Why the Way We Approach Islam Needs Reform

Ayaan Hirsi Ali
  • George Williams

    Here’s something that needs reform…

    • Abdulah Fawaz

      Most Shia Ulema (scholars) explicitly forbid extreme acts such as this. This includes Ayatollah Sistani (the most important shia cleric in Iraq), Ayatollah Fadlullah (a venerated, recently(ish) deceased ayatollah from Lebanon) and the current supreme leader of Iran Ayatollah Khamenei.

      Copy pasting things from some article you read on the bloody tea party website hardly makes you an expert on shia jurispudence.

      • George Williams

        Then you are saying that Mohammed the prophet, no peace be upon him, didn’t murder and enslave Christians and Jews, making them dhimmi to Muslims, and it isn’t the duty of all Muslims to conquor the infidel and make Islam the only religion, on hehalf of your god? You deny the Islam of the Quran? I couldn’t give a damn what some obscure Muslim (there are no Muslims scholars) that few know of, forbade.

  • George Williams
  • George Williams

    More wacko crap about Islam…

    Lunch, anyone? It’s on her….

    Reference: Al-Arabiya

    Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdulaziz bin Abdullah al-Sheikh has denied issuing a fatwa (religious edict) which allows a hungry man to eat his wife, or parts of her body, in the case of famine or if eating his wife would result in saving his own life.

    Over the past few days, several pro-Iranian media outlets, such as the online portal of Al Allam news channel Lebanon’s tayyar.org website, have carried the story without backing it with any evidence or specifying where or when such a fatwa has been issued.

    The unsubstantiated fatwa attributed to the Grand Mufti claims that such sacrifice is the ultimate way of showing subordination and love to her husband as a “way for their two bodies to become one.”

    Just the idea that you Muslims discuss this is crazy.


  • Pan

    “The reality is that Islamic scholarship that justifies the actions of ISIS exists” – this sentence is problematic. You can say that ISIS’ actions are rooted in some form of Islamic ideology, and it is certainly important to examine that, but ultimately ISIS has twisted that ideology and manifested it in unIslamic, harmful ways and Islam does not justify the war crimes, ethnic cleansing and murder of innocents. Any “scholarship” that justifies those actions directly contradicts the core teachings of Islam and cannot rightfully be called Islamic, even if it sees itself as so. I understand your criticism of passing judgement on what is or isn’t Islam based on what feels comfortable to us and our own Islamic worldview; but at the same time it is important to distance Islam from wrongful and harmful representations of it. And ISIS is one such harmful representation. You have taken care to point out how Hirsi Ali has spread “inaccurate ideas that are directly harmful to Muslims” – you cannot ignore that ISIS does the same.

    • Abdulah Fawaz

      The best explanation of ISIS (and the like) comes in a stunningly accurate verse of the Quran that refers to how it should be interpreted.

      ‘It is he who has sent do to you the Book, from which there are fundamental (muhkamat) verses – they are the mother of the book. And others that are mutashabihat (allegorical, specific, the precise translation of the meaning is debatable). *There are those, in whose hearts is perversity (or evil), who follow the mutashabihat (allegorical) within it, seeking fitnah (causing hatred between peoples) and their own interpretation…. [3,7]