Ad campaign launched in London to improve the image of Islam

Ad campaign launched in London to improve the image of Islam June 21, 2010

IN A bid to create a warm, cuddly, tolerant brand of Islam in the UK, and also counter negative views of Muslims in Britain, the Exploring Islam Foundation has launched a series of Inspired by Muhammad ads in London.
A spokesman for Quilliam Foundation, a counter-extremism think tank which seeks to promote a “British Islam. . .  free from the bitter politics of the Arab and Muslim world”, told London’s Independent:

This campaign is important because it can help non-Muslims to better understand the faith that inspires and guides their Muslim friends, neighbours and colleagues. This initiative also helps British Muslims reclaim the Prophet Mohamed as a time-honoured guide for peace, compassion and social justice from those who seek to twist his teachings.

According to Islamonline, a YouGov poll of 2,152 adults conducted for the foundation last month found that 58 percent associated the Religion of Peace with extremism and 50 percent associated the religion with terrorism.
Only 13 percent thought Islam was based on peace and six percent associated it with justice.
Asked if Muslims had a positive impact on British society, four in 10 disagreed.
The poll also found that 69 percent thought Islam encouraged the repression of women.
Said the foundation’s campaigns director Remona Aly.

We are very concerned about the way our faith is perceived by the public. We want to foster a greater understanding of what British Muslims are about and our contribution to British society. We are proud of being British and being Muslim.

A spokesman for Quilliam said:

We welcome the Inspired By Muhammad campaign as a valuable and timely step to help improve relations and foster deeper understanding between British citizens.

A British bobby captures 'the beauty of Islam' at a rally of angry Muslims in London
A recent survey in the US revealed that Islam has a pretty poor image there too.
According to a new report from the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies:

More than 50 percent of Americans said they had unfavourable opinions of Islam, while 29 percent of those reported a strong degree of prejudice towards Muslims.

Gallup questioned 1,002 interview subjects about different aspects of Islam and Muslims over a month-long period last year and married the results with those found in the Gallup World Religion survey, which surveyed Americans’ opinions on Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism and Islam and their followers.
Of the faiths, Islam and Muslims elicited the most negative perceptions.
Senior analyst Dalia Mogahed, who is the Executive Director for the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, noted that though more than half of respondents said they knew someone who was Muslim, that didn’t deter from having negative attitudes towards Islam.
Much of this antipathy, she insisted, stemmed for negative reporting of Islamic issues in the media
She asserted that all the negativity exposed by the survey was disheartening because there had been so much hard work done by Muslim-Americans and Muslims worldwide to inform the non-Muslim public about the beauty of Islam.

Hat tip: Broadsword
Update: A far more credible version of the ad has been created here:

"Sorry! I got bored and didn't read all the comments."

Adam & Eve musical collapses: Christian ..."
"Anyone who believes the ritual-slaughter ban is anything more than white Europe's defense mechanism against ..."

‘A sad day for Jews’: Belgium ..."
"In the U$A the Christian Right whines every time we push back some of the ..."

BBC presenter accused of attacking Christianity ..."
"Yes Irish Christianity was far preferable to the Roman version which ultimately took over."

Snakes alive! Is this serpent a ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Mike

    Muslim kids, they blow up so fast these days.

  • elainek123

    Oh my. What next. I am not against Muslims until they decide to start their hate campaigns.
    I think the damage has been done already and only if in the name of Allah people start respecting others then they may be on a path to win us over.

  • barriejohn

    I am also concerned about all the negative reporting surrounding burglars these days. After all, they are only putting into practice age-old values of social justice and equality. Who could possibly take offence at that?

  • ZombieHunter

    So if these ads find themselves on the side of a bus and the bus drivers who wouldn’t drive the atheist bus ads refuses to drive these ads as well because it goes against their christian beleifs then what will happen??

  • Broadsword

    “Much of this antipathy, she insisted, stemmed from negative reporting of Islamic issues in the media”.
    The point our delightful Dalia hasn’t grasped is that Islam’s poor image isn’t caused by negative reporting, just reports of the facts. Someone ought to paste a poster of Mo next to these adverts. We’ll see the irony then, by the pramful.
    The one about women’s rights would look good alongside the latest from Jesus & Mo:

  • Prime Numbers

    Where is the missing sign, you know, the one that says: “I believe in sex with 9 year old wives. So did Muhammed.” or “I believe in keeping slaves. So did Muhammed.”

  • Har Davids

    The image of Islam is what we see in the papers and on TV, I’m afraid, just like the RCC’s image is a bit tarnished by recent revelations (abuse, corruption etc). I don’t have a negative view of believers per se, but I keep on wondering why they still cling to their religions. It just doesn’t seem worth the trouble, once you’ve perused the ‘holy’ texts and all the wars that have been fought with the blessing of ‘god’.

  • PJH

    I picked up on that middle one about women’s rights a couple of weeks ago.
    Basically pointing out that it ignores the fact that (a) Islam has little truck with the rights of quite a few groups of people and that (b) women are amongst those groups despite what Ms Sultana Tafadar, or her poster, says.

  • Angela_K

    A pointless campaign, I hope these posters are defaced. If muslims want to improve their image they should abandon their stone-age beliefs, abide by our laws and integrate with the indigenous population – something they do not want to do.

  • Broga

    These adds are straightford lies and those who make these claims are liars. Womens’Rights – Female Genital Mutilation? And so much else. So called honour killings. Women forced into slavery at the behest of men. Propaganda without even a nod in the direction of honesty. Sick. But why expect anything else. This is par for the course.

  • Broadsword

    “I hope these posters are defaced.”
    Hard to resist I know. Strictly speaking though, isn’t that criminal damage or borderline religious hatred? I’m sure the CPS could come up with something sufficient to assuage the hurt feelings of those with deeply held beliefs. Something involving a wooden block and a scimitar I suppose.

  • Prime Numbers

    Perhaps if the claims are shown as un-true to the Advertising Standards Authority, they could be legally removed after a favourable ruling? Either that, or you put up your own posters showing the opposite message backed up with Koranic quotes.

  • Marcus

    These posters are a bit like the bloke I spotted at lunchtime preaching ‘the word of (another) god’ to nobody at all. Uninspired. Unbelievable. Ineffective.

  • Broadsword

    Social justice, women’s rights and environmental issues.
    Very modern concepts for a paedophilic, murderous medieval psychopath.
    These values form the core of every modern Islamic culture. It must be why the Muslim world has enjoyed a golden age these last 1400 years and why they’re so keen to share it with us infidels.
    I hope the preacher amused you.

  • Marcus

    Broadsword – irritated is probably the word I’d use. Although I was highly amused at the fact that not one single person was bothering to stop and listen to the bollocks he was spouting.

  • gsw

    A recent poll showed that more than 73% of Europeans considered the sun to be responsible for their sun tans* and more than 38% were worried about possible skin cancer.
    The “Worshippers of Apollo” are planing an advertising campaign to explain how prejudice we all are!
    “Islam will rule the world” + “we want shariah” + “kuffir women are cat meat” + “women are deficient in intelligence” these things can cause people to consider muslims unsociable!
    *Before you ask – out of a bottle!

  • Alex

    They should put out a survey and see what proportion of mulsims agree with the ideals espoused in the ad campaign

  • Alan

    They could have used Gary Glitter in this campaign. I believe in sex with six year old girls so did Mohamed. Or Anjem Choudray saying I believe in beheading apostates so did Mohamed

  • Brian Jordan

    Of the two women on the posters, it’s the one proclaiming Mo’s belief in women’s rights who has her head tightly bound in cloth. Ah, the irony.

  • Mike

    As the saying goes, you all taking this out of context, this is the good Islam, you must look at it in the original Arabic language and you must stop persecuting Muslims, because to insult one is to insult 1 billion, expect those Muslims who believe in the incorrect Islam.

  • They forgot the poster “I believe in shagging goats/camels only if you kill them afterward (by letting them bleed to death in pain) and give the meat to the next village, and so did Mohammed”… and thats no joke some loopy ayatollah-wallah came up with that one !!!

  • SD

    Apparently this one never made it into the campaign 😀

  • Richard B

    I’m not sure we need worry. I just can’t imagine anyone viewing these ads with anything other than ridicule.

  • Adam Tjaavk

    Women’s uncovered hair – haraam!
    (For some)
    Mascara and lipstick – halaal!
    (So it would seem)
    As Western as motherhood and cherry pie.

  • Broadsword

    Nice one SD
    Your piccy looks great in an email alongside the original. I’ve passed it onto my friends.
    Ridicule, best weapon of all.

  • Non Euclidean

    And who exactly is paying for this rubbish?
    – Let me guess…….

  • Mark Richards

    Without the women to crush, these religions would have little else to do.
    The way to defeat them is to educate and free their women. And then protect them.

  • Prime Numbers

    Uzza! Superb! That’s just what I was suggesting. Now to get them on the streets and busses.

  • Broadsword

    I enjoyed that Uzza.
    I’ve sent it around the world.
    The Xians protested at the Atheist bus posters.
    All the muzzies will get is ridicule. I wonder how long they’ll keep it going before they realise they’re spending money on free entertainment for infidels?

  • Stonyground

    It seems pretty clear to me that the statements on these posters are untrue, the notion that Mohammed believed in modern post-enlightenment values is preposterous. I believe that both the Bible and the Koran contain statements to the effect that it is OK to lie as long as it promotes the faith. I have read some books of Christian apologetics that contain both outright lies and also cleverly worded statements that are techically true but deliberately designed to mislead. The problem for me is that a religion that actually was true would not need to resort to telling lies to promote itself.
    The same thing seems to apply when it comes to slinging mud at atheists and secularists. Articles written by atheists about the religious are on the whole accurate and truthful. On the rare occasions that we get something wrong, the mistake is retracted or corrected as soon as the error is spotted. When it comes to articles written by believers about atheists and secularists, I have lost count of the misleading, disingenuous and just plain untrue articles that I have read. Again, if your religion is true then why do you need to lie so much.

  • Ivan

    Douglas Murray writes on this here:
    And Harry’s Place exposes the not-so-cuddly background of the woman in the advert here:

  • I suggest anyone interested complain to the UK Advertising Standards Authority along the following lines:
    What Muhammad Really Did
    I am writing to object to the poster campaign being run in London by the Exploring Islam Foundation (EIF). 27 Old Gloucester Street London WC1N 3AX
    This campaign goes beyond the far fetched or controversial. It is deceitful. It tells lies and misleads people. I believe it should be stopped and withdrawn immediately.
    Claim 1 “I believe in social justice. So did Muhammad”
    In the Muhammadan faith, Sharia, its legal code based on what Muhammad said and did, includes amongst other things; cutting peoples’ hands off for stealing (as crazy as it sounds an example has recently been reported in the British media); stoning to death for adultery (an example has recently been reported in the British media); flogging for drinking alcohol; a Muslim’s life is worth more than a non-Muslims life; and homosexuality is punishable by death.
    This is not social justice by any stretch of the imagination. This is confirmed by the European Court of Human Rights which stated: sharia …. clearly diverges from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, [and] its rules on the legal status of women ….
    Claim 2 “I believe in protecting the environment. So did Muhammad”
    This claim is based on the belief that Muhammad forbade people from cutting down trees. This is not true, he had no hesitation in cutting down trees if that served his purpose.
    Also the threat to the environment as understood by most people is from pollution and over population. Muhammadan beliefs and practices do not help population control.
    Claim 3 “I believe in women’s rights. So did Muhammad”
    Sharia stipulates that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man’s (a full explanation of this can be found on the website of the UK based Islamic Sharia Council); she doesn’t have the right to unilateral divorce, a man may easily divorce his wife whereas a woman must argue her case and undergo a lengthy Sharia legal process; girls get half the inheritance of boys; and child custody is given to the father at a preset age irrespective of the welfare of the child.
    The Islamic Sharia Council charges a fee for Muslims seeking a divorce, the fee for a man it is £100 and for women it is £250 because (they say) it is more work to process a woman’s application as her word has to be corroborated.
    Sharia law rules on child custody were described by judges in the House of Lords as ‘arbitrary and discriminatory’ in the case of M (Lebanon) v Home Secretary ([2008] UKHL 64).
    This is not what anybody understands by “women’s rights”.
    As noted above the European Court of Human Rights stated: sharia …. clearly diverges from Convention values, particularly with regard to …. its rules on the legal status of women …
    These are the truths of what Muhammad really did.

  • Broadsword

    Since we’re talking about muzzies again, I’ve just put my name to this petition supporting Israel:

  • They forgot the one that says “I believe in killing anybody who depicts my prophet”.
    And where do they get off trying to claim that putting women in personal tents under threat of beatings or death amounts to supporting their rights?

  • MrGronk

    I’m all for western muslims disassociating themselves from middle eastern cultural crap. They’re going to have to try harder than this, though. If they can’t bring themselves to give up on the Koran then they’ll have to at very least bin the literalism which prevents a re-interpretation of the book.
    Only when muslims start selectively interpreting the Koran to fit a modern, humane way of life (while ignoring the nasty stuff), will they be able to fit in as fellow western citizens. This means facing up to the fundamentalist bullies and nutters who seem to always have the upper hand in intra-muslim debate.

  • Garlic

    ‘Of the two women on the posters, it’s the one proclaiming Mo’s belief in women’s rights who has her head tightly bound in cloth. Ah, the irony.’
    Brian, that’s very obviously been done on purpose to get us to challenge our ‘prejudiced’ beliefs that saying women’s hair is unclean or inherently seductive is sexist. I’ve seen this kind of rubbish before from what are known as hijab feminists.

  • Prime Numbers

    I smell a fish with their statistics:
    60% say they don’t know very much about Islam
    17% say they know nothing at all
    33% would like to know more about Islam
    which is basically saying nobody knows anything about islam at all. I think most people know too much. They know muslims always want their own way, they launch fatwas and have jihads and are basically followers of a backwards desert wandering misogynistic religion.

  • See also news Inspired by Muhammad that apparently don’t hurt the feelings of moderate Muslims (since they prefer to spend their time rioting against non-Muslims).

  • Broadsword

    I wonder if Pedobear will make an appearance?

  • Apple have a tremendous oportunity to run an ad with a pic od Steven Fry with the text “I love my iPad and so did Muhammed”. It makes about as much sense.

  • barriejohn

    Comment on Uzza’s blog:
    I find it interesting that your posters back up the claim with scripture references. Theirs do not. They just say it and expect you to take their word for it.
    Nothing to add!

  • barriejohn

    Garlic is correct. They dress up in this garb so that they can say: “Look at me. I’m an intelligent, sophisticated, modern woman with a mind of my own. I dress like this bacause I choose to, not because someone else tells me to. It doesn’t mean that I am oppressed or discriminated against: in fact, under Islam I have more rights than other women!” Bollocks!!

  • alec s thompson

    time for my permanant marker to come out of retirement methinks……..

  • barriejohn

    Jerome’s suggestion is priceless!

  • Broadsword
  • PJH

    Jerome’s suggestion is priceless!
    Hmm – first time at doing anything like this in Gimp, but…
    I give you: Stephen Fry

  • Broadsword

    Your Mr Fry made me laugh PJH
    How about doing one with the Mohammed Bomb-Turban pic
    on the front of an orange spacehopper? We could get them into Toys ‘R’ Us in time for Christmas.

  • Vince
    check out the above cartoon…fits in nicely with the campaign

  • Watersport

    They also forgot the one that says: “I believe in world domination by Islam. So did Muhammed”. And the one that says: “I believe I go to paradise when I die while fighting the jews/unbelievers/christians. So did Muhammed”.
    The one on women’s rights won’t really help, because nobody in his right mind believes this. It almost looks like a sarcastic poster made by atheists.

  • Broadsword

    Introducing the Prophet Mohammed Space Hopper:

  • idlavi

    Pathetic trash from Muslims trying to downplay their hatred of women.
    Do they think we Europeans are so gullible, they treat their animals better that their women, the are pedophiles, Muhammed, what was he but a parasite, killing anyone who did not think his way, the koran written by men for men and ONLY for men:
    This poster is as is the koran pure lies, God help us in Britain, let’s get rid of them all, we are Christian:

  • NeoWolfe

    It seems like all of you may have missed the point. Islam had drifted off into poverty and obscurity after the Moors (Morrocans) and the Ottoman empire. Until, that is, that Henry Kissinger taught the oil producing Arab nations to form a conglomerate union capable of controlling petroleum prices. He did this under orders from Richard Nixon who really wanted to sell Iran weapons to fight Saddam Hussein, but Congress said they had to pay cash.
    Well, Islam is back on the map with a lot of cash to back it up. And there is no “beauty” of islam, just new spin to make an empty argument. Suppression of women and rule of the religious elite. But, never let the message be lost on any of us, that it is religion as a whole that is fucking up our world, not just islam.

  • Pingback: New Islamic ads – dishonesty at its finest « Skepacabra()

  • Wilson R. MacLeod

    As an ex-Muslim who is full of regret after wasting sixteen years of my life within the House of Horrors and Community of Clowns known as Islam, I’ll just say that in regards to the “social justice” and “women’s rights” mentioned on the posters, most Muslims would point to the fact that Muhammad did make some improvements in these areas over and above what existed at the time (which really isn’t saying much!). However, the point that they seem to miss is that the “social justice” and “women’s rights” standards that are enshrined in the Islamic Shari’ah are extremely lacking by today’s standards. They might have improved 7th century Arabia a bit, but as Stonyground mentioned above, “the notion that Mohammed believed in modern post-enlightenment values is preposterous.” Just to name a few, under Islamic law freedom of speech is severely restricted (in spite of the vacuous claims by liberal Muslims), other religions are discriminated against, there are legal restrictions on women’s freedom, and the life of a non-Muslim isn’t considered as valuable as that of a Muslim. So the Shari’ah, in spite of their propaganda, deserves a big “FAIL!” in the mind of anyone who has actually looked at the actual sources rather than the spin that modern Muslims try to put on them.
    Another problem, especially in the case of the head scarf (hijab), is that some Islamic requirements are often portrayed as a matter of choice for Muslim women in the West. The posters show this rather explicitly since they show one woman with and one without hijab. The dishonestly behind this is the fact that in a country ruled by the Shari’ah, which every Muslim is required to believe is the best law for all times and places, it would NOT be a matter of personal choice. As everyone knows, in places where Shari’ah is implemented, whether Iran, Saudi Arabia or Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, all women are forced to cover themselves.
    Muslims will argue incessantly in order to defend their “Holy” prophet and they do so within a framework and worldview that declares him the best ever example for all of mankind and, by default, considers everything that he did to be exemplary. Yes, Muslims doggedly adhere to a “Divine Command” view of ethics in which Allah declares certain acts good and certain acts evil…just because he says so. But in my view, this is Islam’s undoing and where it ultimately fails. That’s because Muslims don’t just need to show that, for example, a 52 year old man marrying a nine year old girl was simply legal within a particular legal system (which was based on the cultural practices of the time), but since it claims to be a system that’s universal and not only good, but THE BEST, for all of mankind, they need to explain how a 52 year old man marrying a nine year old girl was THE BEST course of action. Likewise with many other acts of Muhammad. This alone is enough to show that Islam fails even on its own terms and is thus demonstrably false.
    For the sake of balance, based on what I know about Islam I’d love to see the following “Inspired by Muhammad” posters. They’re all backed up by authentic Islamic sources, but I didn’t have the time to track them all down:
    “I believe in ‘Dr. Doolittle’ stories in which people and animals talk to each other.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 27:16-19
    “Greek mythological heroes got to fly around on winged beasts.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 17:1 – Sahih Bukhari 5:58:227
    “I look forward to the homoerotic reward of being waited on by immortal boy-servants in Paradise.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 52:24, 56:17, 76:19
    “I believe that women are unreliable witnesses.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 2:282
    “I believe a person can live for 950 years.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 29:14
    “I believe that meteorites were created to be missiles for driving away devils.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 67:5
    “I think asking too many questions will cause a believer to lose their faith.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 5:101
    “I believe in having multiple wives.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 4:3
    “I believe in forcing sex on slave-girls.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 33:50
    “I believe in practicing religious discrimination.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 4:144 – Qur’an 5:51 – Sahih Muslim 26:5389 – Sahih Muslim 26:5390
    “I always try to wake up before sunrise since I fear Satan might pee in my ear.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Sahih Bukhari 4:54:492
    “I pee like a girl.
    So did Muhammad.”
    “I believe in stealing my stepson’s wife.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 33:37-38
    “I like having multiple sex partners in one night.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Sahih Bukhari 7:62:142
    “I believe in bribing people.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Sahih Bukhari 4:55:558 – Sahih Bukhari 4:53:374
    “I misunderstand Jewish and Christian beliefs.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 5:72 – Qur’an 5:73 – Qur’an 5:116 – Qur’an 9:30
    “I believe a Muslim should not be killed for killing a non-Muslim.
    So did Muhammad.”
    “I believe in killing those who insult Islam.
    So did Muhammad.”
    I believe military attacks in which women and children are killed by “collateral damage” are okay.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Sahih Bukhari 4:52:256
    “I believe that God has a face, a hand, fingers, a shin, an eye, and that he moves around while simultaneously sitting on a throne.
    So did Muhammad.”
    “When I capture the women of my enemies and turn them into sexual slave-girls, if there’s a really nice looking one in the group, I take her for myself.
    So did Muhammad.”
    “I motivate my religious followers by offering them worldly and materialistic ‘war booty’ as a reward for acts of violence they commit.
    So did Muhammad.”

  • Brian Macker

    Accomplishment stealing is actually a standard practice of Islam.
    Muslims are actually told that the Qur’an was written at the beginning of time, and that may ancient Jewish heros, and non-Jewish ones were Muslim. For example, both Moses and Alexander the Great. Both lived well before Islam was even fabricated.
    They are also believe that many of the great accomplishments of non-Muslims in societies that were conquered by the Muslims, are in fact Muslim. They even have you believing it. Arabic numerals come to mind.
    They’ll have you believe that Islam is against slavery. Which is nonsense. The anti-slavery movement is a Western tradition. Islam in fact condones and promotes slavery. Recently a respected Saudi religious figure (of course Muslim they don’t even allow church buildings or bibles there) advocated that slavery be reestablished in the country. [Note: Anti-slavery law was originally imposed on them by Western countries sick of having white slaves captured and shipped off to the middle east even as late as the 18th century.]
    Muslims claim that Mohammad was anti-slavery because he would free his own slaves if they converted to Islam. However he didn’t ban owning Muslim slaves by Muslims. Nor did he abolish slavery of non-Muslims. The west banned slavery for both whites and all other races.
    Islam codifies rules that make women less than second class citizens get in many countries.
    Islam also makes claims to having invented science when in fact most of it consists of pre-Islamic knowledge, and advances by Christians, Jews, and free thinkers living under Muslim hegemony. Many a great library was burned down by Muslim invaders. They weren’t exactly tolerant of the beliefs of others.

  • Brian Macker

    Wilson R. MacLeod,
    I think some of those claimed improvements are hogwash, and used mostly as propaganda against Idolaters. The Islamic history just doesn’t jibe with the claims. For example, Muhammad’s first wife was an Idolator and yet she owned her own business and was tolerated in her society. She hired Mohammad. So how does that jibe with the claim that Islam originated this practice (when in fact it works against it with its rule against opposite sex non-relative mixing)?
    Think about it some more, and I think many of the improvements that Mohammad claimed to have made will evaporate.
    When I was in Sunday school they taught me that prior to Christianity people would sacrifice their babies to Baal, or something. I found it really hard to believe and the way it was phrased was as if everyone did it. Muslims make the claim that the Idolators were killing their female babies. From Wiki: Some authors believe that there is little evidence that infanticide was prevalent in pre-Islamic Arabia or early Muslim history, except for the case of the Tamim tribe, who practiced it during severe famine.[46]
    Might be true, but I betcha the same can be found in some Muslim cultures also at some time. Clearly Muslims kill females as teenagers in honor killings. This to me seems far worse. Generally babies are killed as a form of birth control, and for culturally economic reasons like famine. It’s ugly but sometimes a hard truth. Honor killings are only about perpetuating an ideology and therefore totally unjustified.

  • Brian Macker

    BTW, loved your list.
    … but isn’t this true:
    “I think asking too many questions will cause a believer to lose their faith.
    So did Muhammad.”
    Qur’an 5:101

  • Dave

    Have you considered making a formal complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority (copy to Transport for London) on the grounds that the statement “I believe in women’s rights. So did Muhammad” is manifestly untrue and misleading, as evidenced in many places in Muhammad’s own teaching in the Quran?
    Of the many Islamic gynophobic commandments, the two most noxious are Quran chapter 4 verse 34, which encourages men to beat wives from
    whom they merely “fear disobedience”. Ch 2 v 23 tells men: “Your women are your fields, so plough them as you please”.
    Ch 4 v 11 says: “A male shall inherit twice as much as a female”. Dealing with disputes, Ch 2:282 downgrades women as witnesses, saying: “Call in two male witnesses from among you; but, if two men cannot be found, then one man and two women”. (The commentator Bukhari cites an extra-Quranic statement from Muhammad saying that this is “because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind”.
    Ch 4 v 24 makes married slave girls the sexual property of their male masters. (The commentator Maududi interprets “slave girls” as including female prisoners of war). Ch 65 v 4 sanctions sex with prepubescent girls.
    All are neatly underpinned by ch 2 v 228: “Men have a status above women”.
    This Quranic teaching about women makes clear the total unacceptability of Sharia courts in the UK – above all in the settling of domestic disputes for which they are often proposed. Under Sharia, women are institutionally and explicitly disadvantaged; to the extent that those preferring the protection of a secular court risk being physically abused by their husbands, so undermining the supposedly voluntary nature of such non-secular alternatives.

  • Adam Tjaavk

    Wilson – are you aware of Crispian Jago’s work and his
    Science, Reason and Critical Thinking
    What a collaboration that would be!