Why does bagdadi supports rape?

[ThePrinceofTea]

No real Qualif can do that. if he was true to his creed he would do a fatwa or what ever declaration to punish by instant death anyone sinning. certainly a fake. or is he against rape but the msm is manipulating his message to make it like he was a rapist apologist? it wouldn't surprise me coming from this hypocritical admin supporting epstein and friends. maybe this beard man is a friend of the potus in his earlier years... who knows.

[saddampbuh]

the koran encourages rape of female captives who are considered war booty, why would baghdadi not support his own religion?

[ThePrinceofTea]

the koran encourages rape of female captives who are considered war booty, why would baghdadi not support his own religion?

you are waking the us imperialist in me... let me explain, without imperial america it would be impossible to have this discussion (just to say b.o. doesn't contribute).

so, I will quote, of course it's important to use LOGIC:

4. Surah An-Nisa

1. O mankind! Be dutiful to your Lord, Who created you from a single person (Adam), and from him (Adam) He created his wife [Hawwa (Eve)], and from them both He created many men and women and fear Allah through Whom you demand your mutual (rights), and (do not cut the relations of) the wombs (kinship) . Surely, Allah is Ever an All-Watcher over you.

...

19. O you who believe! You are forbidden to inherit women against their will, and you should not treat them with harshness, that you may take away part of the Mahr you have given them, unless they commit open illegal sexual intercourse. And live with them honourably. If you dislike them, it may be that you dislike a thing and Allah brings through it a great deal of good.

what does it means? point 1:  raping a women = raping the great^x grand daughter of Hawwa. point 19 exemplification.

then I think the misunderstanding is about the notion of the concept of the "right hand". What does it mean? apply 1 + 19 = you can't hold the hand of a woman against her will.

easy, I know. However understand that I say that under the veil of :

https://search.disconnect.me/image?l=aHR0cHM6Ly9lbmNyeXB0ZWQtdGJuMC5nc3RhdGljLmNvbS9pbWFnZXM/cT10Ym46QU5kOUdjUU83RDAzUExlUnFseUlsQUxpejMyaGYxNXU1ZTAwYkI0TEoyQllSeFdjOG0wTUVLMWY=

and that if you disagree, you will be used as training practice for who knows, maybe a predator (who knew that the torch could be used for targeting, and the book for keeping the score).

those toxins corrupt definitively the mind.

and frankly what ever text would have say the contrary to my opinion, I would have made confetties with it, because free will is necessary to have sinners, that's why I think it's important for people like you to be allowed to speak freely...

and who knows, you may change, ain't you a stone?

xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox

it would be cool to capture this bagdadi alive... or at least have a body this time (not dust).

[saddampbuh]

that entire section deals with marriage and adultery and "inherit" in this context means literally to aquire something from a deceased person and it relates to their muslim female relatives not slaves. the other verse you allude to deals with intercourse with "wives or those whom your right hands possess", who do you think these women were if they were not the muslims' wives? females didn't get to walk around on their own and pick random guys to fornicate with in 7th century arabia

read the article beginning on page 14, you might find it helpful

http://media.clarionproject.org/files/islamic-state/islamic-state-isis-magazine-Issue-4-the-failed-crusade.pdf

[ThePrinceofTea]

that entire section deals with marriage and adultery and "inherit" in this context means literally to aquire something from a deceased person and it relates to their muslim female relatives not slaves. the other verse you allude to deals with intercourse with "wives or those whom your right hands possess", who do you think these women were if they were not the muslims' wives? females didn't get to walk around on their own and pick random guys to fornicate with in 7th century arabia

read the article beginning on page 14, you might find it helpful

http://media.clarionproject.org/files/islamic-state/islamic-state-isis-magazine-Issue-4-the-failed-crusade.pdf

saddampbuh,

I will ignore you. remember, speech is guaranteed. have a nice day.

https://search.disconnect.me/image?l=aHR0cHM6Ly9lbmNyeXB0ZWQtdGJuMC5nc3RhdGljLmNvbS9pbWFnZXM/cT10Ym46QU5kOUdjU2dRR01Ia25pS0ZETUZZaktrSEdYd1NxUTZ6R2t6TUM0SjJDenJ6SHItM01rSlEyRUs=

[bryant.coleman]

Most of the sex-slaves being held by the ISIS are Yazidis. Yazdânism is a pre-Islamic religion, which was founded approximately 5,000 years ago, and t involves worshiping a god called Melek Taus, which represents the peacock angel. The Muslims regard Melek Taus as Satan, and therefore for them the Yazidis are devil worshipers. That is why they are selected for the worst of the atrocities.

[Pierre 2]

This looked very interesting to me so I wanted to say something.
In this context, religions do not really work. I mean rapes are not something you can avoid in war. Because there are no laws or protections in war.
We may think "oh how can they allow rape?" but they are at war and there is no rule of war sadly.

[galdur]

Most of the sex-slaves being held by the ISIS are Yazidis. Yazdânism is a pre-Islamic religion, which was founded approximately 5,000 years ago, and t involves worshiping a god called Melek Taus, which represents the peacock angel. The Muslims regard Melek Taus as Satan, and therefore for them the Yazidis are devil worshipers. That is why they are selected for the worst of the atrocities.

They believe that God is creator of the world and that he placed it in the care of seven holy beings the chief of whom is Melek Taus, the peacock angel. I guess it´s just another version of the feathered serpent, except in this one the believers don´t seem to consider it a source of evil but a leader of the archangels and not any fallen angel. They believe that the source of evils is in the heart and spirit of humans themselves.

[Daniel91]

It's obvious that in their culture women don't have equal value as man in society, they are probably below horse and pigs, just childbirth machine for producing new soldiers for their war and servant to man.
So, answer is very simple, they don't look at women as human being, with emotions or will. 

[galdur]

It's obvious that in their culture women don't have equal value as man in society, they are probably below horse and pigs, just childbirth machine for producing new soldiers for their war and servant to man.
So, answer is very simple, they don't look at women as human being, with emotions or will.  

Well, it isn´t THAT long since this was pretty much the official doctrine in christendom, according to their bible. Of course they´ve backed away from it over time, probably after consultations with the big invisible guy. I guess.