The Warped Wickedness of Mr Khalid Baig

The right to beat your wife, to have plural wives, to keep slaves and fuck them...

The right to beat your wife, to have plural wives, to keep slaves and fuck them…

I wrote earlier about gender apartheid in islam, and I mentioned an article by Khalid Baig. In another article by the same author you can see that he claims that the family in the West has been ruined by female emancipation. He says that families are divided by emancipation, women suffer from demands they are not equal to meet, men suffer because they haven’t got women at their disposal in the home and children suffer because they are abandoned by their mothers.

First of all I would like to state a few obvious truths that Mr Baig has overlooked. One: If women work it means that the family has a double income and can provide better homes, better food and better education to their children thus giving them a better start in life. If a mother works while her children attend their better school, the children are winners not losers. Two: if men started to own up to their half of the work in the home, the women would be sufferers no more. And by doing so men would come to know their homes, their children and their wives better and respect their wives more and women and men both would be winners. So: if men put their big boy’s trousers on and start acting like men, doing their half of all work in the home – everybody would be winners.

One thing that strikes me while reading Mr Baig’s article is that he calls the home “the home of the husband”. Like: “the wife should stay in the home of the husband”. Did you hear that? Not her home. Her husband’s home. And this of course is at the basis of Mr Baig’s warped and misogynist ideology. The wife must obey the husband because he spends on her. Because his work has a value and is paid, her work has no value and is not paid. If a woman in the West divorces her husband, she gets to keep half of the family assets. Because of course the husband can only earn because the wife takes care of home and family. The value of her work is equal to the value of his – in the West. In the warped and disgusting views of Mr Baig her work is worth only empty words like “being a mother is an honour and gives her high status” while in reality it gives her nothing, not even a part in owning her home. She lives in her husband’s home. His only. Because his work has a value, hers has none. He spends on her, no matter how much she works and slaves away she does not spend on him. That is Mr Baig for you.

He says that when women were given freedom, actually they became enslaved. Society broke down. Divorce-rates and social problems reached an all time high. Mr Baig: with the same kind of warped logics you can take a look at what happened to coloureds when slavery was abolished. Look at crime-rates among the coloured community in the US, look at adultery and domestic violence among the coloureds. Obviously slavery was better. Freedom has not given the coloured community a perfect life. So, we should reinstate slavery. Do you see Mr Baig, how sick and horrible your argument is??? I suppose you can’t because if you could you would not have written these sickening articles.

Mr Baig. Your ideology is the toxic medicine that keeps women in slavery and your part of the world in misery. Your ideology is what gives air to ISIS and Boko Haram.

Mr Baig. You are the stuff nightmares are made of.

68 thoughts on “The Warped Wickedness of Mr Khalid Baig

  1. Catadmin I can see where you are coming from and i understand what you are saying. From your world view you are justified in believing in ‘rights’. I would like to believe in ‘rights’ too and i wish it to be true that every human being is special and his/her life has inherent value, doesn’t matter what his/her socio-economic status is. But when i reflect upon it from agnostic position as a rationalist ( after shunning my prejudices) it doesn’t make sense to me.

    Rights don’t exist in the bio-sphere around us. They exist in our minds. They are just a complementary notion to duties. i.e. to say that A has a ‘Right’ upon B is to say that B has some duty towards A. But in reality Human Beings are under No Obligation to care for each other’s needs. So there are no objective duties to fulfill.

    Furthermore If Human beings are equal, they are equal before God(If he exists). Otherwise they are not equal in any other way. We can believe what ever we want but we cannot prove it. Standard of equality social or legal is arbitrary meaning it depends on you where you want to draw the line. You draw your line, i will draw mine and it will be my word against yours.

    Concept of equality social or legal is grounded in concept of Fundamental Human Privileges/rights. But from a secular position it is just an illusion. Fundamental Human Rights/Privileges are socially contrived and there is nothing sacred about them.

    Thanks for your response though.

  2. Saad when you mention equality before God what do you mean by that? There is nothing which says equality before God exists. Unless you are using your own scripture to justify it. And what exactly is it? Both the genders or social groups being judged the same way according to the rules set out for each?

  3. Saad, This is in re your comment: “Rights don’t exist in the bio-sphere around us. They exist in our minds.”

    Most people, including the very religious, would agree that our ideas and drives exist in the mind. And most people with the benefit of any modern education have a modern need for proof.

    The American Declaration of Independence does not say that people are equal, it does not say that people are entitled to happiness, and it does not mention God. Written in the age of Enlightenment, it says, using the term “self-evident” as a precursor to the modern world:

    …”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and THE PURSUIT OF Happiness.”…

    “Creator” can be interpreted in many ways, but yes, Conservatives do interpret “Creator” to mean God, and believe that Rights, being “unalienable” come from God. Liberals view these Rights as having being drawn up and agreed upon by a group of people, who chose self government, and went on to justify it, because the modern mind requires such explanation.

    From my standpoint, all people are equally endowed with an unalienable “Right” to the contents of one’s own mind. Recognizing this, and following up on it, is the beginning of healing.

  4. Mariam,

    //Saad when you mention equality before God what do you mean by that? //

    Concept of equality social or legal is arbitrary. A Transcendent/God/Creator takes away the arbitrariness by providing an objective, global frame of reference.

    //There is nothing which says equality before God exists.//

    True. Because we don’t know if God exists or not.

    By the way, OBJECTIVELY we cannot even prove Man’s own physical existence. (We can prove existence of mind by taking Descarte’s approach but we cannot prove if we exist physically or existence of second and third person or this temporal world is ‘real’ or just a matrix in our head.) Because we can only truly observe if we exist, thus proving existence through observation would be arguing in circles.

    // Unless you are using your own scripture to justify it.//

    Nah, I am not using any scripture.

    // And what exactly is it?//

    It is grounded in the concept of fundamental human privileges/rights. make list of all the privileges/rights you have. I should have the same, and so should Dale, Laila, Unchained and Fiona. Please notice that I am using ‘rights’ and privileges interchangeably because even our fundamental ‘rights’ are actually privileges because we don’t deserve anything by birth until and unless justify our existence. Which we cannot from a secular standpoint.
    ______________________________________________________________________________

    Dale,

    I am afraid right’s are not like an axiomatic belief and if we think upon it they are not even self evidently true. If we are to create civilizations we will definitely have to ASSUME these ‘rights’ to give social and legal equality to people but at the end of the day it would just be our assumption. If some sociopaths like Hitler or ISIS (who don’t share our assumptions and are ready to risk their lives) decide to destroy civilizations, we cannot debate with them and prove them wrong (if they are familiar with Nihilism.)

  5. I agree with the liberal view that Dale mentioned above “these Rights as having being drawn up and agreed upon by a group of people”. I like the simple explanation by Dan Barker in this video. Its a long video, if you are in a hurry just listen at 52.23

  6. ROFL. Gotta love these titles. ‘A Pleasant, Brilliant Atheist Obliterates an Obnoxious Christian in this debate’ :v

    Anyways i have gone through that discussion and i enjoyed watching one cult debating another. I must say unoriginal arguments and i stay unconvinced and unimpressed. Real question that nobody asks is:
    1. Why should our specie thrive instead of getting extinct like dinosaurs?
    2. Does Human Life have inherent worth? If Yes, Can we prove it? (Just because we feel special doesn’t mean We really are.) Or value of human life is subjective? If it is subjective than we will be justified assigning 0 value to it as well.

    Our existence is not justified Laila. Our existence is accidental in first place. We are just living because we lack constitution for suicide. And we are genetically evolved to value self preservation.

    Since we all are programmed to value life so we have contrived set of rules we call morality. It is based on our survival instincts and is just a social convention by which we project our insecurities on each other. Really powerful people don’t need to abide by these rules. They are just meant to protect the interests of weak.

    Thus we came up with golden rule i.e. treat others as you want to be treated. But it doesn’t work in conflict of interest. For Example. Two people A and B value their life but why should A value life of B and vice verca? Now assume A wants to take life of B for what ever reason. Why shouldn’t he go for it? It would be bad for B but good for A?
    You can assume A to be hitler here.

    Continued.

  7. Since our existence is not justified we are not justified in claiming rights. Because we are not born with rights. Just as we are not born equal. There are social, psychological biological racial differences. Some differences are more apparent than other.

    Fiona was right when she said differences between races are more than differences between genders. She is arguing for social equality on grounds of gender equality. Assumption is Human Beings are born equal. But if we reflect upon it in an unbiased way, Human beings have a will to live and Women live longer than men on average. With reference to our specie ‘Homo Sapiens/Story telling Monkeys’ many men are technically disposable but women are not So i don’t see equality there both biological and social.

    So it is not factually true but as a man i appreciate when she says men and women are ‘equal’ because human gene is selfish. We accept ideas which benefit us. Even the good things we do have a selfish aspect because we feel good about ourselves deep down and thus we yield power. This is what life is… Will To Power.

  8. Saad, your opinions and arguments run on the idea that human beings are purely rational beings, and that too is how the world should be run, particularly in a secular godless world. We human beings are not purely rational beings. We are a combination of instincts and rationality you could say. We actually run on instincts majority of the time. The reasons on protecting the survival of the human species and having a will to yield power are good reasons for why we do what we do, but they are not sufficient enough reasons. It makes sense to an extent, but beyond that it makes no sense. No matter how honest we try to be about it, intellectually or otherwise, even for people who do not prefer having illusionary mindset or being conditioned by dogma. Even if we may not understand those instincts right now, but may do so sometime later.

    //With reference to our specie ‘Homo Sapiens/Story telling Monkeys’ many men are technically disposable but women are not//

    From one video you had shown me earlier regarding women being able to be impregnated but not so many men are required for that hence many are technically disposable, from a very strict rational perspective exclusive of the whole arena of instincts, it can make sense, where human beings are considered at the same level of insects or animals who lack consciousness. But since we human beings are not the same as such species, we cannot be put in the same level as them, since we are an evolved species who have consciousness, hence this idea is wrong and illogical as well.

    //We accept ideas which benefit us. Even the good things we do have a selfish aspect because we feel good about ourselves deep down and thus we yield power. This is what life is… Will To Power.//

    This is black-brushing the entire intentions of human beings for doing good things. Yes we do things when they make us feel good about ourselves deep down, but isn’t that a sign in-built in us evolved species that such things are productive things by themselves? It’s our moral compass reacting for us I guess. As for power, is there anything wrong with feeling good? So when you say life is a will to power, it doesn’t sound appropriate and sounds negative as well.

    Saad I am willing to bet several of such nihilist ideas don’t make sense to you once you are in your natural self. When you switch off all other sides and focus on pure rationality, that’s when the trouble begins, since you block off all instincts as being purely subjective or simply survival instincts for the protection of this species. We do not run by pure rationality in this world and never would, not simply because we are afraid of our extinction or losing value, but because it makes really no sense to the vast majority of us, dogmatists or otherwise. I would say as long as moral nihilists live by such rationalist ideas which are actually unrealistic and based on the limited information we have as human beings on earth, their internal struggles and depression is most likely not going to end any time soon, and despite being intellectually honest otherwise, would keep feeling that a part of the puzzle is amiss.

  9. //Saad, your opinions and arguments run on the idea that human beings are purely rational beings,…//

    Humans are not just rational but driven by emotions too but it doesn’t mean our reasoning should be driven by emotions when we are digging truths/facts. It is like saying 1+1=11 because i want it to be that way. For answering rational questions you will have to follow laws of logic if you want to make sense.

    //It makes sense to an extent, but beyond that it makes no sense………//

    You have just passed an argument. would’ve been better if you could substantiate it with examples. Otherwise i can claim anything i want to.

    With reference to your second paragraph. Your argument is because of consciousness it is illogical. How?

    //As for power, is there anything wrong with feeling good?//

    Wrong? I don’t know.
    Selfish? Yes.
    As a nihilist i prefer not to use these catchy terms right/wrong. Nothing is necessarily right or wrong.

    As for your last paragraph,…
    Can you help me answer this question using your instincts: Why should Human Specie survive instead of getting extinct? Since now you are using your instincts and subjective bias it will no longer be a rational answer. But I am ready to hear you with an open mind.

  10. Saad,
    Reading you(r exegesis) reminds me of something that happened to me when I was in my early 20’s. I couldn’t function. I ended up staying briefly with a family I barely knew on a farm. The father said to me “Things change. You don’t realize that when you’re young.”

    I wish he were still alive so I could tell him that he was right. Things do change, and one doesn’t realize it when one is young because everything seems bigger than self in both threatening and self congratulatory ways.

    I can’t really address your argument in the terms you are putting forth, because I see in it too much mood. That statement is not intended to de value your ideas. On the contrary, it is through this thinking that we come into our selves.

  11. In fact it would be better if we end this discussion here. I understand you are a heart based person mariam. We have different world views. Fiona’s thread has once again spammed by me. I did what i do best here changing the topics at hand. Don’t even remember what people were discussing here. :p

    Please continue your discussion. 🙂

  12. Saad, I will give my brief response as a layman in this discussion. Yes, we can be extinct too in future but at this time like any other species we will do our best to survive. Our evolution, the consciousness the cognitive abilities should be used to live harmoneously. I personally believe in minimizing unnecessary harm to not only other humans but to all other species. So yes i completely agree with “just because we feel special doesn’t mean we are”. I see you are not content with this and are looking further and deeper i wish you the best in your journey.

  13. //Humans are not just rational but driven by emotions too but it doesn’t mean our reasoning should be driven by emotions when we are digging truths/facts.//

    Yes. But then instincts and emotions is not the same thing. I value rationality too but I do not consider instincts as something to be ignored completely in face of rationality. I had given you one example earlier but you had disregarded it as bull. Didn’t matter even if real life said otherwise.

    //With reference to your second paragraph. Your argument is because of consciousness it is illogical. How?//

    We people being evolved species have higher set of needs and requirements based on our evolved brains and higher consciousness. We are not simply out here in this world to breed and pass on our genes. That may be one of our purposes, but then to call an entire gender as disposable compared to females because one male can help breed multiple children by being with multiple women doesn’t make sense. Also a child usually needs both the parents in his/her life until a more mature age. A man cannot be with multiple families at the same time to help care for and support the children. Human beings need more care and devotion compared to more simple minded creatures in terms of survival of the species as well and it’s further evolution.

    //Selfish? Yes.
    As a nihilist i prefer not to use these catchy terms right/wrong. Nothing is necessarily right or wrong. //

    In that case ‘selfish’ looks like another catchy term as well.

  14. //Can you help me answer this question using your instincts: Why should Human Specie survive instead of getting extinct?//

    I already said we human beings have limited information for the time being and we are still growing and learning further. Keeping our instincts at hand, we are doing so to figure out more. Some quantum physicists are figuring out that the very sub-atomic particles are actually made up of vortices of energy that are vibrating. Even our thoughts could be vibrations of energy that can influence what happens to us. Anyway, this still requires more advanced science, which we need to wait out.

    In your case you did not believe the supernatural experiences that a number of people had in this world, saying that we need to wait out for science to prove/disprove of them. Hence also in the case of yet unproven instincts which science is slowly figuring out further on, we need to wait further on that. Till then we should do what we deem is best for us for the time being.

    Anyway, these are my own opinions. You are free to agree or disagree with me.

  15. When I mentioned the quantum physics part, I meant the discoveries regarding that area can open more doors for us also to answer bigger questions that mankind have had for a long time, which includes also whether we are an “accident” of evolution or whether species have been intentionally evolved throughout the millennia to come to our stage, where the species have a higher level of consciousness and can think and feel beyond just of survival and having an “illusionary” mental state of being valuable. Again like I said, we need to wait out and carry on what we deem is best for the world, instead of right away having conclusive answers on such bigger questions and disregarding future potential.

    I agree with Laila on her statements, she made some very good points. I need to live up to them myself.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s