₦airaland Forum

Dygeasy: Its crazy... No man to accompany! Very funny people. Last time I checked, hajj is to serve God and to observe one of the five pillars of islam. The only condition Allah (SWT) stated is "if you have the power and the road or route is good, you must perform hajj" when then did having a male to accompany you become a prerequisite for hajj. Abegi make we start our own hajj jor for naija jor.... Arabians too dey vex me

And who are you to question Arabs about the religion they invented?

Do you know it more than they do?

Abeg, none of you all should complain about the deportations by your "big brother"

Kslib: See as dem deport them like expired bags of sour garri.. After if any small thing happen for saudi arabia or middle east wey no concern dem..dem go begin protest with hungry belle for dry sun.. Abeg muslim pass muslim joor..

ogbeche77: The most painful part is that most of them were all sponsored by the pilgrimage board from the native state.. Thats fukcing taxpayers money going down the drain, how I wish it was from there own purse
But come to think of it, if I have offended my God and want forgiveness shouldn't I pay from my own pocket? Why must the govt pay? Since Nigeria is a secular state.. This should not be happening..
Those worshipping other dirties should also have access to pilgrimage funds.. Equation balance

+100

cheddarking: I just tire for them...

The Koran actually promises Baywatch Chicks complete with Bikini and maybe your own everlasting theme song if you're really good...

Please find a verse promising 0rgies with said baywatch chicks in heaven. If so, then I will convert to islam myself and go kill some christians or hindus

Me + Gabrielle Union + Meagan Good?

Allahu Akbar!!!

Does high bosom = small chest?

If so, does the Koran have provisions for big-breasted virgins with nice azz too?

And hopefully the girls aren't fugly either...it would suck to blow yourself up in the name of Islam, then receive 77 chicks you aren't even attracted to

lol

bra and panties
or preferably n@ked always

hrm.

coined by whom?

both don't really roll off the tongue well (at least mine)

Damn

berem: How many Tiger product we go get for naija? We get Tiger Battery,Tiger Generator and Tiger Torch.now na Tiger Flour! Na Tiger be the only animal wey God create? Tiger ko! Antelope ni!

lol

It is probably best to be specific in your accusations rather than using phrases like "some of the posters."

Be a man rather than a coward.

If you want an "African" voice, then choose Nigeria. Since it arguably has a more significant impact on the world economy than SA does, and this gap will only increase over time (since Nigeria's growth rate >>>> SAs)

birdman: What religion was that? Im curious because older folk, in a well-meaning attempt to keep their children on the straight and narrow (christianity in their minds) often exaggerate traditional practices. Im not a proponent of such religions, but I think some measure of balance is always a good idea.

So I actually don't really know. I think we were Shango worshippers? I'm not too sure...I guess I should ask them. I don't really think my parents were exaggerating...the sense I get is the old religion was a sh1tload of work. Always have to sacrifice random crap to appease some gods. I can see why folks abandoned it for Christianity.

PhysicsQED: I wasn't commenting on the religious violence or intolerance of pagan Europe vs. Christian Europe in that time but rather on the religious violence and intolerance of Christian Europe in that time and how they got away from those practices. And if one is against religion in its entirety, then both would be condemned anyway. I don't see what the relevance of this line of argument really is.

I read that part of your post as some sort of argument that Christianity was particularly barbaric during that time period, relative to other religions (or even the atheists of that time, let's say). So, if that is your claim, then a lot more is required.

Based on the fact that I can't think of any religions that could compete with those two but if you can think of a third, let me know.

And that to you is sufficient to argue that Christianity or Islam in that time period were particularly barbaric? How about you link to some sort of study that actually compares religious practices around that time? And if you have no such reference, then how exactly did you come to your conclusion that those were the worst two?

Are Turkish Muslims as violent (with regard to religiously motivated violence) or as prone to Islamist terrorism as some other Muslim nations around the world? I don't think so.

Indeed, Turkey is not. But, more generally, it is also (probably) true that most Muslims are not religious fanatics.

But as we already discussed in this thread, that doesn't mean that the rate of fanatics in Islam versus various other religions is the same, or even comparable.

My point is that the culture (such as European enlightenment culture vs. rigid, ascetic Middle Eastern cultures) is what is most relevant to how a religion is being practiced in 2012.

Sure, fine...I guess many people have different hypotheses for why Islam is violent and backwards today in 2012. But so long as you are not attempting to expand this to saying that all religions are violent, backwards, etc in 2012 (as Soyinka seems to be suggesting), then I have no quibble.

PhysicsQED: On pagan Europe, I just think there's not enough information to reach any definite conclusion. Anyway, an auto-da-fe (burning people alive) or other Christian religious executions aren't any less barbaric than a human sacrifice and certainly are more barbaric than a human sacrifice of an actual condemned criminal (someone who was going to be killed anyway) to some deity, so even if they were practicing human sacrifices, they might not have been worse off for it (unless they were practicing human sacrifice on an Aztec-like scale).

The relevant question is, did Christianity make Europeans more violent, or not? As you say, you don't have any evidence to say "yes."

I'm not familiar with any study but we can basically rule out every single religion other than Islam as far as religions that could compete with Christianity for religious violence,

Based. On. What?

so it just becomes a question of whether Islam or Christianity had more religious violence during those times. That would be a tough call to make but I would lean more toward Christianity having more religious violence during this time period only because I can think of (or am familiar with) more documented examples of religious violence for Christians. Both Muslims and Christians were very intolerant and violent back then though.

OK, so who cares. Of what relevance is the violence of the two religions from 500AD-1500AD in a discussion presumably about the merits of these religions and their impact on humanity in 2012?

Though truth be told, the same is true of France and the UK. It should be something like:

1. US
2. EU
3. China
4. India

maybe Russia or Brazil as the 5th. Japan too, perhaps?

Those are the big dogs on this planet.