How the Islamist Mindset Rationalizes — and Promotes — ‘Sex Sins’

[Bordercop]

The link: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/how-the...otes-sex-sins/


How the Islamist Mindset Rationalizes — and Promotes — ‘Sex Sins’

Almost anything is permissible if it can help advance the jihad.

March 1, 2010 - by Raymond Ibrahim

Is it inconsistent for Muslim “holy warriors” to engage in voyeuristic acts of lasciviousness? Because would-be jihadists and martyrs have been known to frequent strip bars — such as the 9/11 hijackers and Major Nidal Hasan, whose “late-night jiggle-joint carousing stands at odds with the picture of a devout Muslim” — many Americans have concluded that such men cannot be “true” Muslims, leading to the ubiquitous conviction that they are “hijacking Islam.”

In fact, Islamists rely on several rationalizations — doctrines, even — that make “jiggle-joint carousing” consistent with Muslim piety. Considering that Islamic law permits sex slaves (Koran 4:3), who can be kept topless by their masters, and makes sex one of the highest paradisiacal rewards, this should come as no great surprise. However, to elaborate:

First, the doctrine of taqiyya allows Muslims residing among infidels to deceive the latter by, among other things, behaving like infidels, e.g., frequenting strip bars: “Taqiyya [deception], even if committed without duress, does not lead to a state of infidelity — even if it leads to sin deserving of hellfire.”

In conjunction, the overarching Muslim principle that necessity makes that which is forbidden permissible goes a long way in helping Islamists validate their libidinous desires: “It is ‘necessary’ for me to be at this strip club so infidels come to believe that I’m just a regular bloke and not a soldier of Allah.” Indeed, sometimes the mere gratification of sexual urges is deemed a “necessity” that makes the forbidden permissible in Islam, as in this historical anecdote:

After conquering the Banu Mustaliq tribe in 628, Muhammad’s men deemed it “necessary” to rape their captive women (citing their wives’ absence and untended desires). However, they also wanted to sell these women for a profit, which posed complications, as copulating with them risked impregnating them. So they rationalized that ‘azl (coitus interruptus) would solve the problem and asked Muhammad. The prophet went one step further and offered a cosmic rationalization, dismissing coitus interruptus as unnecessary, “for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born” — that is, pullout or not, you cannot thwart Allah’s will, so don’t bother. (See here and here for more ‘azl quotes.)

Muhammad also maintained that death in the jihad not only blots out all sins — including sexual ones, a la voyeurism — but it actually gratifies them:

The martyr is special to Allah. He is forgiven [of all sins] from the first drop of blood [that he sheds]. He sees his throne in paradise, where he will be adorned in ornaments of faith. He will wed the ‘Aynhour [a.k.a. “voluptuous women”] and will not know the torments of the grave, and safeguards against the greater terror [hell]. … And he will copulate with 72 ‘Aynhour (see The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 143).

In light of this, how “un-Islamic” can it be for Islamists to gawk at nude, gyrating, infidel women — especially prior to “martyring” themselves in the jihad, which, as Muhammad said, blots out all their sins? This rationalization has precedents going back to the Middle Ages: Muslim groups like the Isma‘ilis created hidden “gardens of delight” swarming with voluptuous women, and, prior to sending their assassins on missions, would immerse them in these gardens, thereby giving these prototypical “suicide attackers” a foretaste of the sexual delights awaiting them in the afterlife. After this experience, the assassins would eagerly undertake any assignment simply to be “martyred” and return to the gardens of delight, which were based on “the description Muhammad gave of his paradise” (see Marco Polo’s 13th-century account).

Nor has this intersection between sex and violence subsided in the modern era. The Arabic satellite program Daring Question recently aired various clips of young jihadists giddily singing about their forthcoming deaths and subsequent sexual escapades in heaven. After documenting various anecdotes indicative of Islamist obsession with sex, human rights activist Magdi Khalil concluded that “absolutely everything [jihad, suicide operations, etc.] revolves around sex in heaven,” adding, “if you look at the whole of Islamic history, you come up with two words: sex and violence.”

Deceit, rationalizations, and a paradise that forgives the would-be martyr’s every sin — indeed, that satiates his hedonistic urges with 72 voluptuous women (which may only be raisins) — all help demonstrate how Muslims can be observant and simultaneously frequent strip clubs.

Yet there is one final explanation that requires an epistemic shift to appreciate fully: in Islam, legalism trumps morality, resulting in what Westerners may deem irreconcilable behavior among Muslims, that is, “hypocrisy.” As Daniel Pipes observed some three decades ago in his In the Path of God:

[There is] a basic contrast between the Christian and Islamic religions: the stress on ethics versus the stress on laws. Controls on sexual activity directly reflect this difference. The West restricts sex primarily by imbuing men and women with standards of morality. … Muslims, in contrast, depend on “external precautionary safeguards” [e.g., segregation, veiling] to restrain the sexes. … Rather than instill internalized ethical principles, Islam establishes physical boundaries to keep the sexes apart.

In this context, the problem is not Muslims frequenting strip clubs, but misplaced Western projections that assume religious piety is always synonymous with personal morality — a notion especially alien to legalistic Islamists whose entire epistemology begins and ends with the literal words of seventh-century Muhammad and his Koran.

And it is this slavishness that best explains Islamist behavior. For the same blind devotion to the literal mandates of Islam which encourages Islamists to lead lives of deceit also explains why Islamists are callous to human suffering, why they are desensitized to notions of human dignity and the cries of their raped victims, and, yes, why they cheerily forfeit their lives in exchange for a fleshy paradise. In all cases, Muhammad and his Allah said so — and that’s all that matters.

[moutinman]

Interesting article. I would argue that the use of Taqiyya to deceive Infidels is a valid technique, but one thats truth is known only in the heart of the user. Most of what I have seen of Taqiyya is as justification to conduct acts that would generally not be permitted. But there are exceptions where Muslims use Taqiyya in a genuine manner in order to blend in. This could be as simple as not wearing the proper clothing or not praying five times a day in order to not draw attention. Most people (Muslim's and non Muslim's) can see through the lie of claiming Taqiyya as an excuse to visit strip joints, drink, etc.

As for the Quran being used to justify all evil acts....it can and often does. But if taken one sentence at a time the same could be said of nearly all religious scripture to include the Bible, and the Tanakh. I'm not saying that the totality of the Bible is in any way similar to the Quran, merely that due to the nature of scriptures there is much that can be taken out of context and twisted. Many have twisted Christianity and the Bible throughout time from the KKK to the Nazi's.

The ethics vs. law argument is a good one. I think this stems largely from the "if it is God's will" mentality for everything. There is a huge lack of personal accountability in most Islamic culture because of this (but again this is not the case with all Muslim's). This is why there societies enforce laws instead of relying on ethics and personal character as most western nations do.

My main point is that we should be careful to not take the stance of "all Muslim's are terrorists." This is a dismissive and dangerous way to think. Islam is a religion that is flawed, as are most for one reason or another, but it cannot be damned any more than the rest. From my experience I would argue that economic, social, and political issues set the table for extremism more readily than religion.

Just my thoughts.....

So I guess my happy thought of the day will be that I will never make a good Muslim. I have morals!!
AM

[LJ19]

Although I'm not convinced by it, the article is thought-provoking. I don't understand why Christianity is pitted against Islam to make it seem superior, however. The article mentions the rape of captive women by Muhammad, but fails to mention the same thing is described and encouraged at times in the Bible as well. The same thing with slavery. The Bible also mentions "external precautionary safeguards" that women must adhere to. I would also say that "blind devotion" to "literal mandates" could describe one who believes in any religion or belief. That seems to be up to the individual. Wouldn't the crusaders be described as "callous to human suffering" also ?

[AF IDMT]

Originally Posted by LJ19

The article mentions the rape of captive women by Muhammad, but fails to mention the same thing is described and encouraged at times in the Bible as well.

I am not a Biblical scholar by any means so please forgive this question if it seems dumb but, where exactly in the Bible does it say it is ok to rape captives, or anyone for that matter? Killing is in there, fasting I've seen, even cutting the skin off of a groan (sic) man's penis right before going into battle (for you Old Testament fans out there) but I don't remember hearing anything about rape being ok.

~Aaron

I don't understand why Christianity is pitted against Islam to make it seem superior

Google Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael.

Deleted.

[LJ19]

Originally Posted by AF IDMT

I am not a Biblical scholar by any means so please forgive this question if it seems dumb but, where exactly in the Bible does it say it is ok to rape captives, or anyone for that matter? Killing is in there, fasting I've seen, even cutting the skin off of a groan (sic) man's penis right before going into battle (for you Old Testament fans out there) but I don't remember hearing anything about rape being ok.

There are many bible passages where the Israelites are told to "take the women" for themselves. The 20th and 21st chapters of Deuteronomy are examples.

Originally Posted by AF IDMT

Google Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael.

I meant that more to say that I didn't understand the author's justifications for doing it.

[T-Rock]

I don't understand why Christianity is pitted against Islam to make it seem superior, however.

You got it backwards, Islam pits itself against every other religion and pagan on the face of the planet - it’s Islamic Law - all other religions are abrogated by Islam.

w4.1 THE FINALITY OF THE PROPHET’S MESSAGE (from a1.5)

(2) Previously revealed religions were valid in their own eras, as is attested to by many verses of the holy Koran, but were abrogated by the universal message of islam, as is equally attested to by many verses in the Koran…

…it is unbelief (kufr) to hold that the remnant cults now bearing the names of formerly valid religions, such as “Christianity” or “Judaism,”…

(3) islam is the final religion that allah most high will never lessen or abrogate until the last day.

(Pgs. 846-848 - The Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law)

What happens for the professing kufr you may ask?

o4.17 There is no indemnity obligatory for killing a non-muslim…
(see pgs 593-598 - The Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law)

http://www.amazon.com/Reliance-Trave.../dp/0915957728

[Richard]

It is difficult for any rational thinking human to imagine so much hatred could be the result of three works of fiction, all perversely claiming to tell the truth and professing a love of peace - astounding.

And so it goes...

Richard's jaded $.02

[craigepo]

Originally Posted by Richard

It is difficult for any rational thinking human to imagine so much hatred could be the result of three works of fiction, all perversely claiming to tell the truth and professing a love of peace - astounding.

Richard's jaded $.02

Aww, now we've stirred the pot.

So, do you also believe the works of the Jewish historian Josephus to be fiction as well?

[LJ19]

Originally Posted by T-Rock

You got it backwards, Islam pits itself against every other religion and pagan on the face of the planet - it’s Islamic Law - all other religions are abrogated by Islam.

I said it before. But, I meant that I didn't understand the author's reasoning for doing so. I don't mind him criticizing any religion. But, why present one as if it's better ? Most religions are naturally pitted against each other as belief in one typically means rejection of the other.

Originally Posted by T-Rock

w4.1 THE FINALITY OF THE PROPHET’S MESSAGE (from a1.5)

(2) Previously revealed religions were valid in their own eras, as is attested to by many verses of the holy Koran, but were abrogated by the universal message of islam, as is equally attested to by many verses in the Koran…

…it is unbelief (kufr) to hold that the remnant cults now bearing the names of formerly valid religions, such as “Christianity” or “Judaism,”…

(3) islam is the final religion that allah most high will never lessen or abrogate until the last day.

Christianity is the final religion according to the Bible.

Originally Posted by T-Rock;318233(Pgs. 846-848 - The Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law)

What happens for the professing kufr you may ask?

[I

o4.17 There is no indemnity obligatory for killing a non-muslim…[/I]
(see pgs 593-598 - The Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law)

http://www.amazon.com/Reliance-Trave.../dp/0915957728

Many verses in the Bible call for unbelievers to be killed. Christianity has also been used to justify the murder or enslavement of large groups of people.

[afchic]

LJ19 - I think the point you are missing is that any religion can justify anything with select verses from their sacred texts.

I would ask you to identify any verse in the NEW Testament that calls for rape of women and children or the enslavement of non believers.

You need to seperate the action of men against that of the word in their sacred texts.

[LJ19]

Originally Posted by afchic

LJ19 - I think the point you are missing is that any religion can justify anything with select verses from their sacred texts.

Thanks for your response afchic. But, that was the point I was making. If any religion can justify anything with select verses, one religion shouldn't be described as more "callous to human suffering" or more "desensitized to notions of human dignity."

Originally Posted by afchic

I would ask you to identify any verse in the NEW Testament that calls for rape of women and children or the enslavement of non believers.

Did Jesus ever speak out against slavery ?

[Bordercop]

Regarding slavery, here's what Jesus said:

"If you want to be great, you must be the servant of all the others. And if you want to be first, you must be the slave of the rest. The Son of Man did not come to be a slave master, but a slave who will give his life to rescue many people." (Matthew 20:26-28, CEV)

"Whoever wants to be first among you must be the slave of everyone else." (Mark 10:44, NLT)

Indeed, the slavery Jesus and Paul spoke of is a very different type of slavery we know. The slavery they condoned is serving people with absolute selfless love, regardless what positions we are in: doctors, teachers, employers and employees, parents and children.

Jesus taught that the two most important commandments are 1) love God, and 2) love others as you love yourself: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength. The second is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these." (Mark 12:30-31, ASV)

Show me a similar passage in the Koran...which hasn't been abrogated...you won't find one. The muslim relgion is a made up fairy tale designed by a child molestor, liar and thief to justify his actions to his gullible followers.

You can make excuses for them if you want to. Be my guest, but don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.

[LJ19]

Originally Posted by Bordercop

Regarding slavery, here's what Jesus said:

"If you want to be great, you must be the servant of all the others. And if you want to be first, you must be the slave of the rest. The Son of Man did not come to be a slave master, but a slave who will give his life to rescue many people." (Matthew 20:26-28, CEV)

"Whoever wants to be first among you must be the slave of everyone else." (Mark 10:44, NLT)

Indeed, the slavery Jesus and Paul spoke of is a very different type of slavery we know. The slavery they condoned is serving people with absolute selfless love, regardless what positions we are in: doctors, teachers, employers and employees, parents and children.

Jesus taught that the two most important commandments are 1) love God, and 2) love others as you love yourself: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength. The second is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these." (Mark 12:30-31, ASV)

I'm not trying to offend you. I don't have any preference for either religion. I know Jesus mentions a symbolic slavery. But Jesus doesn't ever condemn those who have slaves, and he never says physical slavery should end.

Originally Posted by Bordercop

Show me a similar passage in the Koran...which hasn't been abrogated...you won't find one. The muslim relgion is a made up fairy tale designed by a child molestor, liar and thief to justify his actions to his gullible followers.

You think your religion is true, and theirs is a lie, I understand. Christianity hasn't always been tolerant, however, and some verses do support violence and slavery.