being; we are talking about the rights of human beings, not rights of the religions. Why? It's because not every human being has the same religion, and following a particular faith doesn't change you into a super-human, nor a lesser-human.

3. Agreed, agreed, and wait let me re-read.
....
...
..
.
Agreed!

Do religions respect other religions? Offer them protection? Consider all of humanity equal? Has an omnipotent entity been proposed which says that it ain't going to forgive you for the grievences you'll commit against another human being?

Isn't that taking "Human rights" to a truly "Universally applicable" level? I mean God's don't say, "you were a saint, did good, died nobly, but you took a USD 1 loan from the Chunky Monkey and even though you could return it later, didn't, so sonny, you ain't going into heaven until Chunky forgives you. I won't forgive you for that."

Right? thats just stupid no?

No.

Islam has that clause too :P

So what happens to a religion, which says the "Rights of God" are second to only "Rights of other Humans"?

They like to become terrorists? Blow em selves up to kill a few people and think its right?

I agree :) Them terrorists are real smar! (100% Sarcasm intended)

Yao wrote:

If that's too hard to grasp, then think about animal rights. When we talk about animal rights, they are rights of the animal - not the rights of the religion of the animal. Another example, if I were to compare my weight with yours then both of us would strip naked and get on a scale and weigh. There's no point in comparing if you wear a 10kg training jacket or I'm wearing the 50kg training shoes in 9Dragons; if we were to do this, we would be comparing our training gear weights, not our weights.

4. Hey, don't be derogatory against Catism or Dogism and yes their religions are different.
a. Catism = Feed me and stay away and lemme sleep unless I want you to scratch my belly. Don't forget to feed me!
b. Dogism = If you can't eat it or piss on it, least try to F*** it.

--------------
PUN INTENDED IN POINT (4)

YES I GET HIS POINT!

YES IT'S AN APT EXAMPLE TO GIVE, BUT I'M GRUMPY AND THAT STUPID EXAMPLE I GAVE MADE ME SMILE.

*grins*

Doing something for others like opening the door is a courtesy; it is never an obligation. Society may look down on you, but you are not required to open doors for others. Hell, you are not even required to help an old woman cross the street. It is a courtesy. You are not required to greet other people either; it is also a courtesy. You have to differentiate between the way of treating others (courtesy) vs personal freedom (rights). They are not the same.

Helping others by doing something for them (eg. opening the door) does not violate their rights in anyway, unless you are doing it against their will or you don't allow them to do it.

Ok let's go to the details.

Quote:

Article 16 1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. 2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses. 3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Why does Islam permit men to have up to 4 wives, but restrict women only having 1 husband? If they're equal, then women should also be allowed to have up to 4 husbands.

And why does Islam permit the man to marry a woman of his choice from of any religion - may be Jews or Christians, and the vice-versa is not permitted? If it is indeed equal, then the Islamic woman should also be allowed to marry Christian, Jews, etc...

and here you guys start again ...i ain't reading this >.< ...Too much !!

.

*grins*

patriota_PL wrote:

Heeeeyyyyyy. Guys. I got an idea. You know why we (me not anymore) are arguing?

1. I was discussing.
You were arguing.
Yao discussed and provoked thought.
I thought, responded and provoked thought.
He thought, responded and provoked thought.

Me and him, turned a discussion/argument into a debate.

patriota_PL wrote:

Because Islam and rest is incompatible.

2. After all these walls of posts you should realize how little value I put in speculative sweeping statements.

a. After all the "science" you claim to know and you claim your country knows you should known that from Aristotle, from Decartes, from Socrates, from Plato. You might not have read the research and scientific leaps the Middle easters and Persian scientists did in 1000ad, but least you should be acquainted with the thoughts of the Greeks.

b. So, What is the basis for your statement that Islam and "rest" is incompatible.
i. Yes, that is incorrect english. You appear to be speaking on behalf of the Vatican, on behalf of the "Enlightened" people, on behalf of the "free minds" on behalf of the "evolved" and better people. I would strongly recommend you learn the english language first before attempting to communicate in it.

ii. Who is the rest? Islam vs. everyone, So you are comparing people with a religion? isn't that comparing apples and basketballs? (yes I realize the idiom is apples and oranges, but those two are still fruits)

patriota_PL wrote:

So drop it fellas. We are going nowhere.

3. What makes you say we are going no where?

4. Is that the "open minded", "democratic", "free willed", "evolving" and "liberal" throught process? i.e. If someone doesn't agree with what you yammer on about due to hysterical paranoia induced primarily due to a lack of knowledge, the correct thing to do is to say they are incompatible, stubborn (implied by saying they will "never agree"), and subsequently implying they are close minded and not worth discussing your fears with?

5. Really?

6. So if I say "YOUR FACE IS STOOPID" and walk away because I don't know what to say that means I'm the one who won?

7. Avoidance is good?

8. Did you indulge in escapism much?

patriota_PL wrote:

Our own forum Islam-supporters will never agree with UN Declaration supporters. (and yes I am still with UN point of view)

9. Let me get this straight, "your own" (?) "forum Islam-supporters"? By this you mean me? Am I the only one in this forum who is suggesting a free and open mind rather than a closed off mind?

10. IF ANYONE READING THIS THINKS THAT AVOIDANCE IS A GOOD THING OR THAT SPECULATION BASED ON LACK OF KNOWLEDGE IS GOOD OR THAT FORMING JUDGEMENTS WITHOUT COMPLETE AND HOLISTIC KNOWLEDGE IS GOOD PLEASE REPLY HERE AND LET US KNOW. IT WOULD BE UNFAIR OF DESTINY TO KEEP AN OPEN MIND TOWARD ITS MEMBERS AND VIEWERS WHO THINK AUTHORITARIAN RULE IS GOOD AND THAT ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH THEM IS WRONG.

patriota_PL wrote:

So lets drop the issue until we will all grab AK-47 M-16 and whatever we invented to kill each other and start danse macabre to end this world. Fine? I almost feel sorry for starting this topic:D Just slap each other and be coool:D

11. *GRINS*
a. Let me clear a few misconceptions here.
i. I am an admin on this forum.
ii. Other than me no one can change something in my profile and even I can't remove myself from the admin group.

iii. Based on (11.a.i) I can lock and/or delete this thread. I can also deactivate, ban and delete accounts.

iv. Did I lock/delete this thread? or deactivate, ban and/or delete your account?

v. Why are you then insinuating that this will resort to violence? Is that what your "liberal", "open to new thoughts" and "very knowledgeable" mind suggests will happen?

patriota_PL wrote:

BTW @Xs if I open door before woman, and she says she is feminist and this insults her. Than I will call her stupid B****. Yes call this intolerance.

12. So calling people names is alright by your understanding regardless of what is socially and politically correct?

a. Then how come you don't call Yao a gook due to his Vietnamese (I'm assuming) heritage?

b. Then how come you don't call every Chinese person you meet a "chink"?

c. So you do call those of the African-American heritage "niggers"?

d. So you do call the "Native Americans" Indians?

e. So you did call the fat kid in your class something like "meat loaf"?

13. Based on point (1) to point (12) of this post ... you have
the tenancy to indulge in escapism?
a defeatist attitude?
think only you are right and everyone else is wrong?
like your hysterical paranoia?
want to remain closed to new knowledge, if it contradicts your thoughts?
think that all discussions and debates are simply arguments which result in firearms?
and are racially and ethnically intolerant and don't care if your actions or words are derogatory?

DON'T JOIN ANY GROUP PLEASE!
YOU NEED A PSYCHOLOGIST TO HELP YOU GET THROUGH THE INTENSE TRAUMA THAT YOU HAVE, I CAN'T EVEN BEGIN TO HYPOTHESIZE ITS REASONS OR ITS IMPLICATIONS ON YOUR LIFE.

YOUR LIFE IS IMPORTANT, YOU FIT THE PROFILE OF A HATER AND POTENTIAL SUICIDE BOMBER, PLEASE, WE CARE ABOUT YOU, DON'T DO IT!

NOTE:
With the exception of patriota_PL, apologies to anyone I might have offended.

If you feel offended in any way, please click the little exclamation mark button and report the post. I will make the amends as soon as possible.
(The button to report a post is --- --- this button, which is present at the top of every post and thread)

Yes I know this is a double post by me BUT

With that, I take my leave from this thread.

In the event that the ToS (for this forums are violated), I will move this thread to the trash.

Sorry Yao, it it seems like I have been "bullied" by a potential suicide bomber.

*follows the thought process of the "evolved" and "correct" person and runs away from an enlightened conversation*

Running away is never a solution. Face it; embrace it; it was a mistake in the beginning to receive the insults in your part. Whatever insults anyone is throwing at you, they don't belong to you. These insults are properties of that person who is trying to pass them on to you. Just don't accept, and they remain that person's problems. Why make yourself suffer by accepting these abuses?

I'm still hoping that someone can clarify the last two questions raised by me (per article 16 of the freedom of rights to marriage).

Well I think this discussion was interesting which I probably said before. The thing which I think made it most interesting is to see this from 2 different muslims point of view (Xs & analyzer) cause debates like this in Sweden is 99% with the nazis who hate the muslims and pick out small quotes from the quoran trying to make the whole religion look like a bunch of terrorists and those discussions are just lame and uninteresting. The few times in Sweden you manage to discuss Islam with a muslim he always gives short answers like "The quoran says so and it was written down by Muhammed who got told by Allah and so on..." So I can honestly say its been an interesting discussion with lots of new things to learn.

Last thing I will say in this topic since everyone else is leaving:
I believe religion is private and everyone is free to chose their own religion and as long as they dont "interfere" with my life I wont interfere with theirs. It doesnt hurt me if someone decides to have 4 wives or walk around covering themselves since its their lives. There's alot of things in this world I find strange and weird like Islams point of view on women but that doesnt mean they wont see me as strange or that my culture is better thant their culture.

.

Admin powers are needed to delete posts right? So I did this thing.
@Xs You may be not muslim fanatic but you defend it pretty much in the same way as fanatics do. You call me follower of Vatican while I dislike most of its actions. You ignore obvious arguments on female-treating by muslim law. After all this you call me not open minded. Such hypocrisy...
Your post only means that you took this discussion personal. Man... you could have been law enforcement memeber in PRL. I rather expected you will say we are cool. So... ye this was personal attack on me. Open minded thing again...

Quote:

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?

Lk 6:41
Also after watching this woman again I must say that indeed she is manipulator is she not?
End of topic for me...

Still reviving this thread?

It's cooked, baked, well-done and probably burned.

Let it RIP!!!