Pretty soon a man who looks at a woman will be up on rape charges - no pun intended. I mean, he was thinking about it....wasn't he? Or is that the other way around....the woman will be up on rape charges? Joanne | 01.18.08 - 8:25 pm
Covenant: I think Sharia law addresses this conundrum.... it's the woman's responsibility to ensure the male is not aroused into raping her. Thus the requirement to be veiled when in public.
After all, expecting the Muslim male to be responsible for his own behavior is detrimental to his being a savage barbarian while at war against the infidel.
The Islamic perversions of Judaism never cease to amaze me. Take for example the cunning way Muslims project evil onto women by claiming the later comprise ten "awrahs" or sexual organs, such as hair, hence the hijab. Being [female]is equated in Islam as "hate-speech", to make a comparison between us and them. Your saying is hate; and your being is hate.
The concept of woman as shame is clear: That the burkah is meant to cover the "shame" of female sexuality and allure that supposedly arises in woman at the onset of puberty. This censorship of being is the Muslim equivalent of hate-speech censorship in the West.
'Conflicted' hardly begins to cover the problem of sexuality in Islam. That Leftists would pander to this skewed version of reality in Islamic culture for the sake of indulging maternalistic philobarbarism is beyond anything sane. The Christian perversions of Gnostic Pelagianism overthrows Augustinianism to produce a childless sea of clamouring suicides in the West celebrating the arena's most repulsive 'martyrdoms', with the Gnostics front and centre in the sand. And in this fury of martyrdom we are expected to follow their example? Madness.
Perverted Jewish Islam. Perverted Christian Gnosticism. Women are Shame. Love is Hate. Well, someone has to say something about it and suffer the consequences. Thank you, Ezra Levant.
2 comments:
Covenant: I think Sharia law addresses this conundrum.... it's the woman's responsibility to ensure the male is not aroused into raping her. Thus the requirement to be veiled when in public.
After all, expecting the Muslim male to be responsible for his own behavior is detrimental to his being a savage barbarian while at war against the infidel.
The Islamic perversions of Judaism never cease to amaze me. Take for example the cunning way Muslims project evil onto women by claiming the later comprise ten "awrahs" or sexual organs, such as hair, hence the hijab. Being [female]is equated in Islam as "hate-speech", to make a comparison between us and them. Your saying is hate; and your being is hate.
The concept of woman as shame is clear: That the burkah is meant to cover the "shame" of female sexuality and allure that supposedly arises in woman at the onset of puberty. This censorship of being is the Muslim equivalent of hate-speech censorship in the West.
'Conflicted' hardly begins to cover the problem of sexuality in Islam. That Leftists would pander to this skewed version of reality in Islamic culture for the sake of indulging maternalistic philobarbarism is beyond anything sane. The Christian perversions of Gnostic Pelagianism overthrows Augustinianism to produce a childless sea of clamouring suicides in the West celebrating the arena's most repulsive 'martyrdoms', with the Gnostics front and centre in the sand. And in this fury of martyrdom we are expected to follow their example? Madness.
Perverted Jewish Islam. Perverted Christian Gnosticism. Women are Shame. Love is Hate. Well, someone has to say something about it and suffer the consequences. Thank you, Ezra Levant.
Post a Comment