My ideal Somalia

[Tanker]

You will get the Norway I am living in .... free health free education and all the boys are bi sexual there are gay sex education to the boys from the age of 14 where they are told " there is no problem if you play with little Kasper tonight " everyone is happy and smiling the water is clean and the welfare state protects you and you can fuck anyone you want

[Advo]

War yaa ilaahay yaqaan, wtf is up with these people and khaniisiin? Poor qaxootis misunderstood reer magaalnimo. I don't believe anyone would put that much effort, time and dedication if they're weren't practicing sodomites.

We have to ban radicalized somalis from Scandinavia iyo kanada coming back to the country. They are a tumor that needs to be severed.

[LiquidHYDROGEN]

You will get the Norway I am living in .... free health free education and all the boys are bi sexual there are gay sex education to the boys from the age of 14 where they are told " there is no problem if you play with little Kasper tonight " everyone is happy and smiling the water is clean and the welfare state protects you and you can fuck anyone you want

What is up with this thirsty fat qumayo? Some one said it was a female, I have never seen a female so obsessed with young boys and homosexuality.

[Thuganomics]

The
reason you are allowed to live in NA
is due to the civil rights movement
of Blacks not gays.

I actually watched a documentory about the civil rights saying exactly that.A Republican lawmaker said "We didn't really want to sign the civil rights bill,but because the groundswell was so enormous,We had to be seen doing something.We thought though let's put in a clause that would be so ridiculous congress would reject it.That ridiculous clause was that homosexuals would get the same rights under this law they were bound to reject that".He then said "to our surprise they didn't reject it but ratified it without batting an eyelid"
So your right,I don't know about Jews but certainly all this LGBT crap got their rights on the back of the civil black rights movement

[AbdiJohnson]

Actually atheists/agnostics would make sure no child dies of hunger in Somalia while religious people like Thuganomics and Anzeloti would laugh at dying Somali children in refugee camps as they have previously done.... while booty clapping for Gazan children

When I call for minority rights for gays in Somalia, I think of all minorities. You people kill and bully clan minorities. I don't trust you sick weirdos in even granting basic human rights to clan minorities. You treat them as barn animals but bring out your kitaab when it suits you. At least I am consistent in my messaging. You don't want to treat gays fairly but you also don't want to treat clan minorities and dying children in camps fairly so your opinion doesn't matter.

The same religious people on here laugh and jump when a fellow Somali killed in clan clashes or a terror attack. These people don't care about Somalis. And they get angry when someone calls for gay right. You never even cared about the rights of children and the most vulnerable but when gays are mentioned you are up in arms. Stop acting fake.

I am,

Abdi Johnson

[mclovin]

Oh boy, This is gonna be long.

Mclovin: you are entitled to your own opinion, but please don't try to pass weak sources as facts. Caliphates, by definition, operate with the sharia (however you want to define that) as their legal system. Alcohol is never completely wiped out (even in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to this day), but it is always officially banned under these legal systems.

The interpretation of sharia wasn't as puritanical and taken as literally as it is today. Although the Quran forbade drinking wine, the Hanifi legal view at the time allowed alcoholic drinks made from dates, honey, or figs. Harun al-Rashid the fifth Abbasid Caliph also engaged in drinking alcohol later in his reign. Also prostitution was largely left unenforced, with brothels and street prostitutes being allowed to operate in baghdad this was the same for gambling.

You're basically insinuating that someone who believe in God or is a practicing Muslim/Christian is unable to be creative or scholarly. This is another radical atheist mantra, but the facts state otherwise. The greatest scientists in the history of humanity have been everything from pagan, to Muslim, to Jewish, to Christian, to atheist and agnostic.

I never said that. I was talking about society in general liberalizing itself over generations, I didn't say anything about individual scientists.

With respect to the Moorish Emir you mentioned, it is clear that Wikipedia is your source and they mention a couple of RECENT ORIENTAL sources with no reference to primary sources. That's akin a Saudi Arabian man born in 1992 who has never set foot in England telling me about how King Edward the Elder (of England) was openly homosexual lol Anyone can write books about anything, it doesn't mean you should take it as fact. Take it with a grain of salt, it'll do your critical thinking skills much good.

The primary sources are listed in the bibliography of each book. The primary source of this in particular comes from The Memoirs of the Badis, the Last Zirid king of Granada.

More importantly, your entire argument is incoherent. Religiosity is closely associated with your personal makeup more than anything else, and it is not an indicator of stability or economical prosperity. Malaysia (religious people) is doing much better economically than Thailand (not so religious people). Conversely, England (not so religious) is doing much better economically than Ireland (ardent Catholics). How well a country is doing economically and how stable it is very little to do with how religious its people are, and it has more to do with how well led the country is (their business-savy and their willingness to build their nation and establish policies that foster peace and stability).

Once again, I wasn't talking about individuals, i was talking about society as a whole. Malaysia's largest religion Islam and Thailand's largest religion Buddhism are completely different religions. Islam is a more active religion requiring more daily rituals and adherence to moral code, while Buddhism is more passive,and not demanding as much from its followers. Thailand is actually a very conservative country, its just their religion doesn't prohibit as much as islam. In regards to Malaysia, Sixty percent of Malaysians still live on less than $1,600 each month and struggle to buy basic necessities like food. Just because they have a fancy capital city doesn't mean that they're prosperous.

Let's take an example closer to home: by your logic, Somalis in the diaspora who receive education and middle class jobs SHOULD be less religious (because they're not living in harshness or poverty) but we know that's not the case. How religious someone is has very little to do with his/her socio-economic status.

Liberalization of a population doesn't occur over night, its a generational change. Your view of the world is a slighty liberalized vision of your parents view of the world, and your parents view of the world is a slightly liberalized vision of theirs parents view of the world etc. Somalis living in diasporas are mainly composed of first and second generation somalis.

The correlation between income and religiousity is too large. Typically, The richer the country, the less religious they become.

[LiquidHYDROGEN]

Correlation is not the same as causation. Economic disparity is a lot subtler and more complicated. Look at Eastern europe, they are largely secular and yet have poorer economies than that of western europe.

Liberalisation ≠ Economic growth and prosperity. In fact, the opposite is true. The fastest economic growth in the last 50 years happened in East Asia when those countries were under harsh authoritarian regimes.

[mclovin]

Correlation is not the same as causation. Economic disparity is a lot subtler and more complicated. Look at Eastern europe, they are largely secular and yet have poorer economies than that of western europe.

Liberalisation ≠ Economic growth and prosperity. In fact, the opposite is true. The fastest economic growth in the last 50 years happened in East Asia when those countries were under harsh authoritarian regimes.

I meant liberalization in an social sense, not an economic one. Also i didn't say liberalization leads to economic prosperity, its the other way around.

Economic prosperity leads to liberalization(in a social sense) of the society at large.

[SahanGalbeed]

A benevolent {desire to do good to others} land and people

[Kareem99]

We can argue about what orientalists write back and forth. They have every right to write what they want about Islam and
Islamic history, it doesn't necessarily make it factual. There have been extremely repugnant things written by these
orientalists about Omar ibn Khattab with "primary sources" galore. Doesn't make it true when you have an even larger number
of "primary sources" that have nothing but praise for him. I take all history with a grain of salt. What I believe with regards
to certain historical matters are just that - my beliefs. I never try to pass them off as gospel as is done by everyone
from Christians to atheists to Muslims to Jews and even Nazis (ex. the Aryan issue). We'll agree to disagree on this one.

With regards to the sharia and how it's defined - we actually agreed on this one. What I was trying to say is that alcohol
is and was always prohibited under sharia law, but scholars of jurisprudence sometimes use loopholes and thus, what is in
theory illegal becomes (in practice) legal - case in point regarding alcoholic beverages made from barley vs. grapes.
And other times, it is simply not enforced. The same applies to prostitution and other aspects of the legal system.
This holds true for every legal system, even the ones in the West. You have some police forces in the USA not enforcing cannabis possession and they let the people smoke even though it's explicitly illegal. Or take anti-prostitution laws: you got massage parlors that are really
brothels (illegal) but anti-prostitution laws are rarely enforced depending on what part of the USA you are. I thought you were
saying alcohol and prostitution were actually explicitly legalized in the Abbasid caliphate, which would be incorrect. But we agree on this one.

Malaysia: I never said Malaysia was perfect (don't know what you got that from). Malaysia (a Muslim country with a high number of practicing people) is doing better than Thailand economically, despite the fact that Malaysia has, in general, a more religious population. So my point here still stands. So does my point about the Somalis living in the diaspora.

If you're not suggesting that religiosity stagnates creativity, scholarship, and economic advancement, then what ARE you saying?

If you want to compare countries, then yes: for the most part Western countries tend to be more economically developed and
they tend to be less religious. I just don't buy the conclusion you seem to propose - which is cause and effect. If two phenomena have a correlation, it is rather simplistic to assume that one caused the other. I can bring you a thousand graphs showing the
correlation between violent crimes and African American perpetrators. It is laughable to suggest that being black causes you to be violent.
There are various other factors at play which must be considered. I think a better question would be to study the income
of religious people vs. non-religious people in developed countries while controlling for factors such as access to education,
health care, etc... You can just imagine how difficult that would be.

I just don't buy this "being religious makes you less intelligent" garbage spewed by atheists (not saying that's what you're doing here - nor am I saying all atheists do this). Being a Christian makes you just that - a Christian. Just like being black doesn't automatically make you more violent or angry. It's not as simple as cause and effect.

Lastly, good on you for keeping this civil (and I say this with sincerity and without sarcasm).

[TheMailMan]

Kareem, bro don't waste your time getting into discussions with this McLovin troll. Look at how poor his reasoning skills are, and see for yourself that this guy has nothing more than an agenda to change the Somali people for the worse.

He doesn't even understand the basic principle of correlation=/causation. There are plenty of secular states today that are in utter poverty, such as Mozambique and Honduras. Yet this Mclovin troll wants to divide the world into Islam and the West. As if sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and East Asia don't exist. I mean, two generations ago the people of China were starving to death and now look at China today. Things change and they change quite fast. It's obvious that this McLovin character is just a naive kid with a chip on his shoulder.

It's best to let him bark.

[mclovin]

If you're not suggesting that religiosity stagnates creativity, scholarship, and economic advancement, then what ARE you saying?

That a side effect Economic prosperity is the society become less conservative and more permissive. Also, that a side effect extreme poverty(and war) is the society become less liberal and more restrictive. Religiosity itself doesn't cause or hamper anything. All I'm saying is increased religiousness is a byproduct of war and poverty as people try to find solace and comfort in their situation though religion. Also that increased liberalism is a byproduct of security and affluence as people try to make the most of their lives though the opportunities their wealth gives them. And when i refer to society I mean the people not the government(although the government can reflect the views of the people). Also just because a country is secular doesn't mean it's doing economically well. and just because a country is theocratic doesn't mean it isn't doing economically well

And thank you for being civil about this as well. I'm not trying to turn the world atheist or anything. People ask me why im atheist and they don't like the reply i give.

Kareem, bro don't waste your time getting into discussions with this McLovin troll. Look at how poor his reasoning skills are, and see for yourself that this guy has nothing more than an agenda to change the Somali people for the worse.

He doesn't even understand the basic principle of correlation=/causation. There are plenty of secular states today that are in utter poverty, such as Mozambique and Honduras. Yet this Mclovin troll wants to divide the world into Islam and the West. As if sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and East Asia don't exist. I mean, two generations ago the people of China were starving to death and now look at China today. Things change and they change quite fast. It's obvious that this McLovin character is just a naive kid with a chip on his shoulder.

It's best to let him bark.

I love you too.