Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Women's Rights in Islam - UPDATED WITH MOD INSTRUCTION IN FIRST POST
Options
Comments
-
Defender OF Faith wrote: »
In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry.
In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines.
In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.
In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines.
In Deuteronomy 21:15 "If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons...."
These are but few examples from the Old testament and as Jesus have said "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"
You are judging 7th century Arabia by 21st century Western European standards, are you doing this deliberately?
What Jesus meant by not changing the law was not changing the SPIRIT of the law. He was more than willing to challenge the letter of the law, which can be seen by the way he defied the religious authorities, and showed how the rules had become more important than doing good. He helped people and did good for them on the Sabbath, and defied those who criticised him, saying he shouldn't do anything on that day, as the law said. Christianity kept the spirit of the OT laws but rejected most of the details, following Jesus's example.
Nobody is judging 7th century Arabia by 21st century western standards; if polygamy were something that was once allowed, but now rejected because Islam realised that it doesn't gel with the equality of women, you might have a point. But polygamy still exists in Islam, and is practised to different degrees according to people's interpretation of Islam.
Until Islam stops excusing CURRENT practices on the basis that they are written in the Qur'an, it can never claim to be a religion of equality. Once is says "Yes, that was acceptable in 7th century Arabia, but is no longer acceptable in the 21st century anywhere, it remains a religion that favours men.
The sticking point seems to be that since the Qur'an is seen as the literal word of God, nothing in it can be put aside, only explained away and excused. Whereas the vast majority of Christians accept that their scripture is human made, and divinely inspired, and that what is written in it can be understood and practiced differently according to our growing relationship with God and our growing understanding of human relationships.
Christianity changed the relationship with God from one of the relationship between an all powerful father/king figure with a particular race of people to a relationship between a much more complicated God (Creator, Redeemer and Inspirer) and all mankind, on a personal basis. Christians have a personal relationship with God, which is not dependent on the behaviour of anyone else. Jesus took the existing religion, Judaism, and pointed out that it had become so engrossed in following rules and regulations that it had lost the spirit of what was behind them. He also introduced people to the new understanding of God, and their relationship with him. That's why Christians can read their scripture and contextualise it, and not feel they have to stick to the letter of the law just because something was written by human beings at a certain time and place in history.0 -
So why are women singled out? Not all women have problems at the time of the month they menstruate, so why assume they all do? Why ont on a case by case basis, leaving it to the individual to decide?confusedquark wrote: »I'll nip in on that - if men or women have any medical issues, then they absolutely are given special considerations regarding their obligatory prayers. They don't have to perform the full wudhu properly if they cannot manage it and they can also pray sitting down or even lying in their beds if they can't manage to stand up.
The stance Islam takes on this is misogynistic, because it makes assumptions about all women that are untrue, and assumes that they are all incapacitated and emotionally affected by menstruation.0 -
So why are women singled out? Not all women have problems at the time of the month they menstruate, so why assume they all do? Why ont on a case by case basis, leaving it to the individual to decide?
The stance Islam takes on this is misogynistic, because it makes assumptions about all women that are untrue, and assumes that they are all incapacitated and emotionally affected by menstruation.
I banned discussion of mensturation, yet you bring it up again, stoking the flames.
Take a month off.
0 -
I hope you are joking, are you informed about the level of rapes in the Muslim world? do you know that in the Muslim world the victim of rape will almost certainly marry the rapist? have you looked at the rate of suicide because of it? if not I suggest you to look and then we might have a proper debate on this matter because the hijab solution isn't working as you are suggesting. BTW I will not post any link regarding this, if you want to know more google is your friend, if you want to close your eyes and ignore then fell free.
Because affairs don't exist in the Muslim world? because perhaps Divorce doesn't exist in the Muslim world? at least women here are protected by the law and social welfare, go and read about divorced women in Muslim countries, you will realise that the vast majority of them live in poverty after the divorce.
All of your above points rely on the assumption that Muslims and Muslim-predominant countries today reliably follow Islam. I cited an article in a thread recently here that compared all the countries in the world today in how they practice Islamic principles and Muslim-predominant countries are actually a country mile behind non-Muslim countries, with only Malaysia (33) and Kuwait (42) in the top 50 countries, and Saudi in 91st. Whilst the study had its limitations, it's useful to look at from a point of view of what Islam teaches aside from the same select few topics that come up again and again, and the fact that the majority of Islamic countries fall well short on the issues that were looked at, the least that it shows is that Muslim-predominant and Islamic are far from synonymous (today at least).
I've said it time and time again that following Islamic principles will NOT 100% stop all rapes, all affairs, suicides etc, but it will reduce the likelihood of those things occurring. Feel free to cite actual rape, suicide, divorce, divorce-outcome and affair statistics from Muslim-predominant countries, in comparison to what happens in the west, and we can objectively compare them, but my argument will remain that Muslim-predominant countries today are not a fair reflection on Islam, and the link above is part of my reasoning why. There's a whole chapter in the Quran that deals with divorce and it gives women entitlements that men don't get. I've already dealt with how rapists are (or should be) treated in Islam - making a girl marry the rapist is disgraceful. It's a heinous crime and is severely punishable in Islam.What I meant was that it has failed in protecting women's right, topics like polygamy, inheritance, woman raped and forced to marry the rapist...all these are elements that prove to me that Islam failed in terms of equality between a man and a woman.
I've given many reasons in the opening post as to why polygamy is much less practical for women, as opposed to men. Polygamy in certain circumstances has its uses - In the Quran polygamy is mentioned as a means to look after orphaned children. It's also useful after a war when there have been many male casualties (which usually is the case in war) and there are surplus women to men in a society. Polygamy isn't a walk in the park for man - it doubles/trebles/quadruples his responsibility, and he is strictly obliged to be fair and just to all his wives, and if he can't, he shouldn't marry more than one.
Men getting twice the inheritance that women do has to do with the different roles men and women have in Islam. Men are the maintainers and protectors of women, as per the Quran. A man has the responsibility to provide for his wife and his family, and a woman is entitled to her husband's earnings, whereas a woman's own wealth she keeps for herself and spends how she wishes, and her husband has no right over it.0 -
So why are women singled out? Not all women have problems at the time of the month they menstruate, so why assume they all do? Why ont on a case by case basis, leaving it to the individual to decide?
The stance Islam takes on this is misogynistic, because it makes assumptions about all women that are untrue, and assumes that they are all incapacitated and emotionally affected by menstruation.
If you had bothered to read my earlier response regarding this particular issue, which Defender of Faith had also re-quoted for your benefit, but you chose to ignore a second time, then you would see the non-misogynistic non-assumptive reasoning behind it.0 -
Advertisement
-
Looksee, can you explain how the man/Husband bearing the financial responsibility of the family considered oppressive to the women? you have to remember that at the same time the women is free to work and purse a career and become educated, the money she earns remains hers and she's no obliged to spend on her husband unless she wants to. Take into account that in society today many women are housewives and do depend on their Husbands for financial support Islam simply places this duty on the man.Defender of Faith you said:
That is a clear and specific example of the attitude of Islamic Law to women, and demonstrates the inherent inequality which is the base line for discussion on the part of Muslims.0 -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1081214/Somali-girl-pleaded-mercy-Islamists-stoned-death-raped.html
"
A girl of 13 begged for mercy moments before a mob buried her up to her shoulders and stoned her to death, it was claimed yesterday.
The Somalian youngster is said to have pleaded 'Don't kill me, don't kill me' before her horrific execution in front of a 1,000-strong crowd...According to Amnesty International, the girl was 13 and had been raped by three men.
Officials say she was 23 and had confessed adultery before an Islamic court."
I know who I'd choose to believe between Amnesty International and some Islamic fundamentalists. But EVEN if she was 23, and had confessed to adultery, it's still interesting that the three men involved weren't treated in the same way.
Being raped is a million miles away from committing consensual adultery. I don't know what the actual story of this case is (and certainly won't be relying on a tabloid to provide it) - but if these rebels are applying adultery punishments to an innocent victim of a heinous crime, then I can't condemn it enough, from both a personal and Islamic viewpoint.0 -
Defender OF Faith wrote: »Looksee, can you explain how the man/Husband bearing the financial responsibility of the family considered oppressive to the women? you have to remember that at the same time the women is free to work and purse a career and become educated, the money she earns remains hers and she's no obliged to spend on her husband unless she wants to. Take into account that in society today many women are housewives and do depend on their Husbands for financial support Islam simply places this duty on the man.
A man and a woman should (by my standards of equality and in my opinion) have equal rights and responsibilities in a marriage. To say that a man automatically has financial responsibility for the family is patronising to say the least. If, within a family, the husband and wife decide that the husband will be the earner and the wife will care for the home and children, then that is fine, and is their decision. However, adjusting inheritance laws, for example, to the assumption that the male is the responsible adult in a relationship is, as I have said, patronising.
All kinds of automatic assumptions follow from this kind of ruling. That the man is not only the responsible person, but also the dominant adult. He takes care of his wife and family, but that also makes the wife dependent on him and subject to his authority.0 -
You say patronising but patronising to whom? the man or the women? how can it be patronising the the women while at the same time she's free to purse a career and have her own job which provide her with her own stable income, she want to share the financial responsibility with the Husband nothing is stopping her from doing so, so again how is it patronising?A man and a woman should (by my standards of equality and in my opinion) have equal rights and responsibilities in a marriage. To say that a man automatically has financial responsibility for the family is patronising to say the least. If, within a family, the husband and wife decide that the husband will be the earner and the wife will care for the home and children, then that is fine, and is their decision. However, adjusting inheritance laws, for example, to the assumption that the male is the responsible adult in a relationship is, as I have said, patronising.
Islam places this role on the man, once he marries he can discuss with his wife the possibility of sharing this responsibility as a couple.0 -
Defender OF Faith wrote: »You say patronising but patronising to whom? the man or the women? how can it be patronising the the women while at the same time she's free to purse a career and have her own job which provide her with her own stable income, she want to share the financial responsibility with the Husband nothing is stopping her from doing so, so again how is it patronising?
Islam places this role on the man, once he marries he can discuss with his wife the possibility of sharing this responsibility as a couple.
Do you understand the meaning of the word patronising? If you cannot see why it is patronising then I cannot take the argument any further.
Definition of patronize
'ˈpatrənʌɪz/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: patronising
1.
treat with an apparent kindness which betrays a feeling of superiority.
"‘She's a good-hearted girl,’ he said in a patronizing voice"
synonyms: treat condescendingly, treat with condescension, condescend to, look down on, talk down to, put down, humiliate, treat like a child, treat as inferior, treat with disdain, treat scornfully/contemptuously, be snobbish to, look down one's nose at'0 -
Advertisement
-
I actually looked up the definition before I replied and what I don't understand is how can you submit or condescend the women by providing for her financially, when a man takes his women for a date and take care of the finances involved it's view as an act of chivalry a gentleman not in any way was he trying to patronise or condescend the women he loves and respect.Do you understand the meaning of the word patronising? If you cannot see why it is patronising then I cannot take the argument any further.
Definition of patronize
'ˈpatrənʌɪz/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: patronising
1.
treat with an apparent kindness which betrays a feeling of superiority.
"‘She's a good-hearted girl,’ he said in a patronizing voice"
synonyms: treat condescendingly, treat with condescension, condescend to, look down on, talk down to, put down, humiliate, treat like a child, treat as inferior, treat with disdain, treat scornfully/contemptuously, be snobbish to, look down one's nose at'
If Islam wanted to patronise the women she would not be given the right to purse a job and earn her own money but she is. Marriage in Islam is an institution build on love,trust and compassion between the two couples, sharing the household task with your wife such as cleaning and washing is something the prophet used to do and not submission and condescension.
Aisha describes him when asked what he used to do in his house by saying:
"He was like any other human being: he would clean his clothes, milk his ewe and serve himself." (Reported by Imam Ahmad in al-Musnad)
She (RA) was also asked about what the Messenger of Allah (p.b.u.h.) used to do in his house, and she said, "He used to serve his family, then when the time for prayer came, he would go out to pray." (Reported by al-Bukhari).
“The best of you are those who are the best to their wives, and I am the best of you to my wives.”[Narrated by al-Tirmidhi]
Once Aisha (radhiAllahu ‘anhu) asked the Prophet (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) “How is your love for me?”
“Like the rope’s knot,” he replied, indicating that it is strong and secure. And time after time thereafter, she would ask him: “How is the knot?”
And he would reply: “Ala haaliha” [in the same condition].
[Abu Nu’aym in Hilya al Awliya (2/44) and quoted by Hafiz Ibn Hajar in Lisan al Mizan (no. 760), Al Shawkani in Al Fawa’id al Majmu’a fi al Ahadith al Mawdu’a (no.1180)]
Sayyida A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) would kiss one of his wives and then leave for prayer (salat) without performing ablution (wudu).
Urwa says that I asked A’isha: “It must have been you?”
(Upon hearing this) A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) smiled. [Sunan al Tirmidhi]0 -
Defender OF Faith wrote: »I actually looked up the definition before I replied and what I don't understand is how can you submit or condescend the women by providing for her financially, when a man takes his women for a date and take care of the finances involved it's view as an act of chivalry a gentleman not in any way was he trying to patronise or condescend the women he loves and respect.
If Islam wanted to patronise the women she would not be given the right to purse a job and earn her own money but she is. Marriage in Islam is an institution build on love,trust and compassion between the two couples, sharing the household task with your wife such as cleaning and washing is something the prophet used to do and not submission and condescension.
The fact that she has to be 'given' the right to pursue a job is what is patronising. If Islam refused the woman the right to her own job, that is not patronising, it is sexist. There is a difference.0 -
I dont understand? under western law the women is given the right to purse a job and work how does this differ from Islam giving the women the right to purse a job?The fact that she has to be 'given' the right to pursue a job is what is patronising. If Islam refused the woman the right to her own job, that is not patronising, it is sexist. There is a difference.0 -
No, under western law the woman has the right to pursue a job, she has the same rights as a man in that respect. Neither is given the right.0
-
No, under western law the woman has the right to pursue a job, she has the same rights as a man in that respect. Neither is given the right.
Then allow me to rephrase, under Islamic law the Muslim women has the right to pursue a job and be educated & marry whom she likes, just like the man.
In Islam, greater financial security is assured for women. Women in Islam have been given more financial security, as compared to the men. They are entitled to receive marital gifts, to keep present and future properties and income for their own security. No married woman is required to spend a penny from her property and income on the household. She is entitled to full financial support during marriage and during her 'Iddah (waiting period after divorce) in case of divorce- and if she has children, she is also entitled for child support.
A woman in Islam does not shoulder any financial obligations; it is the man who shoulders this responsibility in the family. It is the duty of the father or the brother, before she is married to look after her lodging, boarding, clothing and financial aspects, and it becomes the duty of her husband or her son, after she is married.
If a Woman works, all earnings she makes are absolutely her property. She is not obliged to spend from it on the household, unless she wants to do so with her free will. Irrespective how rich the wife is, the duty to give lodging, boarding, clothing and look after the financial aspects of the wife remains that of the husband.0 -
OK. I give up. You and I are really on opposite ends of the spectrum of what is meant by 'rights' and I cannot see any point in trying any further.0
-
Can you educate me with regard to your definition of what's rights? to see how the extent of how the rights given to the Muslim women would fit under your definition.OK. I give up. You and I are really on opposite ends of the spectrum of what is meant by 'rights' and I cannot see any point in trying any further.
You said "under western law the woman has the right to pursue a job" and I affirmed your statement, we might disagree on something but were are not completely on the "opposite end of the spectrum".0 -
I can clearly see that long posts aren't working and trying to cover different points at the same time just gives you the opportunity to answer to the parts that suit you and you put aside the other parts, for this reason I am going to focus on 3 main parts, once we discuss them fully then we move to the other parts, we are going to talk about the Prophet's marriage to a child, Sharia law about rape and Lesbians/Homosexuals in Islam and their right.Defender OF Faith wrote: »You answered by saying
"A 12 year old girl is still small, skinny, her body isn't completely formed, she is not suitable for marriage, there is also the psychological aspect. Am I right or wrong?"
And I replied by saying:
"present to me a single hadith by Aisha the most beloved person to him and the women he choose to die on her lap, out of the 2000+ she narrated where she stated her displeasure with the prophet her husband or how he oppressed her then you are welcome. or where she complained about being small,skinny and her body not being completely formed before the prophet married her."
Am waiting for your evidence...
Do you really do it on purpose? do you seriously defend the undefendable? do you really need a hadith as a proof? the child -yes she was a child not a woman - cannot make a full decision whether or not to marry a man, its way too advanced for her at the age of 7 years old, the child was forced to make love at the age of 9 or 12 years old and you still defend that?
The Prophet in Islam who is supposed to be the fairest and most complete man of all time failed miserably, how come you can't see that?
Well I am agnostic and as such when I read anything linked to any religion I analyse it and I use logic and common sense, you have faith in a religion and as such you are blinded by it because Islam as a religion isn't negotiable, you can't challenge it because it doesn't give you the right to do so and as such you aren't using common sense.Defender OF Faith wrote: »The 3rd article you presented states that Sharia law punishes the raped women:
Under Sharia law the rapist will be inflected with the Sharia Punishment of adultery and is forced according to some scholars to pay her a dowry.
The writer however is making his point based on the difficulty of establishing the proof of rape or adultery in Islam making the victim possibly to prove her claim of rape,but what the author had failed to point out that cases of rape are in general difficult to prove, and in accordance with The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence."
is this link http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=6157 a full and complete summary of the Sharia law when it comes to rape, yes or no, if the answer is no please add a link that summarises the Sharia law in order to compare both of themDefender OF Faith wrote: »Hide behind Christianity? Draw sympathy I merely stated "We Muslim believe just like Christianity and Judaism that Homosexuality is sinful" which is a fact so I fail to see how can I draw sympathy from this & how is that hiding behind Christianity when I clearly stated "We Muslims"
#1) you said:
"misinformation wouldn't work with me"
What I provided is the Orthodox Muslim view on Homosexuality, you have yet to prove how what I said conflicts with Islam of what Mainstream Muslim believe using the Hadith & Qur'an. What we Muslim not accept is the manifestation of this sin in public, otherwise if a homosexual keeps his practice private or in his premise he enjoys the full rights as any other Muslim.
#2)LOL! Citing Wiki-islam and Answering Islam among your sources of "true information", both of which are littered by Anti-Islamic articles written by people who have a strong a negative sentimental against Islam and its prophet subjecting their writings to bias & subjectivity add to this the fact that not a single one of the writers of these articles hold a degree in Islamic scholarship,Arabic & Hadith for me or any Muslim in fact to take his/her claims seriously.
#3) You cant progress a debate by placing your whole point and idea on a link you provide, what usually happen is that you present your argument and then you provide the source and not provide the source alone. If you want to stick to your sources dont cite them for me YOUread them and summarise what you read for me presenting the Hadith,verses and statements that support your argument while pointing out my mistakes.
I do not need to read to confirm this, as I have mentioned before the links you posted are not written by Islamic scholars for me or for any Muslim to take their words seriously.
I told you that a Muslim with Homosexual inclination can lead the Muslim prayer,since the whole problem is the manifestation of the act and not the tendencies you are yet to prove otherwise by presenting a Hadith of the Prophet that strictly forbid homosexuals from leading the prayers because no such Hadith exist.
All the links that I posted are wrong based on you, all of them regardless where I got them from, ok, enlighten me please and post a link that proves that homosexuals are accepted in the Muslim society and that a known homesexual can be an Imam, I know that all what you said is completely wrong and what really annoys me is you dishonesty when it comes to talking and describing Islam as a religion, you have altered so many information already hence why I will focus on these three topics first before I move to something else.0 -
confusedquark wrote: »All of your above points rely on the assumption that Muslims and Muslim-predominant countries today reliably follow Islam. I cited an article in a thread recently here that compared all the countries in the world today in how they practice Islamic principles and Muslim-predominant countries are actually a country mile behind non-Muslim countries, with only Malaysia (33) and Kuwait (42) in the top 50 countries, and Saudi in 91st. Whilst the study had its limitations, it's useful to look at from a point of view of what Islam teaches aside from the same select few topics that come up again and again, and the fact that the majority of Islamic countries fall well short on the issues that were looked at, the least that it shows is that Muslim-predominant and Islamic are far from synonymous (today at least).
I've said it time and time again that following Islamic principles will NOT 100% stop all rapes, all affairs, suicides etc, but it will reduce the likelihood of those things occurring. Feel free to cite actual rape, suicide, divorce, divorce-outcome and affair statistics from Muslim-predominant countries, in comparison to what happens in the west, and we can objectively compare them, but my argument will remain that Muslim-predominant countries today are not a fair reflection on Islam, and the link above is part of my reasoning why. There's a whole chapter in the Quran that deals with divorce and it gives women entitlements that men don't get. I've already dealt with how rapists are (or should be) treated in Islam - making a girl marry the rapist is disgraceful. It's a heinous crime and is severely punishable in Islam.
You are using some common sense by admitting that the veil and Islam aren't a complete solution to rape in general and I appreciate that, I kindly ask you to have a look at the below link and tell me whether or not it summarises the Sharia law regarding rape, it this link is wrong please post a link that summarises everything: http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=6157confusedquark wrote: »I've given many reasons in the opening post as to why polygamy is much less practical for women, as opposed to men. Polygamy in certain circumstances has its uses - In the Quran polygamy is mentioned as a means to look after orphaned children. It's also useful after a war when there have been many male casualties (which usually is the case in war) and there are surplus women to men in a society. Polygamy isn't a walk in the park for man - it doubles/trebles/quadruples his responsibility, and he is strictly obliged to be fair and just to all his wives, and if he can't, he shouldn't marry more than one.
Men getting twice the inheritance that women do has to do with the different roles men and women have in Islam. Men are the maintainers and protectors of women, as per the Quran. A man has the responsibility to provide for his wife and his family, and a woman is entitled to her husband's earnings, whereas a woman's own wealth she keeps for herself and spends how she wishes, and her husband has no right over it.
You have given me examples of polygamy that suits you the best, I am also in a position to give examples that suit me, but I don't want this debate to be based on examples because it always give you an opportunity to focus on one side only as oppose to looking at the bigger picture.
In Islam polygamy favors the male and not the female, how can that be seen as equal in our modern society?
In Islam and Sharia a male will always have the bigger part of the inheritance, while this rule is logical in the past for obvious reasons it's not logical anymore in our modern society, how come this rule isn't challenged by different scholars in the 21st century? and how come this rule is fair and shows equality between men and women in our modern society?
do you know this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariq_Ramadan ? he's the only Muslim that I listened to who is ready to have a proper debate about some medieval aspects of Islam and challenge them, he is even banned from entering 6 Muslim countries because of his views on the governments and so on but he's also hated by some well known Imams because he is using common sense regarding some topics.0 -
Open another thread to talk about this since it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread, If you want to talk about the injustice Aisha received by her marriage to the prophet then present evidence from the Hadith or sunnah where Aisha complained about such injustice as who are you to speak on behalf of someone who lived 1400 years ago, especially her marriage to a man whom she lived dearly and whom she was to him the most beloved person in his life.we are going to talk about the Prophet's marriage to a child
Until then reflect and think about these points, they should can keep you busy:1- If the marriage was so wrong, then why didn’t Aisha’s mother object to the marriage? Instead she happily gave Aisha for marriage, and prepared her for the marriage
2- Why didn’t Abu bakr the father of Aisha object to the marriage? If it was so wrong you would expect the father to have not allowed such a marriage to take place.
3- Why did the women who were present with Aisha when she was about to be given to the prophet for marriage wished her luck and were happy for her. If the marriage was wrong, the women present would have been sad, and they would not have been happy for Aisha, rather what we see is that they were happy for Aisha and had no problems with this marriage whatsoever.
4- Are we supposed to assume that Abu Bakr, and Aisha’s mother, and the women present with Aisha are all pedophiles and child molesters? Indeed such a conclusion with be very ignorant, and arrogant.
5- Why didn’t any of the prophet’s enemies use this against the prophet Muhammad? If the marriage was so wrong, then you would expect to find his enemies to be the first ones to start using this against him, instead what we find is that his enemies NEVER EVEN ONCE brought this marriage up in a negative way against him.
6- In fact why didn’t any of the Arabs around the Hijazi area object or talk against this marriage? It was not only the pagan Arabs in Hijaz who didn’t object to this marriage, but the surrounding Arabs didn’t object to it neither!
7- Are we to assume that ALL these Arabs were pedophiles and child molesters? Indeed such a conclusion would make the one making this conclusion a very stupid man, because only a very stupid arrogant man would accuse an entire race of being child molesters and pedophiles.
8- Why is there not a SINGLE hadith from Aisha showing her being displeased of the marriage? Why is there not one hadith from Aisha showing her to be like a victim, instead when you look at Aisha you find no symptoms of a victim. She became a great leader for Islam, a great scholar for Islam who would teach about Islam to many men. Does this seem to be the symptoms of someone who has been abused?
9-If Aisha was indeed a victim and so on, then why did she love the prophet Muhammad so much, and would sometimes get jelous around him because she loved him so much, does this sound like someone who is a victim?
Baseless claims that are not supported by any evidence nothing to discuss here.Do you really do it on purpose? do you seriously defend the undefendable? do you really need a hadith as a proof? the child -yes she was a child not a woman - cannot make a full decision whether or not to marry a man, its way too advanced for her at the age of 7 years old, the child was forced to make love at the age of 9 or 12 years old and you still defend that?
More baseless claims that have not evidence presented to support them for me to interact with, again nothing to discuss here..The Prophet in Islam who is supposed to be the fairest and most complete man of all time failed miserably, how come you can't see that?
Again more baseless claims not supported by anything other then your own words, you claim to be logical then present me evidence from Islamic sources that prove your point seriously how difficult can this be?!you have faith in a religion and as such you are blinded by it because Islam as a religion isn't negotiable, you can't challenge it because it doesn't give you the right to do so and as such you aren't using common sense.
I discussed the article and the point it was trying to made with regard to rape punishment under Sharia law,as the article did not provide a full review my answer below:is this link http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=6157 a full and complete summary of the Sharia law when it comes to rape, yes or no, if the answer is no please add a link that summarises the Sharia law in order to compare both of them
The article you presented does not provide a full and complete summery regarding rape. For an article discussing Sharia law regarding rape in Islam: http://islamqa.info/en/158282Defender Of Faith wrote: »The 3rd article you presented states that Sharia law punishes the raped women:
Under Sharia law the rapist will be inflected with the Sharia Punishment of adultery and is forced according to some scholars to pay her a dowry.
The writer however is making his point based on the difficulty of establishing the proof of rape or adultery in Islam making the victim possibly to prove her claim of rape,but what the author had failed to point out that cases of rape are in general difficult to prove, and in accordance with The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence."
According to the CPS UK Policy for Prosecuting Cases of Rape, section 5:
http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/p.../rape.html#_05
To avoid wasting space here read point 1-6, Under Sharia law the evidence for establishing rape is similar to adultery however in the case of a rape it can be proven with the same level of evidence as stated by point 1-6. DNA testing under Sharia is taken as secondary evidence and is not completely rejected as the writer implied:
"THE Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) has recently stated that DNA is secondary evidence in rape cases. This has been bitterly criticised by many. Here is a counter-viewpoint why DNA is secondary evidence.
DNA testing can prove that intercourse has occurred but not the circumstances of the event. Other evidence is needed to differentiate between rape (zina bil jabr) and consensual sex (zina bil raza). In rape, only the man will be punished, and in consensual sex, both man and woman will be punished.Science cannot prove that in case of a rape the DNA would be different and in case of intercourse with consent it will be different.
This can be treated as initial evidence, but not main evidence for rape. Also, one of the basic principles of both Sharia and the man-made law, to which attention must be paid, is that the accused is innocent until proved guilty and the claim of the claimant — whether man or woman — cannot be accepted unless there is valid proof."
The author also fails to realise that DNA testing under western rape prosecution laws in general is not enough to prove rape due to not only the limitation involved but since DNA testing will only eliminates a suspect from suspicion or identify and further evidence is required to prove the rape.
https://www.umassd.edu/media/umassda...a_evidence.pdf
http://www.wyndhamforensic.ca/resour..._DNA_Nov09.pdf
#1)I do not learn and educate my self about my religion from people that preach against it with no qualification to do so, just like you do not accept medical advice unless it's from a qualified Doctor.All the links that I posted are wrong based on you, all of them regardless where I got them from
#2) I gave you the opportunity to read the article and use the Hadith and verses it presented to support your argument then I can replay.
There is no doubt that in Islam homosexuality is considered 'sinful'. With regard to dealing with homosexuals, the basic rule governing this would be:Enlighten me please and post a link that proves that homosexuals are accepted in the Muslim society and that a known homosexual can be an Imam
Allah forbids you not with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just- Holy Quran 60:8-9
As a Muslim who lives in this west where homosexuality is accepted and manifested into its culture, am not going to start running up to homosexual and start killing them and spilling blood, because I am differentiating between the actual homosexual and the homosexual act. The act is what I have an issue with, as for the homosexual can I show him respect,love & compassion? of course I can!
Please note that there is a difference to actually being involved in a homosexual act -which is a sin - from having sexual feelings that you try to control, that you don't express in public, which is not sinful if you try to control them.
What is sinful in homosexuality is the actual sexual act between the couple of a similar sex. if you transform your desires into a struggle and a challenge to overcome it and not physically commit it, then we believe God will get the reward for it.
Am never going to compromise in my religion, when I told you that a Homosexual man can lead the prayer, In Islam as long as a person is a Muslim he can lead the prayer,If a person has an inclination toward homosexuality but is not necessarily acting upon the inclination, we all have an inclination toward a sin even the Imam that lead the prayer as we are not angles.
If he has the inclination even if he's acting upon these inclination which is a major sin in Islam, as long as he does this on his own private premise and does not manifest this act in public he can lead the prayer, just like an Imam who might have had an inclination to a sin however did not manifest this sin in public for people to see but rather in his own private area.
Source:http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/homosexuality.htm
& an excellent video by a Brother from the UK discussing the issue of homosexuality in Islam: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsgSAd1fs8s
When compared to the narrow minded idea you have about Islam it's wrong, since you are clearly not open minded enough to accept the view I believe in as a Muslim, and I told you it's the orthodox belief of mainstream Muslims.I know that all what you said is completely wrong and what really annoys me is you dishonesty when it comes to talking and describing Islam as a religion
You reject it not based on evidence but based on your own preformed idea about the religion formed from reading corrupted source of information about Islam such as the one you linked,
I have not altered a single information, go read my post and show me a single situation where I altered what I said or contradicted my self.you have altered so many information already hence why I will focus on these three topics first before I move to something else.0 -
Advertisement
-
Read my previous comment exactly before this one for a link and discussion of the article.You are using some common sense by admitting that the veil and Islam aren't a complete solution to rape in general and I appreciate that, I kindly ask you to have a look at the below link and tell me whether or not it summarises the Sharia law regarding rape, it this link is wrong please post a link that summarises everything: http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=6157
You gave a single example so far, based on the assumption that a women might have a large sex drive, to which she needs 4 men to support such drive, you were unable to support such claim to begin with using a reputable source or study.You have given me examples of polygamy that suits you the best, I am also in a position to give examples that suit me
We refuted by saying men have a larger sex drive then women supporting this by a study we cited proving the invalidity of your argument.
Explain how is this not logical any more in modern society, but am glad you accepted the fact that it was logical in the past, care to elaborate as to what changed so much to the point where it's no longer logical today? taking the ruling and the reason behind the ruling into consideration.In Islam and Sharia a male will always have the bigger part of the inheritance, while this rule is logical in the past for obvious reasons it's not logical anymore in our modern society0 -
Defender OF Faith wrote: »Open another thread to talk about this since it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread
Yes it has to do with this thread, based on your Prophet's action different countries picked different ages for women's marriage, please help yourself and pick the 5 or 6 countries from this list that follow Sharia and then tell me how it's irrelevant to this thread http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age.Defender OF Faith wrote: »If you want to talk about the injustice Aisha received by her marriage to the prophet then present evidence from the Hadith or sunnah where Aisha complained about such injustice as who are you to speak on behalf of someone who lived 1400 years ago, especially her marriage to a man whom she lived dearly and whom she was to him the most beloved person in his life.
You are dodging my question by insisting to refer to a hadith, it's a clear sign that you are ashamed about your Prophet's actions and you have no logical explanation to defend himDefender OF Faith wrote: »Baseless claims that are not supported by any evidence nothing to discuss here.
How come its baseless and what evidences do you need? again I can feel that you are short of arguments hereDo you really do it on purpose? do you seriously defend the undefendable? do you really need a hadith as a proof? the child -yes she was a child not a woman - cannot make a full decision whether or not to marry a man, its way too advanced for her at the age of 7 years old, the child was forced to make love at the age of 9 or 12 years old and you still defend that?Defender OF Faith wrote: »More baseless claims that have not evidence presented to support them for me to interact with, again nothing to discuss here..
Lots to discuss here, how come this is a baseless claim:The Prophet in Islam who is supposed to be the fairest and most complete man of all time failed miserably, how come you can't see that?Defender OF Faith wrote: »Again more baseless claims not supported by anything other then your own words, you claim to be logical then present me evidence from Islamic sources that prove your point seriously how difficult can this be?!
Can you explain to me where you used common sense?you have faith in a religion and as such you are blinded by it because Islam as a religion isn't negotiable, you can't challenge it because it doesn't give you the right to do so and as such you aren't using common sense.Defender OF Faith wrote: »I discussed the article and the point it was trying to made with regard to rape punishment under Sharia law,as the article did not provide a full review my answer below:
The article you presented does not provide a full and complete summery regarding rape. For an article discussing Sharia law regarding rape in Islam as the article you present: http://islamqa.info/en/158282
your link is incomplete and doesn't give a full picture of the Sharia law when it comes to rape, on top of that there is a mention of DNA but DNA is not mentioned in the Sharia nor is it used in the Muslim world, how do you want me to take you seriously then?Defender OF Faith wrote: »#1)I do not learn and educate my self about my religion from people that preach against it with no qualification to do so, just like you do not accept medical advice unless it's from a qualified Doctor.
Where did I preach against it? we live and learn everyday and from everybody this is why we try to have a proper debate.Defender OF Faith wrote: »There is no doubt that in Islam homosexuality is considered 'sinful'. With regard to dealing with homosexuals, the basic rule governing this would be:
Allah forbids you not with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just- Holy Quran 60:8-9
As a Muslim who lives in this west where homosexuality is accepted and manifested into its culture, am not going to start running up to homosexual and starting killing them and spilling blood, because I am differentiating between the actual homosexual and the homosexual act. The act is what I have an issue with, as for the homosexual can I show him respect,love & compassion? of course I can!
Please note that there is a difference to actually being involved in a homosexual act -which is a sin - from having sexual feelings that you try to control, that you don't express in public, which is not sinful if you try to control them.
What is sinful in homosexuality is the actual sexual act between the couple of a similar sex. if you transform your desires into a struggle and a challenge to overcome it and not physically commit it, then we believe God will get the reward for it.
Am never going to compromise in my religion, when I told you that a Homosexual man can lead the prayer, In Islam as long as a person is a Muslim he can lead the prayer,If a person has an inclination toward homosexuality but is not necessarily acting upon the inclination, we all have an inclination toward a sin even the Imam that lead the prayer as we are not angles.
If he has the inclination even if he's acting upon these inclination which is a major sin in Islam, as long as he does this on his own private premise and does not manifest this act in public he can lead the prayer, just like an Imam who might have had an inclination to a sin however did not manifest this sin in public for people to see but rather in his own private area.
Source:http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/homosexuality.htm
& an excellent video by a Brother from the UK discussing the issue of homosexuality in Islam: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsgSAd1fs8s
When compared to the narrow minded idea you have about Islam it's wrong since you are clearly not open minded enough to accept the view I believe in as a Muslim and I told you it's the orthodox belief of mainstream Muslims.
You reject it not based on evidence but based on your own preformed idea about the religion formed from reading corrupted source of information about Islam such as the one you linked,
I have not altered a single information, go read my post and show me a single situation where I altered what I said or contradicted my self.
of course you altered several pieces of information, homosexuals aren't accepted and an Imam cannot be a well known homosexual, you are yet to give me a Sharia text to prove it and an example, instead you went to write a big long post accusing me of being a narrow minded person, this is your only mean of defense against a logical argument, do you mind posting the link where I can see that the Sharia law accepts Homosexuals as Imams just like you stated? Do you see now what I mean with dodging my questions?
Here is a link that explains the punishments awaiting homosexuals and Lesbians: http://islamqa.info/en/38622Defender OF Faith wrote: »If you want to have a fruitful discussion then back up every point you make about Islam with evidence using the Qur'an & Hadith.
Please don't write using bold characters, it's aggressive.
No I won't back up everything with the Quoran or Hadith, there are issues in which common sense will be used and others where Sharia law or Quoran will be used.
Out of the 3 topics that I wanted to discuss with you 3 have been dodged one way or another.0 -
Defender OF Faith wrote: »Read my previous comment exactly before this one for a link and discussion of the article.
You gave a single example so far, based on the assumption that a women might have a large sex drive, to which she needs 4 men to support such drive, you were unable to support such claim to begin with using a reputable source or study.
We refuted by saying men have a larger sex drive then women supporting this by a study we cited proving the invalidity of your argument.
Explain how is this not logical any more in modern society, but am glad you accepted the fact that it was logical in the past, care to elaborate as to what changed so much to the point where it's no longer logical today? taking the ruling and the reason behind the ruling into consideration.
Would you care focusing on the 3 topics that I started with you prior to moving to these topics? I just want to finish what we started and prove you are wrong before we move to other topics.0 -
Different countries around the world and different state pick different age for women marriage for example in US states the age of marriage varies from 13 in New Hampshire to 15 in South Carolina.Yes it has to do with this thread, based on your Prophet's action different countries picked different ages for women's marriage
What does the age of marriage has to do with the right of women in Islam? especially since under Islamic Law a women cannot be forced into marriage.
#1) My friend if I was ashamed of his actions, I would have presented the evidence used by some scholars to argue that Aisha was 18-19 when the marriage was consummated*. I will never be ashamed for any action my prophet did,he's described in the Qur'an as a man of greatest behaviour and manner.You are dodging my question by insisting to refer to a hadith, it's a clear sign that you are ashamed about your Prophet's actions and you have no logical explanation to defend him
*http://www.hasaan.com/2012/04/hazrat-aishas-real-age-at-marriage-time.html
#2)Am not dodging the question, am inviting any question that deals with the issue of injustice and oppression of women in Islam, if you feel that the marriage of Aisha to Muhammed was an act of injustice or oppression you need to support this using Hadith and Sunnah from the time of the prophet not using 21st century moral codes and standard to judge something that happened in 7th century Arabia and which was only criticized in 1905.
The prophet marriage to Aisha is not the topic of this thread, but before you open a thread discussing such issue I invite you to read and reflect on the following point:1- If the marriage was so wrong, then why didn’t Aisha’s mother object to the marriage? Instead she happily gave Aisha for marriage, and prepared her for the marriage
2- Why didn’t Abu bakr the father of Aisha object to the marriage? If it was so wrong you would expect the father to have not allowed such a marriage to take place.
3- Why did the women who were present with Aisha when she was about to be given to the prophet for marriage wished her luck and were happy for her. If the marriage was wrong, the women present would have been sad, and they would not have been happy for Aisha, rather what we see is that they were happy for Aisha and had no problems with this marriage whatsoever.
4- Are we supposed to assume that Abu Bakr, and Aisha’s mother, and the women present with Aisha are all pedophiles and child molesters? Indeed such a conclusion with be very ignorant, and arrogant.
5- Why didn’t any of the prophet’s enemies use this against the prophet Muhammad? If the marriage was so wrong, then you would expect to find his enemies to be the first ones to start using this against him, instead what we find is that his enemies NEVER EVEN ONCE brought this marriage up in a negative way against him.
6- In fact why didn’t any of the Arabs around the Hijazi area object or talk against this marriage? It was not only the pagan Arabs in Hijaz who didn’t object to this marriage, but the surrounding Arabs didn’t object to it neither!
7- Are we to assume that ALL these Arabs were pedophiles and child molesters? Indeed such a conclusion would make the one making this conclusion a very stupid man, because only a very stupid arrogant man would accuse an entire race of being child molesters and pedophiles.
8- Why is there not a SINGLE hadith from Aisha showing her being displeased of the marriage? Why is there not one hadith from Aisha showing her to be like a victim, instead when you look at Aisha you find no symptoms of a victim. She became a great leader for Islam, a great scholar for Islam who would teach about Islam to many men. Does this seem to be the symptoms of someone who has been abused?
9-If Aisha was indeed a victim and so on, then why did she love the prophet Muhammad so much, and would sometimes get jelous around him because she loved him so much, does this sound like someone who is a victim?
You claimed that Aisha was a young,small,skinny child that was forced into marriage you need evidence to support:How come its baseless and what evidences do you need? again I can feel that you are short of arguments here
#1) The physical descriptions you associated with her
#2)That she was actually forced into marriage.
I don't think you have read a single biography about the prophet Muhammed or have even read the Qur'an the book you claim he wrote.Lots to discuss here, how come this is a baseless claim
How can this man fail miserably yet gets chosen in Michael Hart "100 Influential" as the most influential man in the world?.
How can this man fail miserably yet become honoured by US supreme court as one of the greatest lawgivers of the world in 1935?
How can this man fail miserably and yet to 1.8 billion people today remains the most perfect example to have walked the earth, a mercy to not only mankind but every form of creation.
This man children would run up to because they knew how merciful he was, he promised he who take care of an orphan child to be with him in paradise.
At a time when people were burying their daughters alive he was the one that gave honours to daughters, he loved his daughter Fatima so much so that he would stand and kiss her between her eyes every time he sees her.
This is a man who would treat the poor the same way he would treat the rich, a man that treats the black the same way he would treat the white.
This is a man that refused to allow his followers to rise him to a position of divinity, he even scolds one of his companions when he says "what God wills and you will" saying angrily "You made me an equal with God?", preaching to his followers ''Do not adulate me as the Christians have adulated the Son of Mary. For I am but His slave. So say 'slave of God, and His messenger'.
Then he calls his followers to the best of manners and that the truthfulness will lead to paradise and falseness and lying will lead to fire, forbidding sins calling them to treat even the animal with mercy, exhorts them on good manners and forbidding what's evil.
This man did not obtain from this world what the emperors and kings have obtained from foods and drinks, even though he could of easily did so with his authority and the love of his followers, but most of his food was dates and water, sometimes he would tie a stone around his belly from hunger.
Then he died while his shield was mortgaged with a Jew indicating his poverty and the religion he came with continues to spread for the next 1400 years.
Now Present me proof and discuss how did he "fail miserably"
Show me where I haven't.Can you explain to me where you used common sense?your link is incomplete and doesn't give a full picture of the Sharia law when it comes to rape, on top of that there is a mention of DNA but DNA is not mentioned in the Sharia not is it used in the Muslim world, how do you want me to take you seriously then?
#1)Are you an Islamic Jurist? did you study Figh or Islamic law?! show me how the link I provided does not present the full picture of Sharia regarding rape, did you even read it probably, discuss it like I discussed the link you provided me.
#2)I just presented to you the a statement by the Council of Islamic Ideology, made of scholars that are actually specialized in such matters which discussed the permissibility of DNA further consolidated by the fact that I have provided another Link written by a Scholar of Islam allowing the matter & not the word of a Pakistani judge whom nobody knows about.
#3) I dont think you have even read the article you presented to see how silly and stupid the argument presented by the author is against DNA testing let me quote what he said:
"But DNA tests have no place in Hudood Laws either. The BBC reported that Zafran Bibi of Pakistan “went to the police to register a case of rape, but she herself was instead sentenced to death for having an adulterous affair.”[xvii] About conducting a DNA test to identify the rapist, the Dawn reports: “Justice Ali Nawaz Chauhan of the Lahore High Court has observed that the DNA test is not acceptable as evidence to establish the offence of Zina under the Hudood laws which require a direct testimony in such cases….”[xviii]"
I mean what's this rubbish! he wants to establish that DNA is not allowed based on BBC report using the words of a judge, whom we know nothing about regarding his qualification and scholarly education. This article is the furthest thing possible from being a work of a scholar qualified in this issue.
I will finish of by quoting something form the article I provided you:
"The Islamic Fiqh Council of the Muslim World League on the issue of DNA and ways of benefitting from it, in which it said:
Firstly: there is no shar‘i prohibition on relying on DNA in criminal investigations and regarding it as a means of proving evidence in crimes for which there is no hadd punishment or qisaas (retaliatory punishment) prescribed in Islam, because of the report which says, “Ward off hadd punishments by means of doubts (i.e., do not carry out hadd punishments if there is any doubt).” That is so as to achieve justice and security in society; it leads to the criminal getting the punishment he deserves and proving the innocence of the innocent. This is an important aim of sharee‘ah. End quote."
The words of both Council carry more weight the the word of a Pakistani Judge whom we know nothing about.
There are certain branches of knowledge that you can only learn from those qualified to do so, you don't learn math from a doctor or biology from a physicist.Where did I preach against it? we live and learn everyday and from everybody this is why we try to have a proper debate.
These articles you posted are written by people that do not hold a degree in Islamic scholarship,Arabic,Hadith or Qur'an for them to comment fairy on either sources, these websites are run by Christians or former Muslims, the articles' of which preaches nothing but negativity about Islam.
Can you prove to me how homosexuals are not accepted in Islam? what are your evidence and source? where are the evidence which state homosexuals are not accepted which I have altered?of course you altered several pieces of information, homosexuals aren't accepted and an Imam cannot be a well know homosexual, you are yet to give me a Sharia text to prove it and an example
Will you at least take the time to discuss what I wrote? show me how it's false? because you fail to distinguish between Homosexuals as people and Homosexuality as an act, I elaborated on this already review my post:Defender Of Faith wrote: »There is no doubt that in Islam homosexuality is considered 'sinful'. With regard to dealing with homosexuals, the basic rule governing this would be:
Allah forbids you not with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just- Holy Quran 60:8-9
As a Muslim who lives in this west where homosexuality is accepted and manifested into its culture, am not going to start running up to homosexual and starting killing them and spilling blood, because I am differentiating between the actual homosexual and the homosexual act. The act is what I have an issue with, as for the homosexual can I show him respect,love & compassion? of course I can!
Please note that there is a difference to actually being involved in a homosexual act -which is a sin - from having sexual feelings that you try to control, that you don't express in public, which is not sinful if you try to control them.
What is sinful in homosexuality is the actual sexual act between the couple of a similar sex. if you transform your desires into a struggle and a challenge to overcome it and not physically commit it, then we believe God will get the reward for it.
Am never going to compromise in my religion, when I told you that a Homosexual man can lead the prayer, In Islam as long as a person is a Muslim he can lead the prayer,If a person has an inclination toward homosexuality but is not necessarily acting upon the inclination, we all have an inclination toward a sin even the Imam that lead the prayer as we are not angles.
If he has the inclination even if he's acting upon these inclination which is a major sin in Islam, as long as he does this on his own private premise and does not manifest this act in public he can lead the prayer, just like an Imam who might have had an inclination to a sin however did not manifest this sin in public for people to see but rather in his own private area.
Source:http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/homosexuality.htm
& an excellent video by a Brother from the UK discussing the issue of homosexuality in Islam: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsgSAd1fs8s
Logical argument?! are you reading what your typing my friend? as you have provided no argument so far other then throwing links at me, yes you are narrow minded as you refuse to accept what am telling you since you clearly painted an image in your head that Islam hunts,kill and burn homosexuals which you so far are refusing to change, when I as a Muslim tell you otherwise.instead you went to write a big long post accusing me of being a narrow minded person, this is your only mean of defense against a logical argument
Re-read what I wrote about homosexuality as you clearly do not understand my point:do you mind posting the link where I can see that the Sharia law accepts Homosexuals as Imams just like you stated? Do you see now what I mean with dodging my questions?
"when I told you that a Homosexual man can lead the prayer, In Islam as long as a person is a Muslim he can lead the prayer,If a person has an inclination toward homosexuality but is not necessarily acting upon the inclination, we all have an inclination toward a sin even the Imam that lead the prayer as we are not angles.
If he has the inclination even if he's acting upon these inclination which is a major sin in Islam, as long as he does this on his own private premise and does not manifest this act in public he can lead the prayer, just like an Imam who might have had an inclination to a sin however did not manifest this sin in public for people to see but rather in his own private area."
The irony is that when discussing rape your argument is based on how Sharia makes it nearly impossible to prove the rape will let me tell you this again Sharia makes it similarly impossible to prove that a certain man or women had committed a homosexual act.Here is a link that explains the punishments awaiting homosexuals and Lesbians: http://islamqa.info/en/38622
Homosexuality in Islam is a major sin, however in Islam we distinguish between homosexuals as people whom we show love,respect and compassion and homosexuality as an act.
When a homosexual commits the acts of homosexuality and manifest this act in public for everyone to see, he's then punished accordingly.
When a homosexual commits the act of homosexuality and manifest this act in his own private premise where no one sees him, then he cannot be punished. He will continue to be treated equally with respect,love and dignity in accordance with the verse I provided, as long as he does not manifest his act on public.
I use bold characters to emphasis important words and terms I want you to draw your attention to, if you dislike bolded words I will use Italics instead.Please don't write using bold characters, it's aggressive.
Whenever you criticize a ruling of Islam you must support your point with evidence from the Qur'an or Hadith this is common sense, in any debate,study or article you will state your point and then provide evidence to support your point no matter how silly this evidence is it at least opens the door of discussion for me to point out the stupidity of the evidence presented.No I won't back up everything with the Quoran or Hadith, there are issues in which common sense
Everything you mentioned so far were statements the required proof from the Qur'an and Hadith to prove their accuracy such as saying "Muhammed failed miserably" to saying "Aisha was forced into marriage" to saying "Islam is not negotiable"
These are powerful statements that require strong proof from Islamic sources to support.
I was not dodging the questions I was giving answers which you simply did not like nor did they fit with the picture of Islam that you painted in your head.Out of the 3 topics that I wanted to discuss with you 3 have been dodged one way or another.
I discussed every topic so far bar the marriage of Aisha which I told you is not the topic of this thread. If you feel am dodging anything show me how am dodging.
You so far have been dodging the answer I give and continue to fail in providing a commentary to what I tell you by pointing out the flaws or the mistakes involved.0 -
Defender OF Faith wrote: »Can you educate me with regard to your definition of what's rights? to see how the extent of how the rights given to the Muslim women would fit under your definition.
You said "under western law the woman has the right to pursue a job" and I affirmed your statement, we might disagree on something but were are not completely on the "opposite end of the spectrum".
I said 'under western law the woman has the right to pursue a job' which is not the same as 'is given' the right. She does not have to be given something that she has a right to.
Anyway, let me try and explain it this way. Forget the terms man and woman for a moment, and use the term 'people'.
People would be treated equally in the same way that men are treated equally to each other. One man basically has the same rights as another man. Life may not treat them equally, one may be fitter or stronger or more intelligent than another, but basically they have the same rights to work, to vote, to conduct their lives.
It would not be expected that a normal, healthy, competent adult male would be put in the care of or under the supervision of another male for any reason. If two men start a business together it is not assumed that one of them would automatically control the finances or administration of the business. It may be that one has better practical skills and the other has better administration skills so they divide the work that way, but neither has automatic control over the other one.
Now in the the above situations substitute the word people for men. Some of those people are female, some are male. There is no automatic assumption that because some of those people are female they should be treated differently to males.
There are some circumstances where the female has to be supported because she is bearing and rearing children. Children that are the product of both the male and the female, so both male and female have a responsibility. This does not mean that all women have to be put in the care of and under the authority of a man for their entire lives.
The woman should not have responsibility for protecting men from their sexual urges. She should be able to wear the normal clothing she wears under the hijab without being attacked - I am not disputing that western women can be attacked, but I am in my 60s and I have never known a woman of my acquaintance who has been attacked, and I have no recollection of ever feeling threatened myself.0 -
Defender OF Faith wrote: »Different countries around the world and different state pick different age for women marriage for example in US states the age of marriage varies from 13 in New Hampshire to 15 in South Carolina.
What does the age of marriage has to do with the right of women in Islam? especially since under Islamic Law a women cannot be forced into marriage.
I didn't mention the USA nor did I say that a woman are forced to marry in Islam, you see what I mean with dodging questions and hiding behind facts that have nothing to do with what I said or with Islam.
Again I will ask the question, how logical is it to marry a 7 years old child, and consuming the marriage at the age of 9 years old or 12 years old. how would describe a man who marries a child regardless of the century in which it happened.
Would you mind discussing countries from this list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age that follow the Sharia law and tell me why few of them accept the marriage of 9 years old girls/kids/children?
The answer is simple, its because of the Sharia law, that means that the Sharia law is wrong and as such no religion is 100% right and all religions are the invention of human beings who commit mistakes, so far very logical and I am using common sense, I don't need a Hadith or a verse regarding this matter.Defender OF Faith wrote: »You claimed that Aisha was a young,small,skinny child that was forced into marriage you need evidence to support:
#1) The physical descriptions you associated with her
#2)That she was actually forced into marriage.
It's unbelievable that you are focusing on details, it's crazy that you are avoiding the real facts at all cost, she was a child, since when children are capable of choosing with whom they want to spend the rest of their lives, since when children are capable of establishing that they love a man and that they want to marry that man?
Unfortunately at the time woman were used as objects and as it happened the Prophet in Islam did the exact same thing and used woman as objects, so he's not special at all because he behaved exactly like his peers at the time. how can you still defend such act is beyond me.Defender OF Faith wrote: »This is a man that refused to allow his followers to rise him to a position of divinity, he even scolds one of his companions when he says "what God wills and you will" saying angrily "You made me an equal with God?", preaching to his followers ''Do not adulate me as the Christians have adulated the Son of Mary. For I am but His slave. So say 'slave of God, and His messenger'.
Then he calls his followers to the best of manners and that the truthfulness will lead to paradise and falseness and lying will lead to fire, forbidding sins calling them to treat even the animal with mercy, exhorts them on good manners and forbidding what's evil.
I am talking about the prophet in relation to women, because he married a 7 years old girl, you avoid talking about that particular point by mentioning other things that he has done or that he was part of, its all a myth so lets focus on the topic which is women in Islam as oppose to what he did or how he lived because it's irrelevant to this topic.Defender OF Faith wrote: »#1)Are you an Islamic Jurist? did you study Figh or Islamic law?! show me how the link I provided does not present the full picture of Sharia regarding rape, did you even read it probably, discuss it like I discussed the link you provided me.
#2)I just presented to you the a statement by the Council of Islamic Ideology, made of scholars that are actually specialized in such matters which discussed the permissibility of DNA further consolidated by the fact that I have provided another Link written by a Scholar of Islam allowing the matter & not the word of a Pakistani judge whom nobody knows about.
#3) I dont think you have even read the article you presented to see how silly and stupid the argument presented by the author is against DNA testing let me quote what he said:
"But DNA tests have no place in Hudood Laws either. The BBC reported that Zafran Bibi of Pakistan “went to the police to register a case of rape, but she herself was instead sentenced to death for having an adulterous affair.”[xvii] About conducting a DNA test to identify the rapist, the Dawn reports: “Justice Ali Nawaz Chauhan of the Lahore High Court has observed that the DNA test is not acceptable as evidence to establish the offence of Zina under the Hudood laws which require a direct testimony in such cases….”[xviii]"
I mean what's this rubbish! he wants to establish that DNA is not allowed based on BBC report using the words of a judge, whom we know nothing about regarding his qualification and scholarly education. This article is the furthest thing possible from being a work of a scholar qualified in this issue.
I will finish of by quoting something for the article I provided you:
"The Islamic Fiqh Council of the Muslim World League on the issue of DNA and ways of benefitting from it, in which it said:
Firstly: there is no shar‘i prohibition on relying on DNA in criminal investigations and regarding it as a means of proving evidence in crimes for which there is no hadd punishment or qisaas (retaliatory punishment) prescribed in Islam, because of the report which says, “Ward off hadd punishments by means of doubts (i.e., do not carry out hadd punishments if there is any doubt).” That is so as to achieve justice and security in society; it leads to the criminal getting the punishment he deserves and proving the innocence of the innocent. This is an important aim of sharee‘ah. End quote."
The words of both Council carry more weight the the word of a Pakistani Judge whom we know nothing about.
Again a big long post asking me if I have studied religion and telling me that I am wrong meanwhile I posted a link that covers the Sharia in its purest form when it comes to rape and the consequences of it, instead you link me to a website where there is more discussion about DNA and less talk about the Sharia.
instead of focusing on the BBC part you should focus on the Sharia part, but I feel that you want to dodge my question again so I am obliged to quote this part from the website I posted earlier:proof of rape. There are specific requirements of Sharia law about it.
(A) "Proof of Zina (adultery) or Zina Bil-Jabr (rape) liable to Hadd shall be one of the following:
(a) The accused makes confession, or
(b) There are at least four Muslim adult male witnesses”[x]
(B) "Proof of adultery or rape liable to Hadd shall be one of the following:
(a) The accused makes confession, or
(b) There are at least four Muslim adult male witnesses.”[xi]
(C) “Punishment will take place when Zina or rape has been proved by witness.”[xii]
(D) Sharia Law rejects the witness of women in Hudood cases.[xiii]
(E) “The evidence of women is originally inadmissible on account of their weakness of understanding, want of memory and incapacity of governing.”[xiv]
Is this the Sharia law when it comes to rape? the answer is yes? is it fair to women overall? the answer is no, please feel free to comment on this as oppose to any Scholars who are discussing DNA on paper but not changing the religion or the Sharia.Defender OF Faith wrote: »There are certain branches of knowledge that you can only learn from those qualified to do so, you don't learn math from a doctor or biology from a physicist.
These articles you posted are written by people that do not hold a degree in Islamic scholarship,Arabic,Hadith or Qur'an for them to comment fairy on either sources, these websites are run by Christians or former Muslims, the articles' of which preaches nothing but negativity about Islam.
Can you prove that they are not qualified?Defender OF Faith wrote: »Can you prove to me how homosexuals are not accepted in Islam? what are your evidence and source? where are the evidence which state homosexuals are not accepted which I have altered?
Yes I can:
Abu Dawud (4462) - The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, "Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.".
Abu Dawud (4448) - "If a man who is not married is seized committing sodomy, he will be stoned to death." (Note the implicit approval of sodomizing one's wife).
Bukhari (72:774) - "The Prophet cursed effeminate men (those men who are in the similitude (assume the manners of women) and those women who assume the manners of men, and he said, 'Turn them out of your houses .' The Prophet turned out such-and-such man, and 'Umar turned out such-and-such woman."
al-Tirmidhi, Sunan 1:152 - [Muhammad said] "Whoever is found conducting himself in the manner of the people of Lot, kill the doer and the receiver."
Reliance of the Traveller, p17.2 - "May Allah curse him who does what Lot's people did." This is also repeated in three other places.Defender OF Faith wrote: »Will you at least take the time to discuss what I wrote? show me how it's false? because you fail to distinguish between Homosexuals as people and Homosexuality as an act, I elaborated on this already review my post:
Logical argument?! are you reading what your typing my friend? as you have provided no argument so far other then throwing link at me, yes you are narrow minded as you refuse to accept what am telling you
So I am narrow minded because I don't accept what you are telling me, well re-read your sentence and tell me who is narrow minded me or yourself.
You are yet to give me a hadith or a sentence from the coran that clearly say that a homosexual can be an imam, this is the third time I am asking this question and you always failed to answer it, is it so hard?Defender OF Faith wrote: »Homosexuality in Islam is a major sin, however in Islam we distinguish between homosexuals as people whom we show love,respect and compassion and homosexuality as an act.
When a homosexual commits the acts of homosexuality and manifest this act in public for everyone to see, he's then punished accordingly.
When a homosexual commits the act of homosexuality and manifest this act in his own private premise where no one sees him, then he cannot be punished. He will continue to be treated equally with respect,love and dignity in accordance with the verse I provided, as long as he does not manifest his act on public.
Do you see what's wrong there, you say that homosexuals are treated equally but once we find out that they are homosexuals then we stone them to death, this is your definition of equality, love and compassion?Defender OF Faith wrote: »Whenever you criticize a ruling of Islam you must support your point with evidence from the Qur'an or Hadith this is common sense, in any debate,study or book you will state your point and then provide evidence to support your point.
You only use the word common sense when it suits you, do you use common sense with me? so if you want me to use Quoran and Hadith in this debate then I ask you to do the same and use common sense when we talk about equality between men and women, marriage, rape, Sharia, Inheritance and all the other topics.Defender OF Faith wrote: »Everything you mentioned so far were statements the required proof from the Qur'an and Hadith to prove their accuracy such as saying "Muhammed failed miserably" to saying "Aisha was forced into marriage" to saying "Islam is not negotiable"
These are powerful statements that require strong proof from Islamic sources to support.
These are my own conclusions that I came to after reading about Islam, I don't need the Quoran or Hadith to talk about it, I need only my brain, logic and common sense.Defender OF Faith wrote: »I was not dodging the questions I was given answers which you simply did not like nor did they fit with the picture of Islam that you painted in your head.
I discussed every topic so far bar the marriage of Aisha which I told you is not the topic of this thread, if not show me how am dodging.
You so far have been dodging the answer I give and continue to fail in providing a commentary to what I tell you by pointing out the flaws or the mistakes involved.
Yes you are dodging my questions:
1 - You are yet to discuss the marriage of children below the age of 12 in countries where the Sharia is used and enforced and use common sense.
2- You are yet to provide me with a link that proves that a homosexual is and can be an Imam (this is laughable because if I ask my Muslim friends they will disagree with you completely).
3- You are yet to pinpoint all the aspects of the Sharia law when it comes to rape - now I added them to simplify this task.0 -
What about laws related to the gender? these law are set on an automatic assumption that when the subject is a female he should be treated in Such and such a manner while if he's a male he should be treated in a different way.Now in the the above situations substitute the word people for men. Some of those people are female, some are male. There is no automatic assumption that because some of those people are female they should be treated differently to males.
Below are few examples of gender-related laws that treat the gender based on the differences that exist between them, in a way which bring the most justice to both:
"Presumed paternity laws, post-conception reproductive rights and child support, alimony orders, the gynocentric/misandric definition of rape, the treatment of statutory rape victims pertaining to pregnancy (ie. girls can have an abortion that is paid for by the state, but boys will have to pay child support), public funding for female domestic violence shelters and a lack of public funds for male shelters, the requirement of men exclusively to register with selective service, etc..."
This you can say is similar to the Islamic ruling on some issues regarding the sexes, while Islam stands for equality between the sexes:
"Women are but the sisters of man the one who honour them is honourable and those who humiliate them are but wicked" Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal
"For Muslim men and women, for believing men and women, for devout men and women, for true men and women, for men and women who are patient and constant, for men and women who humble themselves, for men and women who give in charity, for men and women who fast, for men and women who guard their chastity, and for men and women who engage much in Allah's praise, for them has Allah prepared forgiveness and great reward." [Noble Quran 33:35]
Notice how The Quran, uses the expression, 'believing men and women' to emphasize the equality of men and women in regard to their respective duties, rights, virtues and merits. They would not be described by the prophet as "Sisters of men" if they were not equal, however Islam also recognises the differences that exist between them and in special circumstances the genders are treated differently.
For example due to the difficulty the mother undergo during pregnancy Islam gave the mother rights 3 times that of the father this necessitates that the mother is given three times the like of kindness and good treatment than the father. Similarly in Islam the financial responsibility is placed on the women and not man and due to this financial advantage that women have the law of inheritance came to balance out.
Your earlier question was that giving the man the financial obligation was patronizing to the women, but I pointed out to the fact that a Muslim women under Islam still has -instead of given as this word appears to be more accurate- the right for a job,all earnings she makes are absolutely her property. She is not obliged to spend from it on the household, unless she wants to do so with her free will. Irrespective how rich the wife is, the duty to give lodging, boarding, clothing and look after the financial aspects of the wife remains that of the husband.
Islam would have been patronising the women, if it forbidden the women form pursing a job and career under marriage, so that the financial obligation remains on the man and she does not interfere with it.
Yes again I agree with you regarding the point that responsibility shared by both male and female for rearing the children.There are some circumstances where the female has to be supported because she is bearing and rearing children. Children that are the product of both the male and the female, so both male and female have a responsibility. This does not mean that all women have to be put in the care of and under the authority of a man for their entire lives.
Being put in the "care" of men is a broad statement, as in any relationship both couple must take care of each other. There are certain duties of care that the man should perform while others are more suitable for the women.
For example when a thief attempt to rob the house it's not appropriate for the wife to take care of the situation but rather the man, when the Qurnaic verse states "‘Men are the protectors" it meant that men are responsibly for protecting their wives from any evil or harm that might befall them, this does not negate the wife role in protecting her husband from any potential harm that befalls him.
When stating your point of "Being put under the authority of a man" I don't understand how this might apply Islamically as the Muslim women is free to work,educate her self and purse a job with or without the authority of her husband if she stated these conditions under their Islamic marriage contract, as before each couple decide to embark on the journey of marriage, they sit down and discuss what they want and expect from each other, such expectation and conditions are written in this contract and both couple are bound by the promises they made to each other before the marriage.
Again you are right, and Islamically there's nothing wrong with what you said, a women is not responsible for the men weakness it's that man that's responsible for lowering his gaze and controlling his urges.The woman should not have responsibility for protecting men from their sexual urges. She should be able to wear the normal clothing she wears under the hijab without being attacked
The Muslim women does not only wear the veil to protect her self from men, if this was the case then the veil has no religious value but a protection tool, which is false. The veil the Muslim women wear, indicate her submission to God almighty who instructed her do to so and not her submission to men weakness.
The veil the Muslim women is instructed to wear has a much more spiritual meaning to the Muslim women then simply "protecting herself from men.
"The Muslim woman does not feel the pressures to be beautiful or attractive, which is so apparent in the Western and Eastern cultures. She does not have to live up to expectations of what is desirable and what is not. Superficial beauty is not the Muslim woman's concern, her main goal is inner spiritual beauty. She does not have to use her body and charms to get recognition or acceptance in society.
Another benefit of adorning the veil is that it is a protection for women. Muslims believe that when women display their beauty to everybody, they degrade themselves by becoming objects of sexual desire and become vulnerable to men, who look at them as " gratification for the sexual urge". The Hijab makes them out as women belonging to the class of modest chaste women, so that transgressors and sensual men may recognize them as such and dare not tease them out of mischief". Hijab solves the problem of sexual harassment and unwanted sexual advances, which is so demeaning for women, when men get mixed signals and believe that women want their advances by the way they reveal their bodies.
The western ideology of, 'if you have it, you should flash it!' is quite opposite to the Islamic principle, where the purpose is not to bring attention to ones self, but to be modest. Women in so many societies are just treated as sex symbols and nothing more than just a body who "display themselves to get attention". A good example is in advertising, where a woman's body is used to sell products. Women are constantly degraded, and subjected to reveal more and more of themselves.
The Covering sanctifies her and forces society to hold her in high esteem. Far from humiliating the woman, Hijab actually grants the woman an aura of respect, and bestows upon her a separate and unique identity. According to the Qu'ran, the same high standards of moral conduct are for men as it is for women. Modesty is essential in a man's life, as well, whether it be in action, morals or speech. Islam also commands proper behavior and dress of men, in that they are not allowed to make a wanton show of their bodies to attract attention onto themselves, and they too must dress modestly. They have a special commandment to lower their eyes, and not to brazenly stare at women."0 -
I have attempted an explanation, I can do no more. Throughout this discussion you have not compared like with like and most of your explanations are simply reiterating what the Quran says. Since your base line is that if the Quran says it, it must of necessity be right, then there is no way we are ever going to find any common ground.0
-
I have attempted an explanation, I can do no more. Throughout this discussion you have not compared like with like and most of your explanations are simply reiterating what the Quran says. Since your base line is that if the Quran says it, it must of necessity be right, then there is no way we are ever going to find any common ground.
You have to understand that all the Islamic laws are derived from the Qur'an & Hadith, hence am using the same source which is used to support the argument of inequality to prove otherwise presenting verses which clearly support equality between the genders, I have soundly answered your points and agreed with as much as 90% of what you said, and unless you can show me otherwise or point out how I am not comparing like with like my point will remain.0 -
Advertisement
-
No, you win, but this is the Islam forum so I suppose it is reasonable. I shall go back to the Atheist forum!0
Advertisement