SomaliNet Forums

If someone drinks their heart away in their own home, I don’t give a rat’s ass. However if an alcoholic abuses children or drives and endangers the lives of other citizens, that is when the state should step in. And for someone so seemingly enchanted with the idea of moderation, I think you will agree that is the best approach, isn’t that so?

If we follow that logic then we`d end up waiting for a crime to be committed before intervening.
Muslims and non Muslims alike know the utter destruction alcohol wreaks across society. We don`t tolerate certain practises because its against the interest of an orderly society.The interests of the whole society must out weigh the interests of the few.

Saudi Arabia is not balanced and it does not represent the form of governance which I would advocate for, a country that does is Malaysia and they are the ones that have a fraction of the abuse rates that European countries have. Btw don't think I have not noticed that you have very conveniently ignored the evidence which you vowed did not exist.

You have this beautiful idea that morality is an innate trait in society that does not need to be reinforced. If that was the case it would be perfect but it's not. We evolve and our sense of what is acceptable changes with time. Homosexuality was a taboo just a few decades past, a lifestyle that was shunned because of the higher level of disease, abuse and drugs that were linked to it. These things are still linked with homosexuality but society has shifted its moral stance and now homosexuality is accepted. Finally we get to your line when it comes to dictating society's moral conduct which is incest. But society will move on, the same way homosexuality has become acceptable, in time so will incest. We see articles in the news all the time about consenting adults engaged in this, no matter how much you try to use that as your excuse of standing against it. It sickens you because it is wrong and you know it is wrong and that is why it is illegal. But 50 years from now perhaps when again the moral compass makes a shift and it becomes completely acceptable do you wonder if there will be a Muslim exactly where you are right now arguing for this?


ps to answer your question no that is not moderation. By making it socially acceptable for people to drink to their heart's content whenever they choose by allowing easy access to alcohol you are directly putting at risk the lives of children, the welfare of the vulnerable, the health of abusers and the fabric of the society.

BlackVelvet wrote:Saudi Arabia is not balanced and it does not represent the form of governance which I would advocate for, a country that does is Malaysia and they are the ones that have a fraction of the abuse rates that European countries have. Btw don't think I have not noticed that you have very conveniently ignored the evidence which you vowed did not exist.

You have this beautiful idea that morality is an innate trait in society that does not need to be reinforced. If that was the case it would be perfect but it's not. We evolve and our sense of what is acceptable changes with time. Homosexuality was a taboo just a few decades past, a lifestyle that was shunned because of the higher level of disease, abuse and drugs that were linked to it. These things are still linked with homosexuality but society has shifted its moral stance and now homosexuality is accepted. Finally we get to your line when it comes to dictating society's moral conduct which is incest. But society will move on, the same way homosexuality has become acceptable, in time so will incest. We see articles in the news all the time about consenting adults engaged in this, no matter how much you try to use that as your excuse of standing against it. It sickens you because it is wrong and you know it is wrong and that is why it is illegal. But 50 years from now perhaps when again the moral compass makes a shift and it becomes completely acceptable do you wonder if there will be a Muslim exactly where you are right now arguing for this?


ps to answer your question no that is not moderation. By making it socially acceptable for people to drink to their heart's content whenever they choose by allowing easy access to alcohol you are directly putting at risk the lives of children, the welfare of the vulnerable, the health of abusers and the fabric of the society.

Firstly, I examined the links you gave, and it is simply not sufficient to support your conclusion that alcohol is to blame for the huge difference in child abuse cases between Malaysia and The Netherlands. Perhaps The Netherlands has better methods of collecting data on the abuse of children? Perhaps Malaysia and The Netherlands have different criteria in evaluating what is considered child abuse and what isn’t? For example corporal punishment by parents is outlawed in The Netherlands, while it is perfectly legal in Malaysia. If you wish to make such an overarching claim, you will need more comprehensive data. BTW, I’ll have you know that Dutch children are the happiest and most content in the industrialized world according to UNICEF.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6360517.stm

Also:

Like in most countries, only extreme child abuse and neglect cases are reported in Malaysia, often involving tragic elements of disturbing injuries, sexual abuse or even death.

International experience suggests that reported cases are likely to represent only 10 per cent of total cases perpetrated as most victims and their families remain too ashamed or unable to report the violations against them.

http://www.unicef.org/malaysia/protection.html

Secondly, your point about societies changing morals is irrelevant. I do not support legislating based upon morals, which are rather subjective, but based upon societal interests. Morals may change, but the interests of societies remain consistent. For example, it has always been in the interest of society to keep violence levels down, and since the beginning of civilization governments have had a monopoly on violence. It is in the interest of society to prohibit the abuse of children, the incestuous relationships between close relatives, and the irresponsible use of drugs, alcohol, and sex. It is not in the interest of society to force the religious morals of a one group upon others. That will only create unnecessary tension and problems that need not be. Some people may consider it immoral for a woman to walk the streets with her hair uncovered, would it be acceptable for the state to ban that woman from walking the streets so long as her hair remains unconfined in cloth? Absolutely NOT. I don’t understand your need to be the moral police of other people, it makes no sense. The ban on homosexuality (at least in the United States) was overturned because it was upon enforcing the morals of other people and not in the best interests of the state. The ban on incest remains not because of moral considerations but because it threatens the fabric of society if incestuous relationships and their ensuing genetic deformities were to be tolerated. Also the thing about gays and disease sorta became irrelevant with the invention of condoms and STD testing.

Thirdly, your position on alcohol is not moderate. You advocate for the complete banning of alcohol. That’s reactionary, extreme, stupid and impractical. But none of those considerations ever stopped people crusading for morals, now did they.

original dervish wrote:Instead of advocating for the impractical banning of alcohol based upon moral considerations, why don’t you advocate for the implementation of laws that protect people from alcoholics, such as those in place in the Western world? If someone drinks their heart away in their own home, I don’t give a rat’s ass

Alcohol related death in the Western world is abysmal, how can they be an example? It is naive if you think that the drinker will remain in his own home, he will be out to rob you.

Dude even if that was 10%, the total expected abuse cases would still be 10% of the cases in The Netherlands and given Malaysia's population is nearly double that of The Netherlands it still proves my point.

Also if STI checks and condoms make Homosexual lifestyles acceptable then genetic screening and abortion will be an easy fix for incest. You have to admit this argument will be coming up in the next few decades. For every problem you can almost always find a solution if there is nothing more intrinsic holding you back. I like how you tied accepting incest as bring a threat to the fabric of society that is the only real reason why homosexuality like incest are on the exact same page. Just that homosexuality is leading the way in unraveling that thread.

ps LOL@ happiness statistics I always find that to be the weirdest study case no matter what the context.

Now that I am done not letting you have the last word ...

union wrote:It is not in the interest of society to force the religious morals of a one group upon others

Is this what this whole thread has been about? Not enforcing Islamic laws and morals on non Muslims because it came across like you were trying to alter Islamic laws for the Muslims. Have I misunderstood? Because if that is what you have been saying then I agree with you.

18 pages! In my opinion, the best bet for Muslims in the west is to align with the liberals. You oppose other minorities and you will be next. Blend in or go to a Muslim dominated country, ironically with less/no freedom and no room to maneuver

waryaa wrote:18 pages! In my opinion, the best bet for Muslims in the west is to align with the liberals. You oppose other minorities and you will be next. Blend in or go to a Muslim dominated country, ironically with less/no freedom and no room to maneuver

YES.

BlackVelvet wrote: Dude even if that was 10%, the total expected abuse cases would still be 10% of the cases in The Netherlands and given Malaysia's population is nearly double that of The Netherlands it still proves my point.
quote]

BV, like I told you, the criteria for what is considered child abuse and the mechanisms for identifying and reporting child abuse are different between The Netherlands and Malaysia. I also provided you with evidence describing the difficulty of reporting child abuse cases in Malaysia, whose government does not have as many resources as it’s disposable as Holland. Malaysia lacks the proper intuitional mechanisms for monitoring and managing child abuse cases in their country, and the Malaysian government records only the most SEVERE cases of child abuse and of those severe cases reported, UNICEF admits that is perhaps at most 10% of the actual number of severe cases of child abuse that happen in the country.

Also consider this:

There has been increasing awareness that sexual abuse of children is a problem in Malaysia. Existing data are based on notification of cases. Population-based studies are required to plan services for sexually abused children. In this study, an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire was given to student nurses and trainee medical assistants at the Ipoh School of Nursing and Hospital Bahagia Medical Assistant Training School. Questionnaires were distributed directly to all students in a classroom setting and retrieved after a 30-minute interval. Information collected included questions on personal experiences of sexual abuse. Sexual abuse was defined as rape, sodomy, molestation, or exhibitionism that occurred to a child less than 18 years old. A total of 616 students participated in the study. Of the 6.8 percent of the students who acknowledged having been sexually abused in their childhoods, 2.1 percent were males, and 8.3 percent were females. Of those abused, 69 percent reported sexual abuse that involved physical contact, 9.5 percent of whom experienced sexual intercourse. The age at first abuse was less than 10 years old in 38.1 percent of the cases; 59.5 percent were repeatedly abused, and 33.3 percent had more than one abuser. Of the abusers, 71.4 percent were known to the respondent, 14.2 percent of whom were brothers, 24.5 percent relatives, and 24.5 percent a family friend. Further, 28.9 percent of all students knew of an individual who had been sexually abused as a child. Although this population may not be entirely reflective of the community, this study does provide an indication of the prevalence of sexual abuse in Malaysian children. The prevalence figures in this study are lower than those reported in industrialized countries, and this may reflect local sociocultural limitations in reporting abuse.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/ ... ?id=163222

BTW, child abuse is more highly correlated with low levels of education and poverty. It would be more wise to target those problems rather than trying to eliminate the consumption of alcohol, which would be nearly impossible.

Please don't bother debating this point further, you don't have a cogent argument.

BlackVelvet wrote: Also if STI checks and condoms make Homosexual lifestyles acceptable then genetic screening and abortion will be an easy fix for incest. You have to admit this argument will be coming up in the next few decades. For every problem you can almost always find a solution if there is nothing more intrinsic holding you back. I like how you tied accepting incest as bring a threat to the fabric of society that is the only real reason why homosexuality like incest are on the exact same page. Just that homosexuality is leading the way in unraveling that thread.

I already told you that most cases of incest are inherently nonconsensual. Sexual relations between parent/child and older sibling/young sibling are by their very nature coercive and constitute rape. Other incestuous relationships such as between first cousins and uncle and niece are becoming less taboo in human society. In Qatar, you can legally marry your 1st cousin if you undergo genetic screenings, and these relationships have also been decriminalized in Sweden and Brazil. In parts of the United States, it is possible to wed your cousin if you are beyond child bearing age. In cases where the incest does not constitute rape and where there isn’t a risk of enhanced genetic deformity of the children, then the state probably will not intervene as its primarily mandate is to protect citizens, not act as a moral police force. Homosexuality does not carry the risk of genetic deformity of children (indeed procreation in homosexual relationships is in principle impossible), and homosexuality does not have rape as an inherent factor. The equivalence you are trying to draw between homosexuality and incest is a bogus one, and based upon your own prejudices rather than objective analysis.

BlackVelvet wrote: Is this what this whole thread has been about? Not enforcing Islamic laws and morals on non Muslims because it came across like you were trying to alter Islamic laws for the Muslims. Have I misunderstood? Because if that is what you have been saying then I agree with you.[/

This thread is about the move towards progressive values and ideals by Muslims. Not enforcing Islamic laws and morals on non Muslims was a side debate about the virtues of secularism.

Simple mathematics if you assume the number quoted for cases in Malaysia is 10% of the actual figure, despite what the reasons are, 100% would still be less than 10% of the cases reported in The Netherlands in one year, go calculate it if you don't believe me.

You are the one who spoke of "the threads of the fabric of society" as an argument for your case against incest. It is indecisive to use it then and ignore it when you argue for Homosexuality. Morality seems an argument to pick up and discard at will and lets not even go into the link between child abuse and homosexuality.

Anyway I was trying to see if there was a profound reasoning to justify your stance that I was just failing to see so thanks for answering my questions. But if I understood you correctly from the get go then my very first comment on this thread was sufficient.

You either struggle with reading comprehension or are being intentionally obtuse. I will not repeat myself in the vain hope that repetition will induce understanding. Thank you for your contributions to this thread (however lacking they were in substance. )

Please don't repeat yourself, I think I have caused you to rake up enough dambi as it is by letting you babble on.

Trust me, ignorance is not a virtue.

BlackVelvet wrote:Please don't repeat yourself, I think I have caused you to rake up enough dambi as it is by letting you babble on.

If you are willing to put aside Islam and why it needs to be changed to be more inclusive of men who dress like women or men and women who want to change their gender or sleep with the same sex or how it is okay for Muslims to get drunk in their own homes and why we as Muslims should develop progressive values that embrace these "wonderful" traits in society we can discuss the simple math problem you seem unable to solve.

If 1,656 is only 10% of X, what is X?