TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Muslims continue to oppress women
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer you moron.what if those women chosed to dress like that and it wasnt forced upon them?is that hard to believe?

iam with you on that i don't believe he will understand that

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer you moron.what if those women chosed to dress like that and it wasnt forced upon them?is that hard to believe?

Is it hard to belive that a bunch of women chose to wear exactly the same crappy clothes? Yes it is actualy. I really doubt that whey would all chose to wear that, if they werent told that they have to.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I agree. But this image of Arab culture is wildly exagerated. Saudi Arabia, without a doubt, has the most extreme and fundamentalist Goverment in the entrie Middle East.

...But not by much.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z The reason I pointed that out and said the Saudi Goverment/Fudamentalists is because it's not reflective of reality in many other Muslim countries/societies.

True, but then orthodox Sunnis (that is, the devout of Islam according to a literal reading of the Qur'an) wouldn't call these countries you're thinking of "true Muslims" (you likely know this better than I do).

Observe what's gone on between the Sunni and Shia of Iraq and Iran -- the Sunni condemn moderate Islam (that is, anything other than a literal reading of the Qur'an) as illegitimate, and its devout as targets. So taking these other countries that are not Fundamentalist as the benchmark "of reality in many other Muslim countries/societies", while indeed a change in perspective, isn't an accurate measure of Islam.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z When people who don't know Muslims or don't know anything about/understand Islam, are many times mislead to believe that Islam is oppresive of women (which is a common misconception in the West).

I think I follow what you're trying to say here -- correct me if I'm wrong.

To them, no rights have been violated because within the context of their socio-religion, women don't have any rights to begin with. This has been a major bone of contention within the UN, the WTO, and e.g., Turkey's admission to the EU.

This has been the way for centuries, and only a Westerner with the concept of equal rights (having developed this from a different, arguably more secular historical experience and perspective) could look at Islam and say it's unequal. This is a Westerner forcing his own ideals on someone else's historical experience, when the two aren't compatable (same goes for Democracy, by the way).

I agree that we in the West, pointing our fingers and casting labels is largely an unfair historical anachronism. It misunderstands the culture of Islam and the Middle East, which should be approached on their own terms, not thru the lens of general Western ignorance.

But like it or not, the West doesn't like to deal openly with people that don't share its own values. Policy is (due to economic clout) that other cultures must conform to Western ideals or be left behind. This is a shame when these elder-brother cultures have so much more to teach. But let's not misrepresent them either.

Cheers,
-Noble.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer you moron.what if those women chosed to dress like that and it wasnt forced upon them?is that hard to believe?

There's nothing I enjoy more than strapping on my ankle to neck, black abaya to go play a game of hoops in the blistering sun. Then again, it's not like they have the option of throwing on a T-shirt and athletic shorts. But hey, at least they get to shoot some hoops, right?

On a side note, check out this wicked Islamic swimwear. It's not oppressive at all.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka On a side note, check out this wicked Islamic swimwear. It's not oppressive at all.

*gasp*

It shows the ankles! How perverted!

quote:

Originally posted by Moongoose Is it hard to belive that a bunch of women chose to wear exactly the same crappy clothes? Yes it is actualy. I really doubt that whey would all chose to wear that, if they werent told that they have to.

this is where the cultural gap sets in. i agree with you most women in the west wouldnt wear the same thing because they dont want other people looking at them wearing the same thing. but in certain eastern cultures women dont want people looking at them full stop. the dress you see here is a sort of uniform, you may not belive this, but to hide what the woman looks like. im not saying whether this is right or wrong, it just the culture that they have grown up in and this is what they know. so when there are men around they wear this covering.

for example in saudi arabia you have more shopping for womens clothes than you have in canada, BY FAR. my friends are seeing shops open up in canada recently that have already been there in europe and saudi, yet one glance in the mall and all the women look the same in thier black abayas, that is for the public, under the abayas they are wearing their clothes.

there is a difference in cultural perspective, it doesn't make it wrong.

^^^^
I actually have no problem with that is it's their CHOICE... the thing is, they don't have a choice.



FYI, that basketball pic was taken in the U.S. Women are not allowed to play basketball in Saudi Arabia.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu I think I follow what you're trying to say here -- correct me if I'm wrong. To them, no rights have been violated because within the context of their socio-religion, women don't have any rights to begin with. This has been a major bone of contention within the UN, the WTO, and e.g., Turkey's admission to the EU.

Yes, you are wrong. Islam is the first major monotheistic religion(if not the first religion) which gave women equal rights. In certain places in the Muslim world, it's a really backward cultural thing and lack of education (amost othert factors) (which incase you don't realize, is contrary to the teachings of Islam) that women's rights are opressed on some level.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu This has been the way for centuries, and only a Westerner with the concept of equal rights (having developed this from a different, arguably more secular historical experience and perspective) could look at Islam and say it's unequal.

Ok, I'm not trying to be confrontational, nor my I trying to piss off my white brothers here, but the concept of equal rights is very new to western culture whereas this concept has existed in Islam since its arrival 1400 years ago. Islam is very critical of the mistreatment of women that was pretty much found all over the world before it and racial discrimination aswell. So, you've done nothing but demonstrated pure ignorance here. And neighter am I trying to get into a pissing contest of Islamic values v.s. Western value but you kind of asked for this one as your argument is simply factualy incorrect (and I find it hard not to believe, you're ignorance of Islam and it's teachings).

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu This is a Westerner forcing his own ideals on someone else's historical experience, when the two aren't compatable (same goes for Democracy, by the way). I agree that we in the West, pointing our fingers and casting labels is largely an unfair historical anachronism. It misunderstands the culture of Islam and the Middle East, which should be approached on their own terms, not thru the lens of general Western ignorance.

Right. But you're doing exactly that rightnow as I pointed out above.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu But like it or not, the West doesn't like to deal openly with people that don't share its own values. Policy is (due to economic clout) that other cultures must conform to Western ideals or be left behind.

I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here.

quote:

Originally posted by Moongoose Is it hard to belive that a bunch of women chose to wear exactly the same crappy clothes? Yes it is actualy. I really doubt that whey would all chose to wear that, if they werent told that they have to.

Alright, since so many of you have minimal understanding of Islam, let me introduce to you an aspect of Islam. Men AND women, are supposed to be modest in their behaviour towards the opposite sex. And modesty is not only supposed to reflect in your behaviour and keeping a respectable distance from each other, but you're also supposed to dress modestly. This standard doesn't apply only to women, but to men aswell.

The West (relatively speaking) is fairly consious about fashion, style etc. Well, believe it or not, in Muslim culture, they don't really care anywhere near as much about it, and in many parts of the world, almost not at all.

In Islam, neigther men nor women, are supposed to expose alot or use their sexualuality attract the opposite sex. Which is why they cover alot more than what most of us (yes, even me) are used to. It's not about men opressing women, but women are supposed to dress modestly and not expose alot(and not just women mind you). At the same times, the minimal coverage prescribed for men and women by the religion is not the same. And I don't think that's very hard to understand. Men don't exactly have tits and women have much more self control in that department than men. Don't agree with it? Well, no ones asking you to. Don't understand it? Well, that's too bad.

If you still want to, I guess you can continue to buy all the bullshit propoganda you get from the media and other places about Islam. But then you have to also remember that it's not Islam you're criticizing but a very negative portayal of it in Western culture.

If you guys have questions or whatever, I'm all ears, but I'm kind of sick of replying to incorrect asumptions and statements.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Yes, you are wrong.

I was being facetious. I was inviting you to correct whether I was summarizing you accurately.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Islam is the first major monotheistic religion(if not the first religion) which gave women equal rights.

I'll make the leap here and assume you are Muslim?

Sorry if I differ with you here, but women in a traditional ("orthodox") Islamic society:

-Cannot vote/attend council/be involved in government.
-Cannot decide for themselves who to marry.
-Cannot decide for themselves to seek an education.
-Cannot freely socialize.
-Cannot travel.
-Cannot practice an intellectual profession.
-Cannot pray/attend mosque as an equal with the men.
-Do not have a say in their men seeking additional wives.
-Are subject to the summary desposition of their husbands.
-Are not treated in Sharia law equally with men (a basic indicator of which is inheritance rights, divorce, etc.)

This I was not inviting you to correct, as this is not debatable.

Recently in Quebec, Sharia courts were banned on the basis that they violate women's human rights, as conceived and enacted according to Western values (a decision that was hailed by the Canadian Council of Muslim Women on 26th May 2005 -- many members of whom fled Islamic countries to escape persecution according to the tenets of traditional Sharia law).

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z In certain places in the Muslim world, it's a really backward cultural thing and lack of education (amost othert factors) (which incase you don't realize, is contrary to the teachings of Islam) that women's rights are opressed on some level.

Which "certain places in the Muslim world" are you talking about?

If you're interested in discussing this, let's move away from your generalizations and start talking specifics.

All you're doing is making comments -- you aren't giving any proof of what is only your (sorry, but highly biased) opinion. Feel free to cite the Qur'an to support your position.

I reiterate that I did not deny that Islamic countries exist that are relatively moderate, where the things you mention do occur; I do assert however that Islam according to the Qur'an (in the Sunni fashion) is not at all what you're describing, and moreover that moderate Islam (what you're describing) is seen by orthodox Muslims as "fake Islam."

Cheers,
-Noble

quote:

Originally posted by Moongoose Is it hard to belive that a bunch of women chose to wear exactly the same crappy clothes? Yes it is actualy. I really doubt that whey would all chose to wear that, if they werent told that they have to.

so if a weoman doesnt want to look a like fuckin slut it is wrong? orif her breasts arent hanging out she cant be acceptable in society?

that may be the case in the U.S. were women can be half naked to get attention or to get a job,but in some countries that is not the case.Men respect women not because of what they wear but because of who they are.It is sad how many people in the west cant understand this.
I agree that in some muslim countries it is forced that women must cover up,or wear cetain things and yes women should be able to choose what they wear,but at the same time there are women out there who dont care about their appearance,and how they dress isnt the most important thing in their lives.
If you guys cant understand that at least have some respect for them .Iam sure many in the muslim nations bash the shit out of women in the west and cant understand why they have to be half naked all the time or why their ass has to show when they are in the public eye.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu I was being facetious. I was inviting you to correct whether I was summarizing you accurately. I'll make the leap here and assume you are Muslim? Sorry if I differ with you here, but women in a traditional ("orthodox") Islamic society: -Cannot vote/attend council/be involved in government. -Cannot decide for themselves who to marry. -Cannot decide for themselves to seek an education. -Cannot freely socialize. -Cannot travel. -Cannot practice an intellectual profession. -Cannot pray/attend mosque as an equal with the men. -Do not have a say in their men seeking additional wives. -Are subject to the summary desposition of their husbands. -Are not treated in Sharia law equally with men (a basic indicator of which is inheritance rights, divorce, etc.) This I was not inviting you to correct, as this is not debatable.

Women traditionaly have been opressed everywhere. What you mentioned above, has little if nothing to do with Islam (the religion itself).

Here's a quote you may find interesting:

Qur'an: (Al-Imran aya. 195)

"Their Lord responded to them: "I never fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you MALE OR FEMALE, YOU ARE EQUAL TO ONE ANOTHER........."

Hmmm, seems reasonable to assume the below from the above verse :

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu -Cannot vote/attend council/be involved in government. -Cannot decide for themselves who to marry. -Cannot decide for themselves to seek an education. -Cannot freely socialize. -Cannot travel. -Cannot practice an intellectual profession. -Cannot pray/attend mosque as an equal with the men. -Do not have a say in their men seeking additional wives. -Are subject to the summary desposition of their husbands. -Are not treated in Sharia law equally with men (a basic indicator of which is inheritance rights, divorce, etc.) This I was not inviting you to correct, as this is not debatable.

Well, you're correct in saying that these things happen in some Muslim countries (Saudi Arabia being the most notorious), it still doesn't reflect Islams teachings and most of them are contrary to it.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu -Cannot vote/attend council/be involved in government.

Where did you get that from? The Quran says nothing about voting whatsoever and in no way forbids women from involvment in Government.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu -Cannot decide for themselves who to marry. -Cannot decide for themselves to seek an education.

Ok, now that's simply incorrect. I can't remember the exact verse and reference rightnow, but, I specifically remember reading in the Quran that men do not have the right to impose a marriage on a woman which she does not approve of herself.

As far as education goes, it is not limited to male members of society.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu -Cannot practice an intellectual profession.

That again, is false.

Counter-example:

Mohammad's wife, Khadija, was one of the most successful business women in Arabia. They were business associates before they were married.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu -Cannot freely socialize. -Cannot travel.

False. In those days, it wasn't particularly easy to conduct business withour "freely socilizing" and traveling. Khadija was already a made woman before she met Muhammad.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu -Cannot pray/attend mosque as an equal with the men.

Uhh, What? What the hell does "pray/attend mosque as an equal with the men" mean? I'm guessing you've never been to a mosque. Traditionally, the prayer rooms for men and women are seperate.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu -Do not have a say in their men seeking additional wives.

That's not entirely correct. First of all, polygamy is only allowed under certain conditions. The verses relevant to this subject were revealed in post wartime conditions where the women greatly out numbered the men. And back in those days, where the infrastructure didn't exist for women to be independent, well, in such conditions, most women resorted to prostitution and such things to survive. The purpose was to prevent things of that nature and making sure they're taken care of. So that's the deal with polygamy and is only permissible in certain circumstances, like the one I just mentioned. At the same time, women have the right to divorce men if they choose. Also, a woman, before marrying a man, can make them agree in contract that they will not engage in polygamy. Plus, I don't know a single Muslim that has more than one wife(and not just in the US). It's not common practice at all since the conditions are such that it doesn't apply. Context.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu -Are not treated in Sharia law equally with men (a basic indicator of which is inheritance rights, divorce, etc.)

What is called "Sharia law" today is not reflective of Islam. You do understand that if a law is in violation of Islamic teachings, it cannot be a part of Sharia law?

You're right about inheritance rights thought. Although women do have inheritance rights, it's not equally distributed amongst son's and daughter's and the reason given for that is that men have traditionally been the bread winners and have the responsibility of providing for the entire family, whereas women are not obligated to do so. Infact, it's illegal for men to take any portion of her property or inheritance, whereas, men, are obligated to give up a certain portion of their monetary assets & property in case of a divorce whereas a woman doesn't have to give anything in return at all. So, yes, in certain issues, there is a slightly different standard but for reasons similar to the ones I mentioned above.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Recently in Quebec, Sharia courts were banned on the basis that they violate women's human rights, as conceived and enacted according to Western values (a decision that was hailed by the Canadian Council of Muslim Women on 26th May 2005 -- many members of whom fled Islamic countries to escape persecution according to the tenets of traditional Sharia law).

Yeah, I read a story on Yahoo news or somewhere about that case although I'm not aware of the specifics. I'm guessing they made that ruling because of what you mentioned earlier that even many Muslims think is part of Sharia Law.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Which "certain places in the Muslim world" are you talking about? If you're interested in discussing this, let's move away from your generalizations and start talking specifics. All you're doing is making comments -- you aren't giving any proof of what is only your (sorry, but highly biased) opinion. Feel free to cite the Qur'an to support your position.

How exactly is my opinion biased (I'm sure it is to some degree, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE ON THE PLANET)? Listen, I wasn't trying to say Islamic values are better or worse that Western values, but I do find it rather annoying when people (mostly Westerners) say things to the effect that "Islam is intolerant" when it placed alot of emphasis on women's rights, respecting women, and, denounced racial prejudice very explicitly. That was 1400 years ago. Civil Rights Act? 1964. Women's sufferage movement? Late 1800s (as far as I can recall rightnow). So, stating facts makes me biased? I apologize if I came across that way but that's not the point I was trying to make.

Also, I don't even know the name of every Muslim country so I couldn't just list every specific example of the top of my head. Since now you sort of insist that I do, I'll give you two to start with:

1. Saudi Arabia
2. Afghanistan

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu I reiterate that I did not deny that Islamic countries exist that are relatively moderate, where the things you mention do occur; I do assert however that Islam according to the Qur'an (in the Sunni fashion) is not at all what you're describing, and moreover that moderate Islam (what you're describing) is seen by orthodox Muslims as "fake Islam." Cheers, -Noble

Yeah, I'm aware of what traditional sunni views and interpretations are but even amost sunni's, there are plenly who don't agree with the list of sexist laws you mentioned. Majority of mosques and organized religion stuff (for lack of a better term) is usually funded mostly by rich Arab fundamentalist (usually pretty corrupt too)(who have a significant Wahabi influence, one of the nuttiest and extreme sects), so it doesn't really suprise me that there's a bunch of BS out there (like the list you mentioned earlier.) The Wahabi sect are basically like a really nutty Arab version of the Amish.

And, BTW, Sunni's aren't the only subgroup.

And you're right that many orthodox Muslims (and when I say orthodox here, I mean narrow and closed minded ppl who adhere strictly to tradition interpretations and viewpoints, some of which are pretty distorted) would label me as a "fake" Muslim.

You also have to keep in mind that the Quran is subject to interpretation and by saying that only a certain interpretations is correct(no matter how distorted that interpretation is), what you're essentially saying is that the interpretation is infallible, which, we as human beings, are not. (i.e. the interpretation is not infallible).

Another thing I'd like to add is that the so called "Sharia" Law that existed under the Taliban run Afghanistan was a pretty sick misrepresentation of Islam. So I hope you weren't basing your understanding of Sharia on Taliban run Afghanistan or even Saudi Arabia for that matter.

Peace.

so much ignorance in this thread, I see the Fox news has taught many of you about islam.

Men oppress Women, not religions, and if you havent figured that out yet, dont even bother posting a reply in here.

quote:

Originally posted by ProDiGaL so much ignorance in this thread, I see the Fox news has taught many of you about islam. Men oppress Women, not religions, and if you havent figured that out yet, dont even bother posting a reply in here.

god i love u

quote:

Originally posted by ProDiGaL so much ignorance in this thread, I see the Fox news has taught many of you about islam. Men oppress Women, not religions, and if you havent figured that out yet, dont even bother posting a reply in here.

The argument runs that these particular men are acting in the name of religion.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka The argument runs that these particular men are acting in the name of religion.

again a matter of ignorance, on their behalf.

Men burned witches in the name of religion, commited genocides in the name of religion and so on and so forth. But last I checked, none of the holy books asked them to do any of these things. Its ironic that men have commited the worse acts in the name of "doing good", and this continues today. Lack of education is a dangerous thing, and this is a big problem in the Islamic world.

And you know I hate seeing these poor women in these crazy robes where the only thing you can see is their eyes, but atleast I know its not the religion thats forcing this apon her, its the state or country she lives in. And thats what happens when you dont seperate state and religion.

Men are more aggressive and dominating by nature, and there are wife beaters/women oppresors all over the world, surely we can all understand that.

personally I think all religions should just be lifted, but thats not happening any time soon....

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Qur'an: (Al-Imran aya. 195) "Their Lord responded to them: "I never fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you MALE OR FEMALE, YOU ARE EQUAL TO ONE ANOTHER........." Hmmm, seems reasonable to assume the below from the above verse :

You don't seem to understand the context of the S�rah you are citing (3.195), which is talking about equality of the sexes for salvation from the Day of Judgement and for admission to Heaven (I sure hope both sexes can be saved -- wouldn't be much point in women being part of the club otherwise!)

The S�rah isn't dealing by any means with general and equal human rights (or perhaps as you do understand, which is why you only quoted a piece of the text, out of context?) Actually a more proper translation of "be you MALE OR FEMALE, YOU ARE EQUAL TO ONE ANOTHER" might be "you are both part of the other," i.e., reference to S�rah 4.1, where Eve was said to have been created from Adam.

This one is more on-topic:

S�rah 4.34. An-Nis�' ("The Women," dealing with law regarding marriage, inheritance for women, women's behaviour, etc.)

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because All�h has made one of them to excel the other,* and because they (men) spend to support them (women) from their (the men's) means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient (to All�h and to their husbands), and guard in the husband's absence what All�h orders them to guard (e.g., their chastity, their husband's property). As to those women on whose part you see ill-conduct, admonish them (first, next) refuse to share their bed, (and last) beat them (lightly); but if they obey you, seek not against them means (of further punishment). Surely, All�h is Ever Most High, Most Great.

* - Alt. translation, "...All�h has given the one more (strength) than the other."

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Well, you're correct in saying that these things happen in some Muslim countries (Saudi Arabia being the most notorious), it still doesn't reflect Islams teachings and most of them are contrary to it.

S�rah 4.15. An-Nis�' ("The Women"):

"And those of your women who commit illegal sexual intercourse (i.e., adultery), take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you (men) against them (women); and if they (the men) testify, confine them (the women) to houses until death come to them or All�h ordains some (other) way."

S�rah 4 makes provisions for women caught in the act of adultery to be killed by stoning (arguably starvation is also a means implied above); moreover depending on the degree of the offense, they can also receive 100 lashes, or be exiled from the community. The laws of S�rah 4 also make a distinction between whether the woman in question is single (i.e., never married vs. divorced), married, a slave, a slave of the harim, or a slave that has been raised to higher status through being married. Hardly equality as we might label it.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Where did you get that from? The Quran says nothing about voting whatsoever and in no way forbids women from involvment in Government.

That's right, because the Qur'an has no concept of democracy. I never said the Qur'an says they can't vote and can't be in government, that's just a basic tenet of Sunni countries.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Ok, now that's simply incorrect. I can't remember the exact verse and reference rightnow, but, I specifically remember reading in the Quran that men do not have the right to impose a marriage on a woman which she does not approve of herself.

Read S�rah 4. All a man has to do is say the word, basically, and he can take a wife, or replace a wife with another. He does however have to pay her the mahr or bridal-dowry as a condition. (I wonder how often that occurs in practice, when the next verse discusses how a man can get his mahr back without angering All�h?)

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z False. In those days, it wasn't particularly easy to conduct business withour "freely socilizing" and traveling. Khadija was already a made woman before she met Muhammad.[quote] Right, and OPEC is loaded with women, the hospitals in Saudi Arabia, or Afghanistan are filled with female doctors, and many of the professors are women. [QUOTE]Originally posted by shaolin_Z Uhh, What? What the hell does "pray/attend mosque as an equal with the men" mean? I'm guessing you've never been to a mosque. Traditionally, the prayer rooms for men and women are seperate.

Right, segregation in the mosque of men and women has its basis in the Islamic fact that "men are superior" (see above, S�rah 4.34) and also that women are spiritually unclean because they menstruate.

These seem to have been a common belief in the Iron Age Middle East, as it is also covered in detail in the laws of the Torah (Old Testament) and the Talmud.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z That's not entirely correct. First of all, polygamy is only allowed under certain conditions. The verses relevant to this subject were revealed in post wartime conditions where the women greatly out numbered the men. And back in those days, where the infrastructure didn't exist for women to be independent, well, in such conditions, most women resorted to prostitution and such things to survive. The purpose was to prevent things of that nature and making sure they're taken care of.

Interesting. I've also heard it said, anecdotally, that it was enacted in the Medieval period during the Crusades to deal with the heavy loss of breeding males.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z So that's the deal with polygamy and is only permissible in certain circumstances, like the one I just mentioned.

Not exactly, it's permitted now under general conditions, but the hindrances against it are more philosophical than circumstantial (as you know).

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z At the same time, women have the right to divorce men if they choose.

This isn't the case in practice, as you probably well know. (Do you have a Qur'anic citation?)

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z What is called "Sharia law" today is not reflective of Islam. You do understand that if a law is in violation of Islamic teachings, it cannot be a part of Sharia law?

Sharia is law promulgated on the teaching of Islam, and not just the Qur'an. It's true that there is immense scholarship concerned with investigating whether given verses from e.g., the Hadith are authentic; where found to differ from authenticated, canonized text, the variant is discarded.

This however is just a form of historical redaction -- dismissing what disagrees with another text doesn't mean it never happened.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z You're right about inheritance rights thought. Although women do have inheritance rights, it's not equally distributed amongst son's and daughter's and the reason given for that is that men have traditionally been the bread winners and have the responsibility of providing for the entire family, whereas women are not obligated to do so. Infact, it's illegal for men to take any portion of her property or inheritance...

True. The same is given in S�rah 4 as justification for why men are superior to women. Do you feel this applies today?

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z So, yes, in certain issues, there is a slightly different standard but for reasons similar to the ones I mentioned above.

We both understand this, and also why this was believed, but we have also just established that inequality is found in the Qur'an.

Why it's there isn't what's being debated.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Listen, I wasn't trying to say Islamic values are better or worse that Western values, but I do find it rather annoying when people (mostly Westerners) say things to the effect that "Islam is intolerant" when it placed alot of emphasis on women's rights, respecting women, and, denounced racial prejudice very explicitly. That was 1400 years ago. Civil Rights Act? 1964. Women's sufferage movement? Late 1800s (as far as I can recall rightnow).

Oh, you weren't pushing the superiority of your beliefs at all and I didn't suggest you were.

I'm actually a great admirer of Islam; it produced incredible high-civilization in the Medieval period (advanced scholarship in the arts, Arabic grammar, philosophy, chemistry, detailed human anatomy and medicine, astronomy, metalurgy, and mathematics [from which we derived our Latin numerics]) at a time when Christendom was wallowing in the gutters of the Dark Ages and the Black Death. If Arabic scholars had continued on that pace, Islamic astronauts would be on Mars today.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Yeah, I'm aware of what traditional sunni views and interpretations are but even amost sunni's, there are plenly who don't agree with the list of sexist laws you mentioned.

Right, but this is the difference betweem Sunni and Shia. We both know full well that the Sunni consider anyone who is not a Sunni to be a kafer.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z And you're right that many orthodox Muslims (and when I say orthodox here, I mean narrow and closed minded ppl who adhere strictly to tradition interpretations and viewpoints...

...finish the sentence.

"...adhere strictly to [traditional] interpretations and viewpoints (of the Qur'an, the Hadith, and Sharia Law.")

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z You also have to keep in mind that the Quran is subject to interpretation and by saying that only a certain interpretations is correct(no matter how distorted that interpretation is), what you're essentially saying is that the interpretation is infallible, which, we as human beings, are not. (i.e. the interpretation is not infallible).

Absolutely. I know all about the difficulties of Semitic translation and the immense problem of trying to convert Classical Arabic into an English paragraph that is going to make sense.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Another thing I'd like to add is that the so called "Sharia" Law that existed under the Taliban run Afghanistan was a pretty sick misrepresentation of Islam. So I hope you weren't basing your understanding of Sharia on Taliban run Afghanistan or even Saudi Arabia for that matter.

This is the main point, I suppose: what one person considers legitimate Islam another condemns, for his own reasons, as "a pretty sick misrepresentation." I have no interest in branding any such label on any particular type of Islam, but rather in pointing out the wide range of perspective.

quote:

Peace.

Wa Alaikum Salaam.

Cheers,
-Noble.

I'm pretty impressed by the amount of research you've done but unfortunately not all of it is entirely accurate and the conclusion you've come to on certain issues. And I think that's understandable considering how misinformed even alot of Muslims are and how full of shit alot of "scholars" are. And just so you know, I don't identify myself with any of the "sects", Sunnis, Shias, or, anyone else.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu You don't seem to understand the context of the S�rah you are citing (3.195), which is talking about equality of the sexes for salvation from the Day of Judgement and for admission to Heaven (I sure hope both sexes can be saved -- wouldn't be much point in women being part of the club otherwise!)

Right, but it's not restricted to only that context. My point was that Islam doesn't put men above women or vice versa on a spiritual level implying that it is not the case that men are superior to women.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu The S�rah isn't dealing by any means with general and equal human rights (or perhaps as you do understand, which is why you only quoted a piece of the text, out of context?) Actually a more proper translation of "be you MALE OR FEMALE, YOU ARE EQUAL TO ONE ANOTHER" might be "you are both part of the other," i.e., reference to S�rah 4.1, where Eve was said to have been created from Adam.

That's actually a big problem with translation of Classical Arabic text to English. I've read many different translation, where some places, the differences in translation are quite apparent reflecting the bias of the translator. I've come across things where I was like, "Hmm, this sounds pretty absurd and it doesn't seem right." When I've run into situations like those, since I don't know Arabic, I usually consult my few Arab aquaintences who are pretty good at both English and Arabic. And I've asked them what particular words or phrases meant in Arabic (and alot of words in Arabic have multiple meanings, which I assume you already know). It makes alot more sense when they explain meanings of particular words or phrases (which have been poorly translated, and in some cases, aren't really reflective of the words/phrases itself and are much more reflective of the bias of the translator).

^^^^Keep that in mind when I'm refering to to other verses too in the rest of this post (and other possible future posts).

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu This one is more on-topic: S�rah 4.34. An-Nis�' ("The Women," dealing with law regarding marriage, inheritance for women, women's behaviour, etc.) "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because All�h has made one of them to excel the other,* and because they (men) spend to support them (women) from their (the men's) means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient (to All�h and to their husbands), and guard in the husband's absence what All�h orders them to guard (e.g., their chastity, their husband's property). As to those women on whose part you see ill-conduct, admonish them (first, next) refuse to share their bed, (and last) beat them (lightly); but if they obey you, seek not against them means (of further punishment). Surely, All�h is Ever Most High, Most Great. * - Alt. translation, "...All�h has given the one more (strength) than the other."

Ok, I already commented on this one earlier in the thread. Here's a translation by Yusuf Ali (which is not the best, but the best I could find rightnow):

Surah 004.034 Al-Nisa:

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all)."

Pay attention to the first part of 004.034. It doesn't claim men are superior to women, but, that a man is supposed to take care and provide for his wife. And then "given one more strength than the other" is referring to obvious differences in physical attributes of men and women, therefore (especially in the context of earlier ages), it's wasn't exactly very safe for women to be travelling(to a job and back) and working independently without a male to make sure no harm comes to them. It's not implying that they're not allowed to travel or work mind you, but, rather that it's the responsibility of a man to make sure he adequetly provides for his wife.

The second part refers to a situation where she's cheating on you.

quote:

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means.

and not:

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because All�h has made one of them to excel the other,* and because they (men) spend to support them (women) from their (the men's) means."

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu S�rah 4.15. An-Nis�' ("The Women"): "And those of your women who commit illegal sexual intercourse (i.e., adultery), take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you (men) against them (women); and if they (the men) testify, confine them (the women) to houses until death come to them or All�h ordains some (other) way." S�rah 4 makes provisions for women caught in the act of adultery to be killed by stoning (arguably starvation is also a means implied above); moreover depending on the degree of the offense, they can also receive 100 lashes, or be exiled from the community. The laws of S�rah 4 also make a distinction between whether the woman in question is single (i.e., never married vs. divorced), married, a slave, a slave of the harim, or a slave that has been raised to higher status through being married. Hardly equality as we might label it.

The punishment for men is not any different(both guilty parties i.e. the man and the woman are subjec to the same punishment). I'm surprised you're not aware of that. You do also realize that you need very reliable testimony from atleast four peaple in order to convict someone right? And if there's even the slightest doubt, no action can be taken against the accused. Also, there have been hardly any case where there was sufficent evidence and credible testimony. Another thing you may find interesting is an incident where this due basically came and confessed that he fornicated to Prophet Muhammad and he ignored it (the first 2 times if I recall correctly) and the third time told the man to leave, but then he insisted and Muhammad was left with no choice but to convict him.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu That's right, because the Qur'an has no concept of democracy. I never said the Qur'an says they can't vote and can't be in government, that's just a basic tenet of Sunni countries.

Exactly, it has nothing to do with Islam. It violates the teaching of Islam as Prophet Muhammads many times recommened to people who had question regarding religon (which encompases all spheres of life including legislation) to consult his wife Aisha who he said was very wise and knowledgable.

And another Hadith:

"Seeking knowledge is a duty of every Muslim, MAN OR WOMAN."

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Read S�rah 4. All a man has to do is say the word, basically, and he can take a wife, or replace a wife with another. He does however have to pay her the mahr or bridal-dowry as a condition. (I wonder how often that occurs in practice, when the next verse discusses how a man can get his mahr back without angering All�h?)

Surah 004.007 Al-Nisa:
"From what is left by parents and those nearest related there is a share for men and a share for women, whether the property be small or large,-a determinate share."

Surah 004.007 Al-Nisa:

"O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may Take away part of the dower ye have given them,-except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and Allah brings about through it a great deal of good."

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Right, segregation in the mosque of men and women has its basis in the Islamic fact that "men are superior" (see above, S�rah 4.34) and also that women are spiritually unclean because they menstruate.

Umm, no, you're WAY off there dude. Other that the fact that that statement is false, the reason for segregation again has to do with how many Muslim cultures view it as being modest (segregation while praying) and that being in close proximity of the opposite sex can be very distracting while praying.

This is just a random comment of mine, but imagine how distracting it would be when the lady in the row in front of you goes does into Sajud (prostration)(as do you at the same time) and her ass is right in your face.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Not exactly, it's permitted now under general conditions, but the hindrances against it are more philosophical than circumstantial (as you know). This isn't the case in practice, as you probably well know. (Do you have a Qur'anic citation?)

Once again, if laws are made contrary to the Quran's teaching, they are not valid. You do know that the Quran is supposed to be appropriate, universal, and, unchanging for all time right? No, I don't expect you to believe in it's universality but that's what it's supposed to be in Islam. So:

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu it's permitted now under general conditions

doesn't hold.

On the other hand, the Quran is subject to reinterpretaion suitable to different times and cultures and is not confined to 700 century Arabia.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Sharia is law promulgated on the teaching of Islam, and not just the Qur'an.

Ok, now that's has to be one of the strangest things you've said so far. The Quran is considered the ONLY infalible source no laws can be passed which are contrary to the teachings within it. Hadith on the other hand, are not infalible as there's no way of verifying wheather a Hadith is authentic or not.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu True. The same is given in S�rah 4 as justification for why men are superior to women. Do you feel this applies today?

No where does it say that men are superior to women and neigther is that the implication of inheritance laws. I also explained that earlier.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu I'm actually a great admirer of Islam; it produced incredible high-civilization in the Medieval period (advanced scholarship in the arts, Arabic grammar, philosophy, chemistry, detailed human anatomy and medicine, astronomy, metalurgy, and mathematics [from which we derived our Latin numerics]) at a time when Christendom was wallowing in the gutters of the Dark Ages and the Black Death. If Arabic scholars had continued on that pace, Islamic astronauts would be on Mars today. Right, but this is the difference betweem Sunni and Shia. We both know full well that the Sunni consider anyone who is not a Sunni to be a kafer.

I've known plenty of Shias and Sunnis and that is not true. I've met married couples where one of them is Shia and the other Sunni. Althought I'm not denying that there are Sunni's out there who do that. BTW, what you just described sounds more like the crazy nutty fundamentalist Wahabi view. (which strays pretty far from the teachings of Islam, they don't even respect womens rights, and have even massacred many Shia Muslims.)

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Absolutely. I know all about the difficulties of Semitic translation and the immense problem of trying to convert Classical Arabic into an English paragraph that is going to make sense.

Yup, which is why you should always be careful when reading translation to get around that problem aswell as the bias the translator had. (And believe me, there's some VERY bad translations out there.)

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu This is the main point, I suppose: what one person considers legitimate Islam another condemns, for his own reasons, as "a pretty sick misrepresentation." I have no interest in branding any such label on any particular type of Islam, but rather in pointing out the wide range of perspective.

Please don't take this the wrong way but your veiws on some things (especially women and Sharia) seem to be what is bsically the really distorted Wahabi version (the nuttiest fundamentalists group ever that currently have alot of influence in Saui Arabia, they also dececrated the grave of the Propher Muhammad and some of his family members, and killed several Muslims that didn't agree with them, mostly Shias).

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Wa Alaikum Salaam. Cheers, -Noble.

Anyways, still an interesting conversation, eventhough you have some serious misconeption and misunderstadings (no offence).

[i]Salaam-alaikum[i] and peace.

p.s. It took me a long ass time to respond to your posts and I missed my reading for my class today so I may not respond very soon.

Another thing I'd like to add since we're talking about equality here, (and please guys correct me if I'm wrong), but from what I know and understand, alteast in the US, if a couple hasn't signed a prenoptual agreement before marriage, men basically have to give up a shit load of their monetary assets and property to women where as they don't have to give men anything (or atleast anything comparable) is return. Now that's isn't technically equality and is a double standard, but does that mean that's it wrong or unreasonable?

Please note that I'm using this example to illustrate how portions prescribed by inheritance laws, white not being equal, have some sort of similar reasoning behing why it's considered appropriate.

Ok, really tired now, gotta get some sleep before class.

External to a specific relgion is multiplicity of religion. Its logical counterpart is to maximize multiplicity Internally. The Koran's genius is to do so with a single immutable text.

quote:

Originally posted by ShadoWolf ^^^^ I actually have no problem with that is it's their CHOICE... the thing is, they don't have a choice.

see hwta you don't understand is that while theyre are some women who are forced to have to wear these abaya's, there always a percentage that consider it an integral part of their life, so that they could go out and do daily chores

an example, in the shahs iran, the shah was very westernized and was totally intollerant of iranian culture and the headress which is a requirement now was totaly outlawed then. there are recorded cases of thousands of widows dieing in their houses because they couldnt leave the house. it may seem incredulous for you to understand that a simple pice of clothing would stop women from going out but it happens.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Sharia is law promulgated on the teaching of Islam, and not just the Qur'an. It's true that there is immense scholarship concerned with investigating whether given verses from e.g., the Hadith are authentic; where found to differ from authenticated, canonized text, the variant is discarded.

not neccesarily...see what most muslims do not realize is that the shariah was compiled 300 years after the death of the prophet. the shariah relects the chages in islamic civilization at that time. most edicts were added that were never covered under quran or the hadith and like i said relect a certain movement of islam at that time (its either the ashari or the mutazli im not sure).

and im quite sure this includes issues of punishment, marriage & divorce.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Right, but it's not restricted to only that context. My point was that Islam doesn't put men above women or vice versa on a spiritual level implying that it is not the case that men are superior to women.

That obviously doesn't wash.

The Qur'an advocates a hierarchy where the men are in control of the women, because contemporary culture had the men as the providers. In cultural practice, the Qur'an establishes men as superior -- this is just a product of the historical experience.

Men aren't equal to women spiritually either, as I already stated -- men have the "position of honour," so to speak, in the mosque, and the laws of S�rah 3 and 4 establish that, while women will indeed be admitted to Heaven, on Earth they are spiritually unclean, especially when menstruating.

There is a whole series of laws in S�rah 4 outlining proper sexual conduct and provisions for feminine ablutions (which plays such a large role in Islam) during and after menstruation.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z ^^^^Keep that in mind when I'm refering to to other verses too in the rest of this post (and other possible future posts).

No problem. I'll also point out that most Muslims don't know Classical Arabic either -- even if they are native speakers, the Arabic of the Qur'an is notoriously obscure with religious terminology and is quite grammatically challenging. It's an art form just to be able to read Classical Arabic caligraphy.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z And then "given one more strength than the other" is referring to obvious differences in physical attributes of men and women,

That's not the connotation conveyed -- that is the meaning you are taking away from the choice of English vocabulary of the translator. The sense of the text is male "superiority," not "physical attributes."

Regardless, I think you're missing the context here:

"Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard."

The word fashishah in Arabic has the meaning either of a woman who openly commits lewd acts/adultery and/or disobeys the wishes of her husband. They both have a 'sin-doer' connotation.

People on equal footing are just that -- when one must be "devoutly obedient" to the other or be beaten, and vocabulary exists in the Qur'an to describe a disobedient woman as sinful, equality doesn't exist.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z The second part refers to a situation where she's cheating on you.

Right, but nonetheless the Qur'an prescribes obstracism, isolation, beatings, torture, and death for women that are not "devoutly obedient."

I'm not making a moral judgement. I'm establishing that the Qur'an solidly and definitively places women in second-class society:

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z The punishment for men is not any different(both guilty parties i.e. the man and the woman are subjec to the same punishment). I'm surprised you're not aware of that.

I expected you would raise this, because it would seem a logical conclusion, but it isn't accurate. You must pay attention to the context of the text, since it tends to switch topics between verses.

Laws must be distinguished for punishment of both guilty parties by the community, and punishment only for the wife by the husband.

In my last post, I was describing the laws in the Qur'an that deal with both (husband's punishment and communal punishment = stoning). Above you are talking about only communal punishment.

It is true that communal punishment is equal for men and women, but only if they are *both* adulterers (which is to say they were both married to someone else but slept with each other); in this event, they can both receive 100-50 lashes, depending on their social rank -- but women can additionally be stoned to death, starved to death, or exiled from the community, whereas a man cannot.

What's more, S�rah 4 makes no penalty for a single male that sleeps with a married woman. This is indicative of the general attitude that is talked about in the Qur'an that men are "weak" insofar as they cannot contain their sexual appetites. Since they cannot, women must be vigilant and cover their bodies. Ergo, if a woman adulters, 'she must have consented.'

He gets off, she gets killed -- or at least whipped.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z You do also realize that you need very reliable testimony from atleast four peaple in order to convict someone right? And if there's even the slightest doubt, no action can be taken against the accused.

This isn't accurate either -- the Qur'an makes a provision for the husband's word as being sufficient. If he swears as many times by All�h as he needs witnesses that his wife is an adulteress and that he was the only one to observe it, this is considered sufficient (the woman however can swear the same amount of times that her husband is a liar and get off).

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Also, there have been hardly any case where there was sufficent evidence and credible testimony.

No way you can claim that with any validity.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Another thing you may find interesting is an incident where this due basically came and confessed that he fornicated to Prophet Muhammad and he ignored it (the first 2 times if I recall correctly) and the third time told the man to leave, but then he insisted and Muhammad was left with no choice but to convict him.

Sounds accurate, since the penalty against a male is relatively light.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Surah 004.007 Al-Nisa: "From what is left by parents and those nearest related there is a share for men and a share for women, whether the property be small or large,-a determinate share."

Right, but exactly what they get is:

S�rah 4.11. An-Nis�' ("The Women," dealing with law regarding marriage, inheritance for women, women's behaviour, etc.)

"All�h commands you as regards your (children's) inheritance: to the male, a portion equal to that of two females; if (there are) only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is only half..."

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Surah 004.007 Al-Nisa: "O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may Take away part of the dower ye have given them,-except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and Allah brings about through it a great deal of good."

This S�rah (4.19, not 4.7) is talking about status quo. This is what should happen, says the Qur'an, if both parties behave. Nothing wrong with this.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z This is just a random comment of mine, but imagine how distracting it would be when the lady in the row in front of you goes does into Sajud (prostration)(as do you at the same time) and her ass is right in your face.

For sure! That's undoubtly part of it too -- there are laws that state one should not go to the prayer distracted. lol

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z On the other hand, the Quran is subject to reinterpretaion suitable to different times and cultures and is not confined to 700 century Arabia.

Actually, on the contrary, its a central tenet of Islam that the text of the Qur'an cannot be changed, and has not changed at all since it was dictated to Muhammed. And very black-and-white tenets simply cannot be "reinterpretted."

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Ok, now that's has to be one of the strangest things you've said so far. The Quran is considered the ONLY infalible source no laws can be passed which are contrary to the teachings within it.

Theoretically anyway, but you just finished telling me, in agreement, that e.g., Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan do it all the time.

You might respond: "well then, they aren't true Muslims" (etc.) but that isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card to be invoked at your whim.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Hadith on the other hand, are not infalible as there's no way of verifying wheather a Hadith is authentic or not.

Word of advice: don't ever say that to your Imam or your Mullah.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I've known plenty of Shias and Sunnis and that is not true. I've met married couples where one of them is Shia and the other Sunni. Althought I'm not denying that there are Sunni's out there who do that.

Ok, fair enough, that's all I was trying to establish.

BTW: we both know in the Middle East that Sunni and Shia don't intermarry as a common practice.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Please don't take this the wrong way but your veiws on some things (especially women and Sharia) seem to be what is bsically the really distorted Wahabi version (the nuttiest fundamentalists group ever that currently have alot of influence in Saui Arabia, they also dececrated the grave of the Propher Muhammad and some of his family members, and killed several Muslims that didn't agree with them, mostly Shias).

No problem, but really I'll I'm doing is citing the Qur'an. I'm not dependent on any particular translation.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z p.s. It took me a long ass time to respond to your posts and I missed my reading for my class today so I may not respond very soon.

Yeah, it does tend to take up a lot of time.

Cheers,
-Noble

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.