Are you with UN "global" law prohibition the provocation "mock/insult/lie", about all religions ?

[Godobeyer]

So what do you think of this ? ( The chapter headings are all links btw )
Women In Islam

The Place of Women in Pure Islam

by M. Rafiqul-Haqq and P. Newton

1. Contents -
   Men's Superiority
   Women's Deficiencies
   What is a Woman?
   Husband's Rights
   Woman's Rights
   Man's Prerogatives
   The Significance of the Marriage Contract
   The Significance of the Dowry
   Spiritual Standing of Women
   Conclusion

I found this by googling the word 'Nashiz', after reading your last post. I'm not sure what most muslims would say about this article. I can't even tell if it is pro or anti Islam, or neither. Could be taken either way - but it seems to be fairly well documented, with extensive references.

Is it accurate Godobeyer ? This is a serious question. Does this article present views you endorse ?

Also to other muslims here - what do you think of this article ? Is it a fair summation ?

some of anti-islam sites useing fake info or exagerate .

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

sorry, for not reply for all the post and question , i don't have internet connect at home for months, i am now in cybercafe.

Just answer one question:

Who will be in charge of deciding who has offended and lied against another religion?

Will that committee be female Western atheists?

Or ayatollahs?

Specifically... who will decide whether someone has lied about Islam?

 

[tumbleweed41]

soft-beat wife "Nashiz".
cut the hand of the theif.
stone the adultery .
....etc

In my opinion, barbaric.

 

[Looncall]

That is an anti-Islam website; google "answering Christianity" and you'll see what I mean.

Are the references given in the article real ones? If they are, are the conclusions deduced from them accurate?

It may be an anti-islam website, but you still need to address the material.

 

[Draka]

Ah,that's mean i am right that you told me that you "rebuilding" your position twice (change your position twice)

Indeed ,you told me that you rebuilt(change) your position twice ,about wife-beat , that's why i asked you to post our PM dailogue here , but you don't agree !!!.

Indeed ,we had agreement about the wife-beating , you told me that agree with Quran but you don't agree with me in use it to wife beating when she get out without permission, and "you blame" me that i made the subject looks like beating the wife for any vanity/potty reason .and you have rebuilt (change) your position twice about this issue .

if you said that your rebuilding your position twice (change your opinion) about soft-beat, who is the responsible for the misunderstanding ? you or me ?

i have no problem to disagree with people or they disagree with me .
i am here to argue and debate with all people with all respect .but i don't respect the double stand opinion what ever their religion .


for me your stand is not clear ,in other thread too "woman on line " , sometimes you are with soft-beat and sometimes you are against.

I remember in that time , i sent you many PM, asked you to represent your clear opinion.
then when you argued with me, i posted our PMs in Islamic privet dir ,in that time the staffs asked me to remove them , because i posted them without your permission .

btw your recently PMs (your request) pop up me , are you with discuss them here ?
i find them very very intersting.


why i have no problem to post my PM dailogue in arabic, but you have?
then why you don't accuse me that i am LYING about you (in recently PM or in this thread) when i said you had double position in PM and thread ?!!!


I believe every one is responsible for his own opinion in thread or in PM.
if you told me an opinion in PM (PM in arabic) different then the opinion that you posting in this thread ,that's your reponsibility and your fault, NOT mind .
that's your problem that you informed me that you changed (rebuilt) your position (opinion) twice about the beat-wife .
because this confusing and double stand (opinion) and not clear opinion , let some people here called me "lair" .

Now this is what I call "off the handle".

Do you not think that perhaps what you have encountered here is miscommunication? Misunderstanding? That perhaps you thought what he was communicating to you was a stance that agreed with you because that's what you wanted to hear when, in fact, he was trying to explain to you something different?

DS is a good friend of mine. I don't think it a stretch to say we are close. I am a Pagan, American woman. I don't know what that may say to you that he has a friend like me, but let me assure you, he most definitely has respect for women and does not think them subservient to men nor deserving of "correction" through physical means. No matter how hard you may stamp your foot or yell your words in large bold letters.

 

[Breathe]

Hey , people , all the world know that Islamic laws:
soft-beat wife "Nashiz".
cut the hand of the theif.
stone the adultery .
....etc

why some people lie (make up) islam here .

Are you saying such actions are Islamic, or are you saying such actions are un-Islamic?

 

[beenie]

Are the references given in the article real ones? If they are, are the conclusions deduced from them accurate?

It may be an anti-islam website, but you still need to address the material.

Some are real, but altered by posting only part of a verse. Many of those Hadith are weak in the chain.

I'm not going to waste my breath addressing the nonsense spewed out by Islamaphobes. I am, however, willing to address those issues as they pertain to the Qur'an and AUTHENTIC Hadith. I think I've proven myself to not shy away from issues, and I'm no apologist either.

 

[Looncall]

Some are real, but altered by posting only part of a verse. Many of those Hadith are weak in the chain.

I'm not going to waste my breath addressing the nonsense spewed out by Islamaphobes. I am, however, willing to address those issues as they pertain to the Qur'an and AUTHENTIC Hadith. I think I've proven myself to not shy away from issues, and I'm no apologist either.

Many thanks.

 

[Kerr]

Hey , people , all the world know that Islamic laws:
soft-beat wife "Nashiz".
cut the hand of the theif.
stone the adultery .
....etc

why some people lie (make up) islam here .

Is it so hard to believe that someone might have a different idea of what is islamic then you? And I would also like to advice you to not take anything people post in here personally because that will just end with hurt feelings and possibly a locked thread.

 

[apophenia]

Quote:
Originally Posted by apophenia
So what do you think of this ? ( The chapter headings are all links btw )
Women In Islam

The Place of Women in Pure Islam

by M. Rafiqul-Haqq and P. Newton

1. Contents -
   Men's Superiority
   Women's Deficiencies
   What is a Woman?
   Husband's Rights
   Woman's Rights
   Man's Prerogatives
   The Significance of the Marriage Contract
   The Significance of the Dowry
   Spiritual Standing of Women
   Conclusion

I found this by googling the word 'Nashiz', after reading your last post. I'm not sure what most muslims would say about this article. I can't even tell if it is pro or anti Islam, or neither. Could be taken either way - but it seems to be fairly well documented, with extensive references.

Is it accurate Godobeyer ? This is a serious question. Does this article present views you endorse ?

Also to other muslims here - what do you think of this article ? Is it a fair summation ?

Originally Posted by Godobeyer
some of anti-islam sites useing fake info or exagerate .

That is not a useful response.

I am showing you some material which appears to be legitimate, and asking your opinion about it.

The material uses quotes from Quran and Hadiths, and works of scholars, all fully referenced.

I am aware that some sites exaggerate - so I am asking you, do you endorse the information from this site ?

 

[apophenia]

Originally Posted by Godobeyer
Hey , people , all the world know that Islamic laws:
soft-beat wife "Nashiz".
cut the hand of the theif.
stone the adultery .
....etc

why some people lie (make up) islam here .

Are you saying such actions are Islamic, or are you saying such actions are un-Islamic?

I did wonder the same thing, the way Godobeyer expressed it could be interpreted as sarcasm or just a straightforward statement.

I hope I get a response to my previous post, because it is hard to have a conversation when straightforward questions get either no answer or an impenetrable answer.

To other muslims here :

What do you think of the information from the 'Women in Islam' article linked in my previous post ?

Is the information presented accurate ? I presented it in response to Godobeyer's reference to 'nashiz' - I googled nashiz and it led me to this page, but I would like to know whether this page presents reliable and accurate information in the opinion of muslims.

Being told that some sites are unreliable, or exaggerate, is so general as to be useless to me - of course I know that. Does this site exaggerate, or is it a fair and balanced presentation of the material ?

 

[Breathe]

Being told that some sites are unreliable, or exaggerate, is so general as to be useless to me - of course I know that. Does this site exaggerate, or is it a fair and balanced presentation of the material ?

Even though I'm clearly not a Muslim, Answering-Islam is, IMO, a hate site; the equivalent of going to Stormfront for immigration information. The materials are not trustworthy there are they do exaggerate many claims. Others, they pick the more iffy translation, and seem to side more with fundamentalist mindsets.

For example, "beat your wives" of Surah 4:34 also means "forsake", or "leave". This would go with the theme of it, in my opinion:

As to those women on whose part you see ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly, if it is useful), but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance).​

This word is "leave", which fits in nicely. In my opinion, it makes more sense:

If you see your wife is being rebellious, unloving, dressing immodestly, etc, then first tell them how you feel, then distance yourselves from them temporarily (by refusing to share beds, probably by giving them the cold shoulder), and if that doesn't work, then there's no point in continuing a relationship, so leave them -- but, if they change their ways, don't hold it against them.​

I made a thread on this one in particular some time ago in the Islam DIR for Muslim women to discuss; overwhelmingly our female Muslim members denied it was 'beat' and would not accept a beating. Of course, it's humans who distort the text to their own ends and gains. Within the same surah, the following is said:

O you who believe! You are forbidden to inherit women against their will; and you should not treat them with harshness, that you may take away part of the Mahr you have given them, unless they commit open illegal sexual intercourse; and live with them honourably. If you dislike them, it may be that you dislike a thing and Allah brings through it a great deal of good.​

NB Mahr: dowry paid by the groom to the bride

Wouldn't beating a woman be treating her with harshness, after all?

The thread is in the Islam DIR: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/islam-dir/126192-opinions-sura-4-34-muslim-women.html

 

[TruthSpeaker]

How much and how hard can a Muslim wife beat her husband?

that unallowed. in islam men is boss in house. suppose in companies are employies can fire his boss?

 

[TruthSpeaker]

I do wonder though, and please forgive me if you have already addressed this, what is your stance on the OP?

I mean, since the UN has a thingy against beating women and you choose to ignore that UN thingy, why should any one pay any attention to any UN thingy?

Godobeyer has not even acknowledged that I brought this point up.
So I am most curious if you will also completely ignore it.

UN allow religion freedom to people, soft beat is included in relgion, so soft beat ok.

 

[McBell]

UN allow religion freedom to people, soft beat is included in relgion, so soft beat ok.

So the UN sanctions are pretty much worthless?
So why would you want a worthless UN sanction to protect your faith?

 

[Breathe]

UN allow religion freedom to people, soft beat is included in relgion, so soft beat ok.

Is soft beat is not included in religion? I think no. I think "soft beat" is a chauvinistic male interpretation of the word to keep women under control.

 

[Looncall]

that unallowed. in islam men is boss in house. suppose in companies are employies can fire his boss?

Sounds like it is time to get rid of islam then.

 

[TruthSpeaker]

So the UN sanctions are pretty much worthless?
So why would you want a worthless UN sanction to protect your faith?

UN saction is worth. soft beat is religious, UN support religious practice, so soft beat is legal per UN.

 

[TruthSpeaker]

Is soft beat is not included in religion? I think no. I think "soft beat" is a chauvinistic male interpretation of the word to keep women under control.

google translate

 

[McBell]

UN saction is worth. soft beat is religious, UN support religious practice, so soft beat is legal per UN.

UN sanctions are worthless if they make exceptions to accommodate religious beliefs.