HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ahmed-shakil@CS.YALE.EDU (Shakil Waiz Ahmed)
Subject: Re: Contradictions in Quaran
Organization: Yale University, Department of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 19:41:10 GMT


In article <1992Aug14.125402.8346@uceng.UC.EDU>, mghayalo@uceng.UC.EDU (Manoj Ghayalod) writes:
> In article <1992Aug14.145011.5624@cs.yale.edu> ahmed-shakil@CS.YALE.EDU (Shakil Waiz Ahmed) writes:

> >The societal behavior may change, but my argument is that it still
> >falls within the bounds of Islamic law
> >
> But you still say that a man can have more than one wife in some
> cases but a woman should have only one husband under any condition. 
> Could you be termed as a sexist?

I could, as you appear to, but it would be wrong.  You see, it's not
just a matter of the very specific situations under which polygyny is
permitted.  Don't forget that it is a woman's *choice* to decide
whether she would go into a marriage like that.  Clearly, almost all
women will choose not to walk into something like that, regardless of
circumstances.  Why is that sexist?

> By saying that Islam has no stand point on veils does it mean that
> men of different countries can decide whether their women should wear
> veils or not. In Saudi, Iran and Afghanistan it is the men who are forcing the
> women. The Indian constitution has no standpoint on veil, by that we mean
> that the women can decide what they wear.

Yes, and Islam says the same thing -- whether a woman wears a veil or
not is her problem.  It is not required by Islam.  I cannot speak for
particular societies where that may or may not be the case, because it
has nothing to do with Islam.

> Is the average person as rich as an average person in Saudi. Is there
> not a big gap between the rich and the poor in the West? It is these
> people that break the law. An Islamic country not implementing an
> Islamic law and you still claim that law is not obselete. It's like
> saying that just because people do not live in cave does not mean
> that people cannot live in caves and thus caves as an home is not
> obselete.

I find your analogy to caves to be somewhat amusing and misleading,
but nevertheless, I would like to point out that living in caves is
indeed not obsolete.  There are still people in parts of the world who
live in caves, but more importantly, the point is that there is no
reason why people would not be *able* to live in caves.  Many Islamic
countries cannot implement Islamic laws because the minorities would
raise a very big fuss about it.

> I also understand how polygamy used to work in the olden days. There
> were less men due to war, and to provide security to all women it was
> allowed.
> Fear was used to command respect and obedience (Islamic punishments).
> Now it is replaced by the carrot and stick approach.
> For stealing they used to cut off your hand, for rape what? Maybe
> rape was not considered a crime then, it was thought of as a natural
> reaction to temptation offered by the woman. So to prevent such
> incidences viel was reccomended.

Wrong.  Rape has always carried a death penalty in Islam.

-- Shakil
From: crick@tsp.med.umn.edu (Ed Crick (CD))
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Limerick from SCI
Date: 14 Aug 92 17:00:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: news2.1992Aug14.170015.5373
Organization: University of Minnesota

On request from someone from SCB, I am reposting this SCI limerick here.
For those who don't follow SCI, a poetic spirit has overcome SCI recently.

A chap from Concordia named Chatterjee,
Whom everyone treated with apathy.
His posts were quite numerous,
His Muslim-bashing quite humorous,
Yet he wondered "Why does everyone laugh at me?"
Xref: sparky soc.culture.bangladesh:4514 soc.culture.indian:28270 soc.culture.pakistan:13718
From: gauri@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Gauri Pavate)
Subject: Re: Contradictions in the Qu'ran
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 19:10:13 GMT

jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed A Khan) writes:

>In article <MeWkzM200VB=EQGnxr@andrew.cmu.edu>, "Arun K. Gupta"
><ag3l+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>> 
>>  (deleted)
 
>> As far as polygamy and Hinduism go: the matter of fact is there is no
>> ONE Hindu code of law, there are several. I think some of them permit
>> polygamy (and some permit polyandry.)  The law codes followed have changed
>> with the era and circumstances. However, the majority follow a monogamous
>> code, (I think).

>But as far as I know it is illegal for Hindus to practice polygamy as laid down
>in modern Hindu(Personal)Law or isn't it ? Maybe someone could clarify that. 

	(deleted)
>--Javed.

	The Hindu Code Bill passed through five Acts between
1954-1956 does provide one uniform personal law code for all
Hindus throughout India; it also covers persons belonging
to Buddhist, Jain, and Sikh religions.

	Of these Acts, the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 made
polygamy illegal (involving criminal liability) for all
Hindus, and for Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs.

					Gauri.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan
From: gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu (Gopal Agrawal)
Subject: Re: Contradictions in Quaran
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Texas A&M University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 05:22:49 GMT


|> In article <1992Aug12.011728.2981@cs.yale.edu>, ahmed-shakil@CS.YALE.EDU (Shakil Waiz Ahmed) writes...
|> > 
|> >circumstances.  Of course, the skeptic will ask why polyandry is not
|> >permitted.  Needless to say, this line of reasoning fails to take into
|> >account the complex social situations under which polygyny is
|> >permitted -- it is obviously not something for everyone.  But it also
|> >fails to take into account the problem of infinite family chains.  If
|> >polyandry were also permitted, it is very easy to show mathematically
|> >that one could end up with infinite family chains.  Given the
|> >importance that Islam places on family structure, the problems of this
|> >are obvious.  Since family structure is so important, it is easy to
|> >see that while the mother of a child is easily determined, polyandry
|> >would make it difficult to determine the father of a child.  All these
|> >reasons are strong arguments against polyandry.



There are many tribes all over the world that have been practicing polyandry
for centuries. They live just as fruitful lives as any other.  I know for sure 
there are some in Zambia and some in the Polenesian Islands. It doesn't matter 
to them who the biological father is.  Since the fathers are unaware who the 
actual biological father is, all the husbands of the woman treat all her 
children as if they were their own. And further, akin to Islam, it is polygamy 
that is not permitted in these societies. So your logic that polyandry would 
fail or cannot provide strong social structure is not true. 

regards,
--   
   ______ ______ ______ ______ __  |\/\/\/|
    ____/  __  /  __  /  __  /  /  |  \  /|   LIFE'S COMPLEX - IT HAS 
   / __   /   /  /   /  /   /  /   | (o)(o)   REAL & IMAGINARY PARTS  
  /   /  /   /   ___/  __  /  /    C      _) 
_____/ _____/ __/   __/ __/ ______/ | \___|  
E-mail - gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu       |   /   All Std. Disclaimers apply.
From: hassan@cup.portal.com (hassan monu alam)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Re: Active conversion and the Bahai faith
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 23:35:09 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Aug13.024510.29918@menudo.uh.edu>

>>You seem to have conveniently ignored the fact that nobody
>>in SCB asked you any questions on your faith.
>>
>That's why I posted the apology; otherwise I would have been glad to
>supply the information

Please follow your apology with actio (eg do not post 47K 
articles informing us of the tennants of your faith. 

>
>>>So I am sorry if I gave the impression that  am trying
>>>to convert anybody.
>>
>>We are even more sorry that we have to put up with your
>>proselytizing.
>>
>Even though I am sorry: can you please tell me why are you afraid of
>a new religion and its ideas. You conveniently ignored my statement
>that religion is a matter of FREE CHOICE and not BIRTH or does your
>brand of Islam prohibit this free choice? I know Iran's does

>Arindam

Let me put it as politely as I can - your proselytizing is
like someone playing a stereo at 200 watts outside my door.
Your protests of not seeking converts seem a little hollow. 
After a little while it becomes annoying. There are 
appropriate newsgroups on religion. Please go and post as
much as you like. People who are interested will no doubt
follow it keenly.

You also seem to make asumptions about my religious beliefs
and my ethnic origin. I suppose I could take umbrage, but my
parents always joked I was adopted. Perhaps it is encoded in
my genes and reveals itself in my writing.

:-) Hassan
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan
From: buchignani@hg.uleth.ca
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Re: Bangladesh and State Religion was Re: Contradictions in Quaran
Date: 19 Aug 92 22:29:25 GMT
Reply-To: buchignani@hg.uleth.ca
Organization: University of Lethbridge

re: Bengali/Bangladeshi culture.

I agree almost completely. The qualifications I would make are minor.
For one, until colonial administration, national incorporation and
differentiation, the regional mass media, etc. had their historical
impact there were of course a host of very local and group-specific
cultures in both west and East Bengal. These and other forces have
had strong but different normalizing effects in India and Bangaldesh.
Thus each in certain ways becomes at once more culturally homogeneous
and different than the other.

Norman Buchignani
Department of Anthropology
University of Lethbridge
From: tahassan@lonestar.utsa.edu (Tawfiq . Hassan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Invitation to the Punjabi Night
Date: 22 Aug 92 06:34:20 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

Hi guys!

On behalf of the Punjabi Group of San Antonio let me welcome you
all to the wonderful "PUNJABI NIGHT"...

            Folk Dances of Punjab, North Indian State
Join us for a fun-filled, entertaining and educational evening!!

                            September 5th, '92
                            6:00 - 10:00 pm
                Churchill High School, San Antonio, Texas

                                FOOD!!
                    Enjoy North Indian Cuisine
                    Food & Social 6:00 - 7:30 pm

                            Entertainment!!
                    A Delightful variety program
                    Bhangra, Gidha, Punjabi Geet,
                    Fashion Show, and much more...
                    Program I       7:30 - 8:30 pm
                    Intermission    8:30 - 8:45 pm
                    Program II      8:45 - 10:00 pm

                        For tickets or Information
                    Dr. or Mrs. Mangat (512) 661-6135
                    Mr. or Mrs. Rai    (512) 699-3078
                    Mr. or Mrs. Gill   (512) 698-1982
                    Dr. or Mrs. Singh  (512) 697-3459
                    Mr. or Mrs. Bains  (512) 696-6692

                            Ticket Prices:
                    Adults :                 $5.00
                    Children under 12 yrs. : $2.00

We are expecting about 450 people, so see you there...

Sincerely,
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh
From: dipen@lheavx.gsfc.nasa.gov (D. Bhattacharya)
Subject: news, apprehensions, etc.
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA/GSFC Laboratory For High Energy Astrophysics
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 19:23:00 GMT

	There are two news items which have bothered me in recent days.
	A mob of a few thousands strong raided the Chinese Embassy in 
	Dhaka following rumors that "tokai"s (child laborers) are killed
	there for research purposes. The version that I have heard says
	"tara tokai dhore khai" (they catch and eat tokais). This maybe
	an example how mass-hysteria works in our country. Apparently, the
	Govt. has apologized to the Chinese. I wonder how these rumor mills
	operate. This incident reminded me also of the events when during the
	height of the Gulf war, pro-Saddam sentiment prompted some people
	to attack Whites and in one or two cases even the Koreans.

	The second event that has really saddened me is the killing of
	septuagenerian veteran communist leader Ratan Sen in Khulna. Ratan
	Sen dedicated his life to politics and was never married. In 
	these days it is difficult to imagine people who would sacrifice
	their lives for a conviction. He was active with the "ghatok dalal
	nirmul committee" (the organization against the collaborators of 
	1971); most of the news sources say he fell victim to the youth
	command of Jamaat. These youth possibly have no clue what is the
	type of dedication and sacrifice that the generation of Ratan Sen
	possessed. By eliminating such people they also devoid us of the
	rich history of politics and social movements that these people
	carried through the British and Pakistan periods into Bangladesh.
	This also shows the operative style of Jamaat: killing activists,
	for whom BNP has little sympathy, outside of Dhaka, in smaller cities.

	Dipen 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan
From: ngrjn@milton.u.washington.edu (V Nagarajan)
Subject: Re: Contradictions in Quaran
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:48:02 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.152729.24246@cs.yale.edu> ahmed-shakil@CS.YALE.EDU (Shakil Waiz Ahmed) writes:
>
>In article <1992Aug13.063644.28151@uceng.UC.EDU>, mghayalo@uceng.UC.EDU (Manoj Ghayalod) writes:
>> In article <1992Aug13.011649.16448@cs.yale.edu> ahmed-shakil@CS.YALE.EDU (Shakil Waiz Ahmed) writes:
>
>> >How can you say what there will or will not be in the future?  Since
>> >we don't know, your point becomes moot.
>> >
>> Here you are proving my point. If you are so sure of the timeless value of the
>> Koran, then you know the future. Allah has said that 1 woman can never have
>> more than 1 husband, his reason for that as you say is because it is impossible
>> to tell the father of the child. So for these clauses to be valid for
>> all eternity, there will never be found a way to test whether some X is a
>> father of Y. So you know the future or are you having second thoughts.
>
>Nope, no second thoughts.  I claim it is timeless.  You claim that it
>isn't.  Your claim that it isn't rests on your assertion that DNA
>identifying of parents will become a 100% method one day.  Something
>we do not know.  Hence your point is moot.
>

	Hmm. There are some things that Shakil has a propensity to easily
	forget. We went thru the DNA typing discussion not too long ago and
	at the time I showed that when it comes to *paternity disputes*
	DNA tests are A OK. (There are NO scientific misgivings on this
	point) The probability of misidentity can be made arbitrarily small. 
	Orders of magnitude smaller, in fact, than the chances that two 
	newborns will be mistakenly switched in a hospital ward. (I am 
	sure everyone has heard of at least one or two cases of this.)

>My claim does not rest on that.  The Qur'an doesn't say anything about
>DNA identifying and does not give that as a reason.  God did not say
>that polyandry is outlawed because of identifying the father.  That
>was a reason *I* gave.  If you wish to show that the Qur'an cannot
>apply at all times, you have to show me how and why.  So far, you have
>not done so.
>

	Obviously it is *you* that does all the rationalizing - on the 
	Qur'anic admissibility of polygyny to the requirement of two
	female witnesses in financial transactions - there are no expla-
	nations given in the Qur'an. As long as you are engaged in it, it
	occurs to me, you should at least go thru with it and not waffle
	in the middle. At any rate, I don't wish to go beyond this and 
	this will be my last and only post in this seasonal free-for-all
	thread, on account of my feeling that Shakil keeps repeating the
	same thing over and over again like a broken record. 
	
							- Nagarajan
From: hassan@cup.portal.com (hassan monu alam)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Re: Active conversion and the Bahai faith
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 18:18:31 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

>Active conversion is explicitly banned in the Bahai
>Faith: we are told to answer questions if somebody
>asks.


You seem to have conveniently ignored the fact that nobody
in SCB asked you any questions on your faith.


>So I am sorry if I gave the impression that  am trying
>to convert anybody.

We are even more sorry that we have to put up with your
proselytizing.

>Love,
>Arindam

We are quite happy without your brand of love. 

Thank You.

Hassan
Xref: sparky soc.culture.bangladesh:4480 soc.culture.indian:28134 soc.culture.pakistan:13658
From: paulchem@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Icarus)
Subject: The 14th Of August, Pakistan etc.
Keywords: n
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 00:10:43 GMT

1] Maybe I speak for myself but I found nothing wrong in someone
   crossposting an independance day message for pakistan.
   I would have found it equally boorish if net people on scp
   reacted so strongly to a cross post on August 15th.

   I have no idealistic visions of pan-subcontinental unity or of
   long lost brotherhood. Still, there is no escape from the fact
   that pakistan is a neighbour and that we share a common culture
   for the most part. 

2] Just for the trigger-happy: I dont need any lessons in patriotism.
   Its just that I think we should feel secure enough in our national 
   identities to avoid seeing a national threat in every post.

3] Stay Cool.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.    ~ ~                                                                     .
.    o o      signito ergo sum.              paul chemmanoor.                .
.     |    i sign therefore i am.            Computer Science department.    .
.     =                                      Univ. of Colorado, Boulder.     .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky soc.culture.bangladesh:4593 soc.culture.pakistan:13872 soc.culture.indian:28628
From: sarkar@grip.cis.upenn.edu (Nilanjan Sarkar)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: Contradictions in Quaran
Date: 18 Aug 92 22:24:25 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.bangladesh
Organization: GRASP Lab, University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Aug18.184141.26798@cs.yale.edu> ahmed-shakil@CS.YALE.EDU (Shakil Waiz Ahmed) writes:
>
>In article <86423@netnews.upenn.edu>, sarkar@grip.cis.upenn.edu (Nilanjan Sarkar) writes:
>
>> A small observation : In order to prove the 'timelessness' of this religious
>> dictum, one needs to show that not only now but never will the number of
>> man  exceed the number of woman. 
>
>There are a couple of problems with this "small observation."  First
>of all, note that in order to prove that the religious dictum is *not*
>timeless, you have to prove the opposite, something which you also
>cannot do.  So neither of us has proved anything in that respect.
>


No, the onus of proof does not rest on me. It was you who claimed the
timelessness of the dictum. Since I do not agree with what you claim,
you need to show me why what you are claiming is true. Otherwise, 
anyone can come up with astonishing claim and can say if one
does not believe that then he should show why it is not true. That
is not the way things work in present day society. Can you publish
a paper stating something like "I am convinced this result is true
but I won't give the proof, the reader should construct a proof
to show it is wrong in case he does not believe my word. " ?



>But more importantly, please note that the issue of the number of
>women outnumbering the number of men is an observation which *I* made,
>and is not something stated in the Qur'an, thus making your point
>moot.


There are two things here. If you say that Qur'an did not give any reason
and you don't know why it is timeless but you *believe* it - then there
is no question. But, if you want to justify it using your own interpretation
then you should also be prepared to divulge the proof.


>
>-- Shakil


Nilanjan
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan
From: arkay@leland.Stanford.EDU (Abdur Khan)
Subject: Re: Contradictions in Quaran
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 07:03:54 GMT

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. see brothers no contradiction, just a long line of dots.

sahibzada rafay khan [ contradictions there are but not in the KORAN]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan
From: gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu (Gopal Agrawal)
Subject: Re: Contradictions in Quaran
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Texas A&M University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 05:50:18 GMT

In article <l8icljINNb4j@pageboy.cs.utexas.edu>, hyder@cs.utexas.edu (Syed Irfan Hyder) writes:
|> In article <1992Aug11.143915.11160@linus.mitre.org> m21757@mitre.org (G) writes:
|> >
|> :Was the above mentioned verse revealed for a particular time and for 
|> :particular circumstances when women did not take part in financial 
|> :transactions?  Does it still apply today, when many more women are fully 
|> :aware of financial considerations?
|> 
|> Yes, it still applies today. The specific example you gave above does
|> not in any way makes the verse obsolete. I think you have never gone
|> into any book on  Islamic jurisprudence. Such issues as above are
|> not the first time that have cropped up. There are thousands of such
|> examples and you can find exposition of such cases in any standard
|> text on Islamic jurisprudence. In fact, the science
|> of "jurisprudence" is there for such cases. For instance, there is
|> Quranic verse that explicitly prohibits pork. Now go to any standard
|> text and see what "Islamic jurisprudence" says when one is dying of
|> starvation and only thing available is pork. Read the principle.
|> Your question will be answered.


I am assuming that you mean to say that Islamic Jurisprudence does 
allow pork under EXTREME conditions (starvation).  However, women 
being aware of financial responsibilities is no longer a rarity. It 
can no longer be classified as EXTREME.  However, the two women witness
rule was applied to women in general. This however should now be applied
in the extreme case (assuming that the man involved as the witness is 
TWICE as reliable as the women!).  So would you say that the Quranic 
verse has shifted its status from a more GENERAL mode to the RARE mode. 

Did Islamic Jurisprudence say anything about rare cases of financial 
transactions as you imply that it might say about eating pork under 
rare cases ?  if so, then that should now be applied as the GENERAL 
rule, don't you think ? 

regards,
--   
   ______ ______ ______ ______ __  |\/\/\/|
    ____/  __  /  __  /  __  /  /  |  \  /|   LIFE'S COMPLEX - IT HAS 
   / __   /   /  /   /  /   /  /   | (o)(o)   REAL & IMAGINARY PARTS  
  /   /  /   /   ___/  __  /  /    C      _) 
_____/ _____/ __/   __/ __/ ______/ | \___|  
E-mail - gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu       |   /   All Std. Disclaimers apply.