An Islamic guide on how to beat your wife
-
bugDanny wrote: So, violence (particularly, beating of wives) is acceptable in Islamic society? Looks like it (i've no first-hand knowledge, but the links from both kgaddy and A.A. pretty much admit that much).
-
Shog9 wrote: 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". Yes, I agree with you on this. I don't see this as a particularly Islamic problem at all. This seems to be indigenous to a multitude of cultures. Why, for that matter, you might as well blame the religion of alcohol equally. I hardly think that several (open to interpretation) lines of print in a religious book is responsible for the global epidemic of violence against women.
John Theal wrote: I hardly think that several (open to interpretation) lines of print in a religious book is responsible for the global epidemic of violence against women. Not responsible for violence against women, no, but at the very least it is allowing it, if not encouraging it. Don't you at least have any problems with that? Danny
-
I'm sorry, was this thread supposed to be a long string of replies pledging their loathing of wife-beating? Should i start a "Rape is Bad" thread, just so we can get that out of the way too? Don't let that knee-jerk kick you in the teeth... :| kgaddy asked a single question: "Why do these women put up with this?" I don't know - i'm not a woman, and definately not islamic. My wife, who went through a very long, very abusive relationship some years ago, generally attributes the acceptance of abuse in this country to low self-esteem, women basing their self-worth on their ability to please whatever asshole they manage to shack up with... whether that's the case or not, i can't say. My point in replying here, misunderstood though it may be, is that the behavior goes on, heedless of law and religion.
Shog9 wrote: I'm sorry, was this thread supposed to be a long string of replies pledging their loathing of wife-beating? Should i start a "Rape is Bad" thread, just so we can get that out of the way too? Don't let that knee-jerk kick you in the teeth... The issue was as it pertains to the regilion. Sure, you have your theories in place, but during your argument you downplayed the stupidity of the acceptance of it in that religion to stress your point (maybe it wasn't intentional, but that's how it was perceived). His points all along were, it's bad. And, having a religion that promotes it is worse. If you think actively promoting it (which your posts suggest) is on the same level as considering it taboo, you need a reality check man. Shog9 wrote: My wife, who went through a very long, very abusive relationship some years ago, generally attributes the acceptance of abuse in this country to low self-esteem, women basing their self-worth on their ability to please whatever asshole they manage to shack up with... For one, sorry to hear that. For two, I agree with your thoughts regarding it in this plane. But, at least this country considers it bad and not ok. You can't tell me it's the same when we don't endorse it. Jeremy Falcon
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Answer the guy's questions already rather than beating around the bush. What after I finish his 20 questions, do you have another long list that you would like me to get through? Jeremy Falcon wrote: Einstein (ya know the smart guy) said if you know something you can teach an eight year old. Yet a kid would understand what the orginal article said... Jeremy Falcon wrote: So, since you're the expert (as you claim) in your religion, teach us rather than be elusive. I don't think I ever said that. Not being elusive at all. If he came up with those 20 questions while studying Islam, I would assume he would know the basics. If he just got it from an anti-Islam website for "anti-Islam" material [they seem to be a dime a dozen with the same content] then he can go to those sites for answers. Quran Translation Intro Discover
A.A. wrote: What after I finish his 20 questions, do you have another long list that you would like me to get through? You could start with first 20, and stop with the crap. A.A. wrote: Yet a kid would understand what the orginal article said... And yet you did nothing to address the point I made. If you cannot teach, then quit whining to other people about learning it. And, if you cannot teach, you don't really know the subject matter to begin with and/or too lazy to teach (which probably means you don't really care and just looking to argue). A.A. wrote: I don't think I ever said that. I'm going to clue you in on something called the human mind. You don't have to flat-out say those words in order for us to pick up on it. So, let me explain this in small terms and ideas so you can understand it. You've claimed in your posts that your religion is complex and he needs to learn because he's the student. You say that you COULD teach him. As such, you're placing him in a subordinate position already -- which means you think you know about the subject matter more than he does. As such, when compaired to him you're all-knowing. Is this too complicated for you? Shall I go on? Now, since you think you know so much about it, then be more understanding and offer us your knowledge in the field rather then whine about us not understanding it. If you cannot do that, then you're just full of shit and not worth listening to. Jeremy Falcon
-
Shog9 wrote: I'm sorry, was this thread supposed to be a long string of replies pledging their loathing of wife-beating? Should i start a "Rape is Bad" thread, just so we can get that out of the way too? Don't let that knee-jerk kick you in the teeth... The issue was as it pertains to the regilion. Sure, you have your theories in place, but during your argument you downplayed the stupidity of the acceptance of it in that religion to stress your point (maybe it wasn't intentional, but that's how it was perceived). His points all along were, it's bad. And, having a religion that promotes it is worse. If you think actively promoting it (which your posts suggest) is on the same level as considering it taboo, you need a reality check man. Shog9 wrote: My wife, who went through a very long, very abusive relationship some years ago, generally attributes the acceptance of abuse in this country to low self-esteem, women basing their self-worth on their ability to please whatever asshole they manage to shack up with... For one, sorry to hear that. For two, I agree with your thoughts regarding it in this plane. But, at least this country considers it bad and not ok. You can't tell me it's the same when we don't endorse it. Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote: His points all along were, it's bad. And, having a religion that promotes it is worse. If you think actively promoting it (which your posts suggest) is on the same level as considering it taboo, you need a reality check man. I really didn't mean to imply that there's no difference between discouraging violence and permitting it... but at least a few people have taken it that way, so i suppose i'll have to be more clear next time. :-O I guess what got me to reply to this in the first place was the tone of some of kgaddy's early posts. Frankly, i'm quite disgusted by the idea of a religious leader publishing a book on wife-beating technique... but even as i read it, i was thinking, "i wonder how many women's lives here would be improved if their partners limited the abuse to light strokes"... It's an ugly thought, i know. I certainly don't want to be a part of a culture that allows for that sort of thing. Yet, it's inescapable. A story that's been in the news here recently: they're re-opening the case of a woman who died from internal injuries a few years back. Her husband later re-married, and was then killed by hit-men hired by his new wife - she claimed abuse in the trial, that she was too scared to leave, that this was the only way out she knew of. From what my wife tells me, she had a good deal of support from those who knew her, and had known the man's previous wife... we're talking severe, routine abuse... but he was a cop, and that counts for a lot. We'll see what comes out from the new autopsy.
-
A.A. wrote: What after I finish his 20 questions, do you have another long list that you would like me to get through? You could start with first 20, and stop with the crap. A.A. wrote: Yet a kid would understand what the orginal article said... And yet you did nothing to address the point I made. If you cannot teach, then quit whining to other people about learning it. And, if you cannot teach, you don't really know the subject matter to begin with and/or too lazy to teach (which probably means you don't really care and just looking to argue). A.A. wrote: I don't think I ever said that. I'm going to clue you in on something called the human mind. You don't have to flat-out say those words in order for us to pick up on it. So, let me explain this in small terms and ideas so you can understand it. You've claimed in your posts that your religion is complex and he needs to learn because he's the student. You say that you COULD teach him. As such, you're placing him in a subordinate position already -- which means you think you know about the subject matter more than he does. As such, when compaired to him you're all-knowing. Is this too complicated for you? Shall I go on? Now, since you think you know so much about it, then be more understanding and offer us your knowledge in the field rather then whine about us not understanding it. If you cannot do that, then you're just full of shit and not worth listening to. Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote: You could start with first 20, and stop with the crap. If you're willing to stop I might be willing to ask you 40 questions. Jeremy Falcon wrote: And yet you did nothing to address the point I made. If you cannot teach, then quit whining to other people about learning it. And, if you cannot teach, you don't really know the subject matter to begin with and/or too lazy to teach (which probably means you don't really care and just looking to argue). It is pointless to go beyond if a person can not read an article that was referenced. Jeremy Falcon wrote: You've claimed in your posts that your religion is complex Did I? I am making clear he obviously is missing the basics. Jeremy Falcon wrote: You say that you COULD teach him. As such, you're placing him in a subordinate position already -- which means you think you know about the subject matter more than he does. As such, when compaired to him you're all-knowing. Is this too complicated for you? Shall I go on? And asking to read one article is not a hard task for those who don't know much about a subject and want to learn. Jeremy Falcon wrote: Now, since you think you know so much about it, then be more understanding and offer us your knowledge in the field rather then whine about us not understanding it. If you cannot do that, then you're just full of sh*t and not worth listening to. Why is it such a big deal to ask someone to read the article? If that was done we could have moved on to either details or other aspects of the case oh well. Quran Translation Intro Discover
-
A.A. wrote: Not being elusive at all. Really? And yet, he asked you a simple yes or no question that you did not provide a direct answer to until, like, 20 posts later. That's not being elusive? Admittedly, A.A. wrote: Is your mom still in prision? Same kind of question. If it were the same kind of question, I wouldn't blame you in not answering it directly. For review, the question was, kgaddy wrote: Is this not true? A Muslim man is allowed to beat his wife or wives. - Qura'anic dictum. Is it true or not? yes or no Now, relating it to you mom in prison analogy, I would rate the question more like, "Would you send your dad to prison if he beat your mom?", not, "Is your mom still in prison?" The question may still be hard to answer, but if my dad beat my mom, I would get him as far away from my mom as possible. YES, I would send him to prison. But you could not answer his question for quite some time. You call that not being elusive? Danny -- modified at 11:41 Friday 30th September, 2005
bugDanny wrote: But you could not answer his question for quite some time. You call that not being elusive? The answer was in the article [as I repeated over and over], just wanted to get him to that point so we can have a discussion. Oh well. Quran Translation Intro Discover
-
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.
I realize your trying to make a point in your reply, and the idea came across. Though I thought I would point out slap would be considered deviant Under a strict application of the doctrines stated in A.A.'s first link Alot of people whose only information about Islam is the TV are usually suprised and doubt everything that doesn't make Islam an extremely horrible thing. So in our case the toothbrush part [actually the word is Miswak which is what they brush their teeth with in certain parts of the world, so not 100% a toothbrush but almost same size] is ignored because don't understand that it really is what it says. Quran Translation Intro Discover
-
A.A. wrote: f he came up with those 20 questions while studying Islam, I would assume he would know the basics. If he just got it from an anti-Islam website for "anti-Islam" material [they seem to be a dime a dozen with the same content] then he can go to those sites for answers. Does it matter where I got them? It just matters if they are true? I would think you would jump at the chance to give me a counter point if these statments were wrong. But you have not, which makes me believe they are true. So, if they are wrong, please tell me so I can feel better about Islam.
kgaddy wrote: So, if they are wrong, please tell me so I can feel better about Islam. So whats your religion, So I can ask you my 20 unrelated questions so I can feel better about it. After those 20 are over, I have 20 more. Quran Translation Intro Discover
-
BTW, 'en mass' is a phrase we have taken from french, so you should use the french 'en' instead of 'in'. Nunc est bibendum
fat_boy wrote: BTW, 'en mass' is a phrase we have taken from french, so you should use the french 'en' instead of 'in'. I have always seen it 'en', but for some reason I typed 'in.' Didn't know the French bit. Thanks for the pointer. Quran Translation Intro Discover
-
bugDanny wrote: So, violence (particularly, beating of wives) is acceptable in Islamic society? Looks like it (i've no first-hand knowledge, but the links from both kgaddy and A.A. pretty much admit that much).
Shog9 wrote: Looks like it (i've no first-hand knowledge, but the links from both kgaddy and A.A. pretty much admit that much). Unless you accept that our laws in the states allows violence against women, I don't see how you can get the from the article I referenced. Seriously if you believe that I want you to reread the article, and if you still believe that oh well. Quran Translation Intro Discover
-
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20050929-121303-6619r.htm Why do these women put up with this?:wtf:
-
bugDanny wrote: But you could not answer his question for quite some time. You call that not being elusive? The answer was in the article [as I repeated over and over], just wanted to get him to that point so we can have a discussion. Oh well. Quran Translation Intro Discover
A.A. wrote: [as I repeated over and over] No offense, but usually in a debate or argument, you quote your sources, but you state your side yourself. In this case, if you meant no, say "NO" and also post the link to the article. Otherwise, it makes you look like your trying to be elusive. A.A. wrote: just wanted to get him to that point so we can have a discussion So, if you had stated answers clearly, noting your article for backing and such, then you can continue with the discussion. Otherwise, your right, you can't have a discussion if you're not willing to respond to anything they say. Danny The stupidity of others amazes me!
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: You could start with first 20, and stop with the crap. If you're willing to stop I might be willing to ask you 40 questions. Jeremy Falcon wrote: And yet you did nothing to address the point I made. If you cannot teach, then quit whining to other people about learning it. And, if you cannot teach, you don't really know the subject matter to begin with and/or too lazy to teach (which probably means you don't really care and just looking to argue). It is pointless to go beyond if a person can not read an article that was referenced. Jeremy Falcon wrote: You've claimed in your posts that your religion is complex Did I? I am making clear he obviously is missing the basics. Jeremy Falcon wrote: You say that you COULD teach him. As such, you're placing him in a subordinate position already -- which means you think you know about the subject matter more than he does. As such, when compaired to him you're all-knowing. Is this too complicated for you? Shall I go on? And asking to read one article is not a hard task for those who don't know much about a subject and want to learn. Jeremy Falcon wrote: Now, since you think you know so much about it, then be more understanding and offer us your knowledge in the field rather then whine about us not understanding it. If you cannot do that, then you're just full of sh*t and not worth listening to. Why is it such a big deal to ask someone to read the article? If that was done we could have moved on to either details or other aspects of the case oh well. Quran Translation Intro Discover
A.A. wrote: Why is it such a big deal to ask someone to read the article? Read my other post about how in a debate, or even when your teaching somebody, as you claimed to wish to do, then you state the issues/answer yourself, using the article, or the Quran, or whatever else to back you. You state the answers, making quotes from the article. Instead of getting so pissed off that people didn't want to read your article, you could instead make quotes from or references to the article when answering questions; this would be showing them that all the answers really were in the article, instead of just making it sound like you don't know what you're talking about and are throwing other people's words at them. Danny The stupidity of others amazes me!
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: His points all along were, it's bad. And, having a religion that promotes it is worse. If you think actively promoting it (which your posts suggest) is on the same level as considering it taboo, you need a reality check man. I really didn't mean to imply that there's no difference between discouraging violence and permitting it... but at least a few people have taken it that way, so i suppose i'll have to be more clear next time. :-O I guess what got me to reply to this in the first place was the tone of some of kgaddy's early posts. Frankly, i'm quite disgusted by the idea of a religious leader publishing a book on wife-beating technique... but even as i read it, i was thinking, "i wonder how many women's lives here would be improved if their partners limited the abuse to light strokes"... It's an ugly thought, i know. I certainly don't want to be a part of a culture that allows for that sort of thing. Yet, it's inescapable. A story that's been in the news here recently: they're re-opening the case of a woman who died from internal injuries a few years back. Her husband later re-married, and was then killed by hit-men hired by his new wife - she claimed abuse in the trial, that she was too scared to leave, that this was the only way out she knew of. From what my wife tells me, she had a good deal of support from those who knew her, and had known the man's previous wife... we're talking severe, routine abuse... but he was a cop, and that counts for a lot. We'll see what comes out from the new autopsy.
Shog9 wrote: but he was a cop, and that counts for a lot. Man, I loathe those type of people. No greater sign of a weak man than one who gets a bit of authority and lets it go to his head ya know. I just wish they'd make cops take psych tests or something before they were able to join the force. The bad ones do nothing except make the good ones look bad. Well, right or wrong, I'm glad that cop is no longer with us. Jeremy Falcon
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: You could start with first 20, and stop with the crap. If you're willing to stop I might be willing to ask you 40 questions. Jeremy Falcon wrote: And yet you did nothing to address the point I made. If you cannot teach, then quit whining to other people about learning it. And, if you cannot teach, you don't really know the subject matter to begin with and/or too lazy to teach (which probably means you don't really care and just looking to argue). It is pointless to go beyond if a person can not read an article that was referenced. Jeremy Falcon wrote: You've claimed in your posts that your religion is complex Did I? I am making clear he obviously is missing the basics. Jeremy Falcon wrote: You say that you COULD teach him. As such, you're placing him in a subordinate position already -- which means you think you know about the subject matter more than he does. As such, when compaired to him you're all-knowing. Is this too complicated for you? Shall I go on? And asking to read one article is not a hard task for those who don't know much about a subject and want to learn. Jeremy Falcon wrote: Now, since you think you know so much about it, then be more understanding and offer us your knowledge in the field rather then whine about us not understanding it. If you cannot do that, then you're just full of sh*t and not worth listening to. Why is it such a big deal to ask someone to read the article? If that was done we could have moved on to either details or other aspects of the case oh well. Quran Translation Intro Discover
A.A. wrote: Did I? I am making clear he obviously is missing the basics. And you obviously missed the point I made. You still thought yourself superior to him, and that was my point. Besides, he ADMITTED to not knowing everything about it and yet you failed to enlighten him. So, you've done nothing useful with your words here. A.A. wrote: Why is it such a big deal to ask someone to read the article? If that was done we could have moved on to either details or other aspects of the case oh well. Right, as long as he agrees with you I'm sure. Jeremy Falcon
-
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20050929-121303-6619r.htm Why do these women put up with this?:wtf:
Mohamed Kamal Mustafa, don't the know how to spell Camel in Spain? I like the bit about refraining from sex to teach the woman a lesson. 97.623% (I love randomly generated statistics) of women world wide would like this, 100% of female circumcised muslim women couldn't give a shit as they will never have an orgasm anyway. Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So i had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash 24/04/2004
-
kgaddy wrote: So, if they are wrong, please tell me so I can feel better about Islam. So whats your religion, So I can ask you my 20 unrelated questions so I can feel better about it. After those 20 are over, I have 20 more. Quran Translation Intro Discover
A.A. wrote: So whats your religion, So I can ask you my 20 unrelated questions so I can feel better about it. After those 20 are over, I have 20 more. Ah.. Well what religion casues you be concerned. What religion is preaching about killing musilums, and other non-believers. If that that religion is mine then we can talk. You still avoid the answers. Oh, those questuibs were related and you know it.
-
Do you hate Arabs because you're Jewish or because you know they might be closely related to you?
JWood wrote: Do you hate Arabs because you're Jewish or because you know they might be closely related to you? I am not Jewish and I do not hate Arabs. Now if you are in a religion that believe in killing me because I am a non-beliver or infidel, then I'm not going to be asking you over for dinner.