An Islamic guide on how to beat your wife
-
kgaddy wrote: You still have not answered the question, you have been jumping everywhere. Yes or No. Does Islam permit wife beating...yes or no. From the article for the reading impaired. "...Such a measure is more accurately described as a gentle tap on the body, but never on the face, making it more of a symbolic measure than a punitive one." If its more than that the answer is no. In fact beating as in the dictionary, the answer will be NO. Now get over it. :doh: Quran Translation Intro Discover
Dictionary.com: # 1. To strike repeatedly. 2. To subject to repeated beatings or physical abuse; batter. 3. To punish by hitting or whipping; flog.
-
A.A. wrote: gentle tap So, the man you quoted says gentle tap, but the iman from Spain says "The blows" Which one is correct. Or does it matter if you are talking with infidels or fellow musilums? Why not come out and say it's a wrong custom that should be left in the middle ages. Why try to justify and cling on to this pratice? BTW the answer is yes. I guess the next question is what does beating mean?
kgaddy wrote: So, the man you quoted says gentle tap, but the iman from Spain says "The blows" Translated from the language they speak there, or did he write it in English. Seriously get over it. kgaddy wrote: Which one is correct. Or does it matter if you are talking with infidels or fellow musilums? Islam more than any other religion does not go around tayloring what it says based upon who is listening. But then again you seem to be one of those "Islamic experts". kgaddy wrote: BTW the answer is yes. I guess the next question is what does beating mean? And this seems to be the bottom line, no matter what the real answer is, your hate for Islam is so deep it skews your everything you see about Islam/Muslims. Muslim chews gum, oh look at those Muslims how can they! Quran Translation Intro Discover
-
Shog9 wrote: Well, to be fair, that isn't exactly a ringing endorsement of wife beating. What would be a ringing endorsement? "Beat the sh!t out of your wife until she shuts the f@#$ up"? The guy is trying to sugarcoat wife beating, but still does not deny it. It's ok in extream cases? You can justfy anthing with thoses standards.
kgaddy wrote: The guy is trying to sugarcoat wife beating, but still does not deny it. And what? He gave you a link that pretty much spells out the attitude towards it: allowed, but discouraged. Don't get me wrong - i'm none too impressed with this sort of thing, and there are plenty of reports of violence against women coming from Islamic countries... But sadly, there are plenty of 'em coming from much, much closer as well. The sad truth of the matter is, there seems to be plenty of enthusiasm for violence towards women all over, with or without printed "guidelines".
-
A.A. wrote: gentle tap So, the man you quoted says gentle tap, but the iman from Spain says "The blows" Which one is correct. Or does it matter if you are talking with infidels or fellow musilums? Why not come out and say it's a wrong custom that should be left in the middle ages. Why try to justify and cling on to this pratice? BTW the answer is yes. I guess the next question is what does beating mean?
The Quran is the literal word of God, dictated by the prophet, and therefore infallible. Hence the difficulty in dropping the scary dark age morality. Mormons will probably have similar issues in a few hundred years (and their prophet had golden tablets in a top hat - way more convincing than some unsupported angel stories), if they ain't already. Ryan
O fools, awake! The rites you sacred hold Are but a cheat contrived by men of old, Who lusted after wealth and gained their lust And died in baseness—and their law is dust. al-Ma'arri (973-1057)
-- modified at 16:57 Thursday 29th September, 2005
-
kgaddy wrote: So, the man you quoted says gentle tap, but the iman from Spain says "The blows" Translated from the language they speak there, or did he write it in English. Seriously get over it. kgaddy wrote: Which one is correct. Or does it matter if you are talking with infidels or fellow musilums? Islam more than any other religion does not go around tayloring what it says based upon who is listening. But then again you seem to be one of those "Islamic experts". kgaddy wrote: BTW the answer is yes. I guess the next question is what does beating mean? And this seems to be the bottom line, no matter what the real answer is, your hate for Islam is so deep it skews your everything you see about Islam/Muslims. Muslim chews gum, oh look at those Muslims how can they! Quran Translation Intro Discover
A.A. wrote: your hate for Islam is so deep it skews your everything you see about Islam/Muslims. Not true, until a couple years ago I did not even think about Islam. And to be honest, I believe there are many good Muslims. But, I do believe there if a bunch of crazy teaching going on in the Islam world. All I want is for the good Muslims to take on the crazy ones. Below is what I have a problem with. I would love for you to tell me the following are wrong, but you will not. You will try to sugar coat them and justify them. A Muslim cannot be put to death for the murder of an unbeliever. (According to clause #14 of Prophet's Medina-Charter, proudly claimed by Sharia-proponents as "The First Written Constitution in the World". 2. A Muslim man is allowed to beat his wife or wives. - Qura'anic dictum. 3. A Muslim man is allowed to have four wives at one time. - Qura'anic dictum 4. A Muslim man can divorce his wife or wives instantaneously. Then he can marry a new set of wives and continue the cycle. - Corollary of Qura'anic dictum. 5. A Muslim woman must pay money to the husband by court orders to have the marriage dissolved. - Faulty human development on Qura'anic dictum.. 6. If a divorced couple wants to remarry each other, the wife must marry another person, must have complete sex with him and must be divorced by him willingly. - Qura'anic dictum. 7. The evidence required in a case of adultery is that of four Muslim adult men - Faulty human development on Qura'anic dictum. 8. Women's testimony is not accepted in cases of adultery or in any capital offence. - Faulty human development. 9. Evidence of a female singer and slave (male or female) is not admissible. - Faulty human development. 10. Testimony of a non-Muslim that has been punished for false accusation is inadmissible. If s/he later becomes a Muslim, her/his evidence is then admissible. -Faulty human development. 11. The Judge of the Court shall be a Muslim. The Judge may be a non-Muslim only if the accused is a non-Muslim. -Faulty human development. 12. Adoption is not allowed in Sharia. - Faulty human development on Qura'anic dictum. 13. Custody of children goes to mother as long as the kids need care, normally 9 years for boys and 7 for girls, after which the father takes over. But if the mother does not pray or gets married, the kids immediately go to the father. - Faulty human development. 14. Women inherit half of men. - Faulty human development on Qura'anic dictum.. 15. W
-
kgaddy wrote: The guy is trying to sugarcoat wife beating, but still does not deny it. And what? He gave you a link that pretty much spells out the attitude towards it: allowed, but discouraged. Don't get me wrong - i'm none too impressed with this sort of thing, and there are plenty of reports of violence against women coming from Islamic countries... But sadly, there are plenty of 'em coming from much, much closer as well. The sad truth of the matter is, there seems to be plenty of enthusiasm for violence towards women all over, with or without printed "guidelines".
-
The Quran is the literal word of God, dictated by the prophet, and therefore infallible. Hence the difficulty in dropping the scary dark age morality. Mormons will probably have similar issues in a few hundred years (and their prophet had golden tablets in a top hat - way more convincing than some unsupported angel stories), if they ain't already. Ryan
O fools, awake! The rites you sacred hold Are but a cheat contrived by men of old, Who lusted after wealth and gained their lust And died in baseness—and their law is dust. al-Ma'arri (973-1057)
-- modified at 16:57 Thursday 29th September, 2005
Ryan Roberts wrote: Mormons will probably have similar issues in a few hundred years (and their prophet had golden tablets in a top hat - way more convincing than some unsupported angel stories), if they ain't already. I'm not Mormon. And as crazy as those golden tablets sound, at least they are not hurting anyone, like killing their daughters and beating their wives. And I do believe they once beleved it was ok to have many wives. Did'nt they drop that because it was backwards? If they can drop their backward ways, why won't Islam?
-
A.A. wrote: your hate for Islam is so deep it skews your everything you see about Islam/Muslims. Not true, until a couple years ago I did not even think about Islam. And to be honest, I believe there are many good Muslims. But, I do believe there if a bunch of crazy teaching going on in the Islam world. All I want is for the good Muslims to take on the crazy ones. Below is what I have a problem with. I would love for you to tell me the following are wrong, but you will not. You will try to sugar coat them and justify them. A Muslim cannot be put to death for the murder of an unbeliever. (According to clause #14 of Prophet's Medina-Charter, proudly claimed by Sharia-proponents as "The First Written Constitution in the World". 2. A Muslim man is allowed to beat his wife or wives. - Qura'anic dictum. 3. A Muslim man is allowed to have four wives at one time. - Qura'anic dictum 4. A Muslim man can divorce his wife or wives instantaneously. Then he can marry a new set of wives and continue the cycle. - Corollary of Qura'anic dictum. 5. A Muslim woman must pay money to the husband by court orders to have the marriage dissolved. - Faulty human development on Qura'anic dictum.. 6. If a divorced couple wants to remarry each other, the wife must marry another person, must have complete sex with him and must be divorced by him willingly. - Qura'anic dictum. 7. The evidence required in a case of adultery is that of four Muslim adult men - Faulty human development on Qura'anic dictum. 8. Women's testimony is not accepted in cases of adultery or in any capital offence. - Faulty human development. 9. Evidence of a female singer and slave (male or female) is not admissible. - Faulty human development. 10. Testimony of a non-Muslim that has been punished for false accusation is inadmissible. If s/he later becomes a Muslim, her/his evidence is then admissible. -Faulty human development. 11. The Judge of the Court shall be a Muslim. The Judge may be a non-Muslim only if the accused is a non-Muslim. -Faulty human development. 12. Adoption is not allowed in Sharia. - Faulty human development on Qura'anic dictum. 13. Custody of children goes to mother as long as the kids need care, normally 9 years for boys and 7 for girls, after which the father takes over. But if the mother does not pray or gets married, the kids immediately go to the father. - Faulty human development. 14. Women inherit half of men. - Faulty human development on Qura'anic dictum.. 15. W
So you just have this list handy, because they look really familiar. kgaddy wrote: You will try to sugar coat them and justify them. Sugar coat them no not at all, I won't even respond to them. If you want I can help you understand anything you want to know about the abc's and 123's. I get a sense from this and previous discussions you dont have a grasp of the very basics. If there is something you are genuinely interested in beyond the basics, I am willing to also talk about them, but you have to realize your a "student" sort of speak and not a know it all [there is a big difference in attitude when that is done]. Quran Translation Intro Discover
-
So you just have this list handy, because they look really familiar. kgaddy wrote: You will try to sugar coat them and justify them. Sugar coat them no not at all, I won't even respond to them. If you want I can help you understand anything you want to know about the abc's and 123's. I get a sense from this and previous discussions you dont have a grasp of the very basics. If there is something you are genuinely interested in beyond the basics, I am willing to also talk about them, but you have to realize your a "student" sort of speak and not a know it all [there is a big difference in attitude when that is done]. Quran Translation Intro Discover
Maybe you misunderstand me. I saying this is what I have heard about Islam. All I want to know is are they true? I am not a student of Islam, noe will I be. But I am willing to live in peace with Islam. But from what I read, Islam is not willing to live in peace with me. Now, if this is wrong, please show me why it is wrong. But remember, I am not interested in Islam as a whole, I just am interested as how it relates to me as a infidel. And you make you assured, I am not a know it all. That is why I am asking you. But remember, I am asking you as an equal, not as a student.
-
So you believe that printed guideline does not make the situation worse? THe fact is even if it is discouraged, it does not put them in jail. I can hear the defense, "But it's in the Quran!"
kgaddy wrote: So you believe that printed guideline does not make the situation worse? I believe the situation's already so bad, it probably doesn't make much difference. How many women do you know, who ended up staying with, even protecting a guy who beats them senseless? And this is with it being frowned on pretty openly! kgaddy wrote: I can hear the defense, "But it's in the Quran!" So what's our defense? Hmm? What've we got, that excuses our society, and gives us license to point fingers?
-
kgaddy wrote: So you believe that printed guideline does not make the situation worse? I believe the situation's already so bad, it probably doesn't make much difference. How many women do you know, who ended up staying with, even protecting a guy who beats them senseless? And this is with it being frowned on pretty openly! kgaddy wrote: I can hear the defense, "But it's in the Quran!" So what's our defense? Hmm? What've we got, that excuses our society, and gives us license to point fingers?
Shog9 wrote: I believe the situation's already so bad, it probably doesn't make much difference. How many women do you know, who ended up staying with, even protecting a guy who beats them senseless? And this is with it being frowned on pretty openly! But at least it's a choice,even if it's a bad one. With shria law, they have no choice. Also, when they go leave the guy and try to get him locked up, we have laws that will protect her and put him away. Shog9 wrote: So what's our defense? I was talking as if I we a man accused of beating his wife, he whould use the defence that it is in the Quran. In our Society, the only defence that might work is self defence.
-
Shog9 wrote: I believe the situation's already so bad, it probably doesn't make much difference. How many women do you know, who ended up staying with, even protecting a guy who beats them senseless? And this is with it being frowned on pretty openly! But at least it's a choice,even if it's a bad one. With shria law, they have no choice. Also, when they go leave the guy and try to get him locked up, we have laws that will protect her and put him away. Shog9 wrote: So what's our defense? I was talking as if I we a man accused of beating his wife, he whould use the defence that it is in the Quran. In our Society, the only defence that might work is self defence.
kgaddy wrote: But at least it's a choice,even if it's a bad one. Which are worse - shackles of law, or shackles of mind?
-
kgaddy wrote: But at least it's a choice,even if it's a bad one. Which are worse - shackles of law, or shackles of mind?
"the bending of minds, and the breaking of bodies and spirits"[^] Probably the most interesting album I own, lyrics wise. One of the reasons why I bought the bible. -- Look straight into the light!
-
kgaddy wrote: But at least it's a choice,even if it's a bad one. Which are worse - shackles of law, or shackles of mind?
Shog9 wrote: Which are worse - shackles of law, or shackles of mind? The shackles on the law...hands down. You can reverse you mind at any time. it's a choice. No matter what you do. You cannot force them to think a certain way. All you can do is give them the freedom to think as they wish. It's the individual's responsibility.
-
Shog9 wrote: Which are worse - shackles of law, or shackles of mind? The shackles on the law...hands down. You can reverse you mind at any time. it's a choice. No matter what you do. You cannot force them to think a certain way. All you can do is give them the freedom to think as they wish. It's the individual's responsibility.
Anonymous wrote: You can reverse you mind at any time. it's a choice. And yet, you are shackled if you do not. And what law can free you from those bonds? A terrible thing: a woman, overpowered and beaten. One yet worse: the woman, bound not by law but by her own mind, returns to be beaten again. This is what i mean by shackles of the mind.
-
Anonymous wrote: You can reverse you mind at any time. it's a choice. And yet, you are shackled if you do not. And what law can free you from those bonds? A terrible thing: a woman, overpowered and beaten. One yet worse: the woman, bound not by law but by her own mind, returns to be beaten again. This is what i mean by shackles of the mind.
This is getting surreal. Shog9 wrote: And yet, you are shackled if you do not. And what law can free you from those bonds? Why are we talking about this. There are people making stupid decisions everyday. THere is nothing you or I can do to MAKE them stop. Ever hear the saying "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink"? So back to reality. My worry is for the women who WANT to leave men who beat them. Your non caring attitude that Sharia law makes it legal for men to beat wives does not help the women who want to do better. I guess if it were up to you, no women would have a chance because you lumped them all in one bin as being shacked by the mind.
-
Anonymous wrote: You can reverse you mind at any time. it's a choice. And yet, you are shackled if you do not. And what law can free you from those bonds? A terrible thing: a woman, overpowered and beaten. One yet worse: the woman, bound not by law but by her own mind, returns to be beaten again. This is what i mean by shackles of the mind.
-
This is getting surreal. Shog9 wrote: And yet, you are shackled if you do not. And what law can free you from those bonds? Why are we talking about this. There are people making stupid decisions everyday. THere is nothing you or I can do to MAKE them stop. Ever hear the saying "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink"? So back to reality. My worry is for the women who WANT to leave men who beat them. Your non caring attitude that Sharia law makes it legal for men to beat wives does not help the women who want to do better. I guess if it were up to you, no women would have a chance because you lumped them all in one bin as being shacked by the mind.
Anonymous wrote: I guess if it were up to you, no women would have a chance because you lumped them all in one bin as being shacked by the mind. I did no such thing. Can you not discuss without attack/defend, or do you just prefer that style? :confused: Anonymous wrote: There are people making stupid decisions everyday. Indeed there are. Anonymous wrote: THere is nothing you or I can do to MAKE them stop. Absolutely correct. Regardless of the laws in place, law does not control behavior. All it does is highlight deviations. Read that again. Now consider: 1) a law prohibiting violence will not stop violence 2) a law allowing violence will not cause violence You might say that #1 applies to us, living here in our enlightened society, while #2 applies to those living under brutish Islamic law. The end result of both is this: there will be those who choose violence, and those who do not. What is the purpose of law, then? To define what is acceptable to society. We cannot control behavior, but we can identify it, and ostracize deviants. Who is a deviant? In this case, our deviants might include someone who slaps his wife. Under a strict application of the doctrines stated in A.A.'s first link, you might have to haul off and punch her before being considered deviant. Neither society is exactly gung-ho over the idea of violence, but one is considerably less tolerant of it, at least in law. In practice, we tolerate a fair bit of it.
-
Anonymous wrote: I guess if it were up to you, no women would have a chance because you lumped them all in one bin as being shacked by the mind. I did no such thing. Can you not discuss without attack/defend, or do you just prefer that style? :confused: Anonymous wrote: There are people making stupid decisions everyday. Indeed there are. Anonymous wrote: THere is nothing you or I can do to MAKE them stop. Absolutely correct. Regardless of the laws in place, law does not control behavior. All it does is highlight deviations. Read that again. Now consider: 1) a law prohibiting violence will not stop violence 2) a law allowing violence will not cause violence You might say that #1 applies to us, living here in our enlightened society, while #2 applies to those living under brutish Islamic law. The end result of both is this: there will be those who choose violence, and those who do not. What is the purpose of law, then? To define what is acceptable to society. We cannot control behavior, but we can identify it, and ostracize deviants. Who is a deviant? In this case, our deviants might include someone who slaps his wife. Under a strict application of the doctrines stated in A.A.'s first link, you might have to haul off and punch her before being considered deviant. Neither society is exactly gung-ho over the idea of violence, but one is considerably less tolerant of it, at least in law. In practice, we tolerate a fair bit of it.
Shog9 wrote: Regardless of the laws in place, law does not control behavior. All it does is highlight deviations. That is a smart thing to say. ! Regardz Colin J Davies The most LinkedIn CPian (that I know of anyhow) :-)
-
Shog9 wrote: Regardless of the laws in place, law does not control behavior. All it does is highlight deviations. That is a smart thing to say. ! Regardz Colin J Davies The most LinkedIn CPian (that I know of anyhow) :-)
Yeah, i almost wish i'd thought it up myself... ;)