Slashdot Mirror
LittleBigPlanet Delayed Due To Qur'an-Sampling Audio
Several readers have pointed out that Sony's much-awaited LittleBigPlanet has hit a snag and will be delayed worldwide. The delay came after it was discovered that a song licensed for use in the soundtrack contained audio samples from the Qur'an. All advanced copies sent to retailers for the target release of October 21 in North America, 22 in PAL territories, and 24 in the UK and Ireland, have been recalled. "The post, by user 'Solid08', indicates of the specific references in the composition: 'In the 18th second: "kollo nafsin tha'iqatol mawt", literally: "Every soul shall have the taste of death' ... almost immediately after, in the 27th second: "kollo man alaiha fan", literally: "All that is on earth will perish."'"
So what if it has that there?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I thought writing the lines in text was a reproduction just as much as the audio? Yet /. just posted them?
Or maybe I'm just confused and there is a difference between writing them and the audio copy.
Delayed PS3 game + angry gamers + Anon. internet forums + Western distrust of Islam = A lot of wasted /. Moderator points slaying trolls.
Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
It's not like some militant Islamic sect would burn down the distributor's house... oh, wait.
So I can publish games that include demons, prostitutes, foul language, and abhorrent levels of bloodshed and violence--just as long as it doesn't piss off a Muslim somewhere?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
I don't see the big deal here, since Muslims are supposed to want to distribute the Qur'an. But I can see how people would be extra paranoid about offending Muslims, since some of them take offense violently.
-- Support a free market in the field of government
Yeah? And? So? What?
Another look at the meaning is clearly only stating the obvious: Just as every life has a beginning it also too must have an end. It does not say that everyone must perish in a cruel, agonizing, bloody death. Even the bible has some pretty dark lines surpassing this one.
Not the same Sony who didn't see anything wrong with Manchester Cathedral being used in Resistance, despite the church itself complaining? Not that I think either should be grounds for a game to be pulled, but there is the faint stench of double standards...
Hmm... do religions of peace say things like:
(Sura 2:191-193) "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]...and fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah."
(Sura 8:12) "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them."
(Sura 8:59-60) "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."
(Sura 9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and fought jihad with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant."
(Sura 9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
(Sura 9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them"
(Sura 9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and fight jihad with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew."
Yeah. I'm sure they were worried about "offending" people whose idea of responding is to kill anyone who "offends" them. Like, say, Theo Van Gogh or Salman Rushdie.
Sad day to see this happen.
the radicals and the terrorists win acceptance of the idea that they alone get to dictate how the world handles their pet delusion.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
Who fucking cares? Is the Qu'ran copyrighted or something? Stop coddling these bullshit religions.
There is a war going on for your mind.
The problem seems to be worry that you'll get the same sort of reaction from a group of people whose religion tells them to burn effigies over cartoons, or stick knives in people's chests, for "offending" them.
Just look at what happened to Theo Van Gogh and Salman Rushdie, to name just two.
Now ask yourself whether that's really a "religion of peace" or something else. I can understand why the Little Big Planet studios were afraid of this.
Yeah, but the West left most of their worst religious-nutball-inspired-violence behind hundreds of years ago. Muslims are still doing it.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Yeah, it's amazing how sensitive people can be when offending some religious group might get your building bombed or your artists shot or stabbed.
More people will be offended by the delay of the game! In fact, when I heard the news I let loose a stream of offensive words... causing even more offense. Oh sweet irony.
Escape Pod Films: Sketch Comedy and Web Series
So what? Having a game censored because of pandering to some primitive superstition is highly offensive to me.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Noooooo! Don't take my Final Fantasy CDs away! Not my Evangelion! Not Ghost in the Shell!
Yeah, but the West left most of their worst religious-nutball-inspired-violence behind hundreds of years ago. Muslims are still doing it.
Most but not all. I wouldn't want my religion being judged based on abortion clinic bombers.
It is fair to say that the Islamic world has a serious problem with violent extremists, a problem that must be addressed.
To mockingly say "Religion of Peace indeed", and imply that Muslims in general are engaging in violence, is not only unfair it's bigotry.
The enemies of Democracy are
Please link to some news stories of Christian suicide bombings. Then your silly "everybody does it" argument might at least be factual. (It's still a ridiculous argument, even if everybody did do it -- but everybody doesn't.)
Yeah, but crazy Islamo-nutballs don't come blow up your building when you quote the Bible.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
How many slashdot trolls had mod points today?
Seriously - this has meaning. The guess that they pulled the game because of fears over rioting/threats or actual violence is a pretty good guess given the "objectionable" content that's being removed from the game.
Would you think they'd have removed it for a couple of lines in Yiddish? Or a Biblical quotation, or a Celtic pagan quotation? You can be 100% sure that they wouldn't.
Give Parent Poster his karma back. This wasn't "flamebait."
If you can read this sig, congratulations, you have your glasses on!
There is no right to "not to be offended". Especially when the group in question, or at least its more vocal components, respond to satire and criticism with riots, bombs, and assassination. In some parts of the world, all it takes is an ill-founded rumor that someone interprets as a slight to Islam to trigger riots and mob violence. The solution isn't to appease the mob. If people act like thugs, they should be treated like thugs.
Give us a call when you get tired of living in the dark ages.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Dunno, seems like a pretty odd thing for a peaceful religion to say sure. Of course, cherry picking to find offensive things in the Quar'an isn't any better than quote mining the Bible. I think that there should be more of a push to get people to actually read their religious texts, in my extremely informal sampling of my friends/classmates/housemates/etc it seems that there's very little of that amongst those who describe themselves as belonging to a certain religion.
Proverbs 20:30 Blows and wounds cleanse away evil, and beatings purge the inmost being.
- Hence, Jesus was *really* pure when he finally got crucified? And bullies in schools are just trying to make their victims more godly?
Deuteronomy 7:1 When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations ... then you must destroy them totally. 2 Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy.
- Peaceful indeed.
Leviticus 21:18 For no one who has a defect shall approach: a blind man, or a lame man, or he that hath a flat nose, of anything superfluous.
- Shun those with physical abnormalities. And yet, Jesus supposedly hung around with the blind, lepers, clubfooted people all the friggen time?
Ephesians 5:22-23 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church, and he is the saviour of the body.
1 Timothy 2:11-12 Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent.
- That's right. Get back in the kitchen! Get back to submitting and quit telling me to take out the garbage.
Deuteronomy 22:5 A woman shall not wear man's clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman's clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your GOD.
Deuteronomy 22:28 If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
- Pants are bad but rape is OK as long as you pay for it and marry her.
Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
- Jesus explaining what he wants people to do when he returns.
Leviticus 25:45 Moveover the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land; and they shall be your possession.
Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by sleeping with him. But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves.
Isaiah 13:15-16 Whoever is found will be thrust through, and whoever is caught will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be plundered, and their wives ravished.
- "Stab all those people over there, bash the head's of their babies in against a rock, then rape their women(especially the young cute virgins)." Sounds more like the order of a corrupt general than an omnibenevolent diety.
Leviticus 20:18 And if a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover her nakedness, he hath discovered her fountain, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood. And both of them shall be cut off from among their people.
- Because we all know that menstrual blood is icky and if people fuck when she's on the rag they should be killed.
Exodus 21:20-21 And if a man smite his slave, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished
Buddha says I should forgive you and remind you that two wrongs don't make a right.
It's even got paedophilia.
The Bible's got incest, rape, mass-murder (and it advocates some mass-murders, too), and all sort of cruelties that were committed by both Jews and Christians--such as any other people in the history of humanity.
How 'bout you read the old testament for a change?
The scale is nowhere near the same, and you know it. When millions of Muslims protest (violently), but only dozens of Christians are involved in clinic bombings (and those haven't happened in many years), it's disingenuous to compare one with the other.
Besides which, the real difference between the two aren't the modern followers, it's the founders. Jesus was a pretty nice guy who could be counted on to provide extra booze at a party (even if he was a mite touchy about conducting business in a temple). Mohammed raped and slaughtered thousands of people, kept slaves, and taught his followers to kill anyone who disagreed with them (and not in parables that people can take out of context, but in direct orders). Not even remotely similar.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
Well done. You just pointed out a different religious text that tells it's followers to kill and teaches hate. That in no way it a counter argument to the posters point.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
... the licensed LBP soundtrack song 'Tapha Niang' by Muslim artist Toumani Diabate's Symmetrical Orchestra uses voice excerpts from the Qur'an in its musical composition.
We Muslims consider the mixing of music and words from our Holy Quran deeply offending.
What's this "we" shit?
Insanity is the last line of defence for the master diplomat. But you have to lay the groundwork early.
I'm convinced that this sort of thing is a last gasp amongst the extremists to hold onto the old ways. The fact is that the world is changing and nobody can stop it. The Middle East is being exposed to the outside world via the internet and other media. The religious hardliners are realizing that they're losing their hold on the people and I suppose like most people they don't like change.
I realize American imperialism is brought up as the reason for this violence. But I'm convinced that's bullshit. The widespread dissemination of foreign cultures is the more real and subtle threat.
I think it's similar to certain Christian groups in this country coming out trying to denounce evolution and force creationism on people. Deep down they realize their religion is being marginalized and are grasping at straws trying to make it relevant.
The problem is that they're confusing a crumbling power structure for faith when the two aren't connected. There's no reason whatsoever why a person can't be devoutly religious and still accept science and progress.
The key difference, however, is that Muslim extremists are more likely to blow things up to get their way, or at least threaten to do so. Sure, you get the occasional Christian nut who tries to shoot an abortion doctor or something, but that's the extent of it. But Christians consistently denounce the act. On the other hand, at best Muslims won't say anything at all and at worst will run into the streets in celebration.
But ultimately these small victories are insignificant in the long run. And having heard some guys complaining about how Middle Eastern is growing increasingly liberal the days of religious extremism are numbered.
Political correctness has crippled America. By no means am I endorsing bigotry and racism, but we should be able to have open discourse about issues without it devolving into claims of racism.
The percentage of the Muslim population in the US is .6% to 1%. The last time I checked we still had free speech and the presence of this passage in a game is not intentionally offensive from what I can tell.
When Andres Serrano dumped a crucifix in urine and photographed it he wasn't banned from displaying his work. Hell, a nun actually stated in an interview that the work was not blasphemous but rather an example of what people have done to Christ.
how come any time someone talks about what's wrong in the Muslim faith, the knee jerk reaction is from a bunch of /b/tards who want to shit all over other religions?
This has nothing to do with the argument, and NeutronCowboy's argument is "crap" as he puts it. It is entirely possible for MULTIPLE religions to be wrong and trying to distract from Islam's problems by attacking another religion is a poor debate tactic, a desperate attempt to distract the argument from something he knows he can't honestly defend.
Remember, hell is exothermic.
If you can read this sig, congratulations, you have your glasses on!
That people in Christian countries who usually mention Muslims as being a bunch of religious fanatics are usually, you know, Christians.
Either way, I believe you're misguided if you believe the only reason why the so-called terrorism exists is because the Qu'ran advocates mass murder of infidels.
Unfortunately for American media and the US government, reality is much more complex than that.
All quotes from the Bible reference specific commands to the Israelites at a specific time in their history. Yes, they are pretty barbaric. However, none of them are commands for the Christians or Jews of today. If I'm not mistaken. the quotes from the Qur'an are not specific commands for specific individuals at a specific time, but commands for all Muslims, all the time.
Or burn people at the stake.
Or lynch people for the color of their skin.
Or torture people to "confess" their sins.
All carried out by church-loving citizens. Oh wait, we were bashing Islam here. My bad.
The Church of England got miffed when one of their churches was featured prominently in one of the levels of Resistance: Fall Of Man. This is a seemingly bigger offense than including a couple snippets of the Quran, yet Sony refused to recall the game.
Please my friend can we stop with the Islam bashing? I'm begging.
I'm just a good old Canadian boy who happened to marry into a family of Muslims and let me tell you the only thing that the entire lot of them want to do is have six-thousand course dinner parties that go on for hours and dance. I'm serious.
If they worry about anything, which they don't seem to much, it's that their religion has been hijacked by nutcases. I guess we could talk about how the nutcases seem to always come from fundamentalist dictatorships that America had a hand in creating and supporting (The House of Saud, the Wahib clan, The Shah of Iran, the Taliban, Musharraf, Assad).
But that is another discussion. If anyone holds to the belief that inside the heart of every Muslim is a bloodthirsty jihadist looking for the right time to strike, well, you couldn't be more wrong. Why not just go with the flow and enjoy the fact that middle eastern women tend towards the large-chested and friendly?
Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
Well then, I guess the people in Amalek, Samaria and Jabesh-Gilead must have taken great comfort in knowing that they were only part of a finite list of butchered victims.
That's all great, but all of the most cheesy lines are from the Old Testament. Now Christians also have the New Testament, and the majority of them worldwide (all Catholics, all Orthodox, most Protestants) believe that the New Testament had done away with those old commandments, so that they're no longer in force, and also don't take the suspect lines from NT (such as "Not to Bring Peace, But a Sword") literally. Of course, there is also a "fire and brimstone", stone-the-gays minority that believes they're very much in force, but it's a tiny minority - and the one largely ostracized.
Can you point me at the equivalent of the New Testament in Islam that would discard the laws such as stoning for adultery or beheading for apostasy, or name a mainstream Islamic school of law that considers those laws to not be in force today? Have you ever met a non-homophobe Muslim?
That is quite an important (and occasionally overlooked) point; the most dangerous people in the world are those with nothing left to lose.
The line can be drawn quite simply.
Practice highly visible public heresy, for example by quoting particularly unflattering passages of a particular religion's holy book.
Now: how many death threats do you receive?
If the answer is not "zero", then you can start with the snide remarks.
I can't recall ever hearing about someone who declined to publish something naughty about Christianity because they feared for their lives. But the same thing happens routinely with Islam.
There is a qualitative difference between having a small group of nutballs angry at you and having the government of a major middle-eastern power decide that you should die because you insulted their religion.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
"religious-nutball-inspired-violence behind hundreds of years ago"
Nonsense. Absolute nonsense.
-Europe had a nice bout of Christians on Muslim Genocide in the 90s. 250,000 murdered in the name of Christ.
-Then there was that Holocaust thing. Lets not forget how many "Christians" in France and Italy were gleeful participants.
-Wiping out Native Americans throughout the 1800s most certainly had a religious component. Civilizing the saveges, etc.
-A MAJOR component of American fear and hatred for Communism stemmed from a Christian hatred for aethiesm.
-The Iraq war. How many Americans justified this or were motivated by Christianity? GWB certainly did to an extent. As did Pat Robertson and his moronic followers.
And in the U.S. how often are Christians beating and murdering gays, doctors at abortion clinics, etc?
Sorry religious violence is rampant in the West to this day. That is because religion is by necessity, violent.
I'll make you a deal.
They stop treating their women as if they were afraid of womens' sexuality (keeping in mind I've done PLENTY of study of Islam) and stop sticking their women in beekeepers' outfits, and I'll be more than happy to "appreciate" the fact that middle eastern women tend towards large-chested and friendly.
In all seriousness, though... "worrying" that your religion is "hijacked", and actually standing up en masse and saying so, are two different things. And by and large, Muslims seem just fine letting people "hijack" their religion all day long. That creates its own set of problems. Let's face it, the number of people at various "not in our name, you don't represent Islam" rallies is a mere fraction of those who rally for death and murder in Islam's name across the world.
I wish it weren't so. I wish your relatives the best, I really do. But there's a long road ahead and they are, sadly, VERY much in the minority concerning their interpretation of the Muslim faith.
"Have you ever met a non-homophobe Muslim?"
Absolutely. This is a retarded question attempting to pigeonhole a huge group of people simply because it's easier than treating people like individuals.
It's modded "funny" as was intended, you humorless fool. I'm guessing you're either a religious fanatic or an athiestic fanatic. I'm not sure which is worse, but you really need to chill.
Free Martian Whores!
Yet all of the Muslims I've ever met are charming, peaceful friendly people. Big on family values, very law abiding, and socially responsible.
You probably haven't gotten to know them very well. The majority of people are dishonest, hypocritical, untrustworthy and at least condone some measure of violence against their opponents. This is despite any religious or political facade that underlies the way they think and act.
Show me a "family values" person and chances are that they are intolerant, prejudiced, and hypocritical.
umm, scales being unequal and all that jazz, you're still a bigot. mohammad didn't rape and slaughter thousands. he was elevated to the leader of his tribe as he gained more followers, and in a effort to protect him and his followers he lead muslims in war.
its true that there was slavery in arabia at the time of mohammad, roughly 650 AD (i hear there was slavery in the US till not too long ago)... the religion brought rules and fair treatment of slaves to the a region that even the arabs now call a region plagued by 'jahilia' (ignorance). if you read the quran instead of spouted off charged sound bites, you'd know that the quran OK's the practice of slavery in one line, and in the next line says "but it is best if you set them free". repeatedly in the quran it talks about freeing a slave (the punishment for manslaughter, the cost of remarrying your wife, the cost of breaking your vow) and prohibits both the abuse of slaves and the sources of slaves to just prisoners of war.
personally i find the fact that this book, revealed in the 7th century to a people who called themselves 'ignorant', just set up a system for the ethical treatment of slaves and prisoners of war in one deft move impressive. it also set the framework for abolitionism in the middle east a full 12 centuries before abe lincoln. the practice of slavery is now antiquated, and disgusting universally, and that includes the 1.2billion muslims in this world.
regarding this supposed order to kill anyone who disagreed with them...? what? also in the quran, chapter 2, verse 256. "there is no compulsion in religion". and again throughout the quran it talks about people who refuse to believe, and it tells the believers to ignore them, that god has made them this way and that god will judge them fairly.
the quran was actually very very liberal a book in its time and in many ways still is.
the problem with islam today is two-fold:
a) the majority of muslims suffer from a lack of education and are as a result easily swayyed and cowed and tricked by eloquent bastards who preach hatred (there's 1.2 billion of them, and they're not all cheerfully educated in the west, and of the ones educated in the west there are two types, the type who stays in the west and tries to live a comfortable good life and the type who'll go back to their third world home and preach of the evils of the west, think harvard educated redneck bigot)
and b) that a muslims have a hard time seeing reading between the lines of the qur'an. the qur'an again and again asks muslims to be better human beings, to let god judge, to be kind and save life ("if you save a life its as though you've saved all of humanity, and if you take a life its as though you've slaughtered all of humanity") and instead read the surface of the qur'an, which for example sets the punishment for a wayward wife as a light, beating that leaves no marks, in a time when wayward wives were killed and buried by the next morning.
the quran set up a lot of rules for being a good muslim in 7th century arabia, and those should be a framework for being a good muslim in our connected 21st century. like the constitution of the US, which itself had rules to govern slaves, but the framework has been built upon and changed, always mindful of its original intent.
You see, the difference here, is that we have admitted our crimes, apologized, and on the whole, have attempted to move on from these wrong actions which do not, in any way, come into alignment with the one we follow (Jesus).
The crimes of Islamic practitioners are neither hundreds of years in the past, nor have they been apologized for (nor have they ceased to occur for the most part). Islam is not a religion of peace. Some of the main tenants teach violence to all who do not follow Islam.
The Christian religion is clear, in the new testament, that we are to forgive, turn the other cheek, and leave the punishing and judgment to someone who has the ability to do the right thing (God).
If you think the Christian Religion is anything other than that, I encourage you to read my sig, and follow it's instructions.
Before commenting on the Bible, please read it first
You seriously lack perspective. Look again...with an open mind...
In response to items like:
"10/15/2008 Afghanistan Lashkar Gah 6 0 Six local police are taken out in a brutal Taliban ambush on their checkpoint."
I suggest:
US strike kills 9 al Qaeda and Taliban in North Wazirstan
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2008/10/us_strike_kills_9_al.php
US kills 6 in strike in Baitullah Mehsud's territory
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2008/10/us_kills_6_in_strike.php
US Kills al Qaeda in Iraq's deputy commander
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2008/10/us_kills_6_in_strike.php
When we do it, its framed as a 'strike against $evil_people' not as an invasion force killing people in their homes, like when they fight back.
In response to something like:
"10/14/2008 Afghanistan Uruzgan 9 6 Two children are among nine civilians murdered when Taliban bombers target a minibus."
how about:
Unmanned US drone kills school children...
http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/index.php?sid=403793
What do you think would be written if it had been their unmanned drone and our children?
And as for this:
"10/13/2008 Pakistan Murid Wal 1 0 A young man is forced by honor to kill his mother when she refuses to break off an 'illicit' relationship."
Gee that sounds awful.. but doesn't REALLY sound much different than this:
"An 18 year old boy, Sean Powell, was shot to death in his car outside the home of the married teacher he had been having an affair with. Local police have arrested the woman's husband, Eric Mclean, in the shooting."
Same motivation, Same result, same difference. Oh wait... you mean to say it was a state sanctioned murder? gotcha...luckily we have those too...
"Kevin Watts, 27, was pronounced dead on Thursday at 6:17 pm Texas time (2317 GMT), spokeswoman Michelle Lyons told AFP.
It was Texas' tenth execution since the start of the year, and the second execution to take place this week. Ten more inmates are scheduled to be killed in Texas by the end of November."
Granted we don't do it for adultry... but on the other hand, we don't exactly have the best track record for even properly ensuring our victims are guilty...
http://www.abanet.org/irr/hr/fall97/deathpen.html
I'll make you a deal.
You stop talking about Muslims as if they were a homogeneous hive mind, and I'll stop considering you a flame-stoking bigot.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
In all of the cases you mention, religion was not a major component. Yugoslav wars were centered around ethnicity, with religion being merely a partially determining factor for the former. Holocaust was very much not religious, though some WW2 atrocities were (e.g. Ustashe). And so on.
Here's another take on it. Let's see how many countries in the world still have death penalty for blasphemy and/or apostasy on the books:
Guess what's the official state religion in all of them? And don't give me crap about "tyrannical monarchies" - more than half of the countries on the list above are republics, "Islamic" or otherwise.
Ephesians 5:22-23 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church, and he is the saviour of the body. - That's right. Get back in the kitchen! Get back to submitting and quit telling me to take out the garbage.
That's one of the Bible verses which is most often quoted out of context. If you read it in context then the wife gets off lightly. She only has to submit to her husband: he has to sacrifice his life for her.
Deuteronomy 22:28 If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. - Pants are bad but rape is OK as long as you pay for it and marry her.
It's not saying that rape is OK. This needs to be read with the cultural context in mind: without this law, the woman would simply be left unmarried and unmarriageable. The remedy for this tort is that the man must give her social status and support her financially for the rest of her life. Sure, she gets a rough deal, but it's better than she would have got otherwise.
Hardcore atheists define themselves by opposition to religion. Without religion, there would be only agnostics.
True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.