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

[beenie]

This was a PM to ssainhu, but I realised it is a more appropriate and honest last post -

I am sorry to have upset you.

My post did say that 'I can see that you are a decent person and a muslim', so no, I don't put 1.5 billion people in a xenophobic basket.

I am just as distressed ( in fact more so) about the effect of free market capitalism/consumerism on the human psyche, and even worse the catastrophic effects of that system on the entire ecosystem. That doesn't mean I hate all consumers. But I do think any of them who don't realise the damage they are doing are either in denial or plain stupid, or just hopelessly selfish (or maybe all three).

Humans make horrible, huge mistakes. Islam and rampant consumerism are just two of many. And people know that desperately bad mistakes have been made, and at least down deep realise that we have all but destroyed our potential for happiness, and on the way are causing mass extinctions which will lead to total ecological collapse, but they seem incapable of making the changes required.

And they can see that their ideas of God and politics/economics are completely failing them, in fact are making things worse.

Realising that we are persisting in error makes people crazy and vindictive, and self-loathing, and this self-loathing is projected outward onto 'the other'.

I 'backed out' because I am overwhelmed by despair about all this and sick in the heart and seriously over discussing it.

Goodbye and good luck.

I'm sorry you feel this way. You didn't upset me, no worries.

I like to try and see the positive and come up with solutions. Sure, people have the ability to be barbaric and selfish, but I we all resign ourselves to the negative energy these people thrive on, then we are contributing to the downfall of humanity.

People who kill and make over trivial matters will always exist; unfortunately they seem to be getting louder and more visible. Our job is to keep them in their places and suppress them the best we can, through not letting them win.

 

[Godobeyer]

AmbiguousGuy

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

all of us , first of all whom been offened , and whom feel that the others been offened.

for exemple, as i understand , most of non-muslim here condemned the morkery carton and mockery film because they feel that muslims been offened .

edited : i heard some suggest a COPY RIGHT of all religions .
i agree with that

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

the muslims and non-muslims whom knows well Islam .

Will that committee be female Western atheists?

Or ayatollahs?

sorry ,i don't understand your point here .
btw ayatollah is title of islamic leader used by shais , i am sunni .

 

[Godobeyer]

quran tell us.

that's right .
old scholars explain it it's "soft-beat" by SIWAK.


YES i agree with Ssainhu, when she said prophet Muhammad (pbuh) should be our Ideal person , because he never soft-beat his wives , BUT he and also there is VALID hadith about this ,but Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) explain the verse of Quran, when/why/how to soft-beat the wife .

sister Ssainhu :
EDITED : I believe if the soft-beat used in the right time and place INSTEAD of divorce .especialy when it's used as solution not problem (instead of divorce ) .it's required, i believe it's a solution of mariage problem ,BUT if it's use to abuse the wife (becomes the problem) it's not required and certainly forbiden .

 

[Godobeyer]

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 ?



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 ?

my point is
some haters of Islam talking about islam , they use True info but they use to lie among TRUE info ,about islam or exagertate .

my point is if you want to ask about islam use to ask muslims sites not anti-islam sites .

 

[Breathe]

that's right .
old scholars explain it it's "soft-beat" by SIWAK.

"Soft beating" a siwak is no more commendable or respectable.

EDITED : I believe if the soft-beat used in the right time and place INSTEAD of divorce .especialy when it's used as solution not problem (instead of divorce ) .it's required, i believe it's a solution of mariage problem ,BUT if it's use to abuse the wife (becomes the problem) it's not required and certainly forbiden .

Would you want to be beaten for disobedience?

If not, why advocate its use for others?

 

[beenie]

Here's what I can tell you:

If my husband or I ever get wind that some man felt the need to "discipline" one of my daughters, even by "tapping" them with a miswak, suffice it to say that my daughters would no longer be married to that man... and he may have trouble walking. There is no excuse for raising a hand to a woman.

Violence escalates. A light tap becomes a smack, and a smack becomes a punch, and so on, until it becomes a full-on beating because the woman DARED to "go out without asking".

Time to grow up, people.

 

[beenie]

sister Ssainhu :
EDITED : I believe if the soft-beat used in the right time and place INSTEAD of divorce .especialy when it's used as solution not problem (instead of divorce ) .it's required, i believe it's a solution of mariage problem ,BUT if it's use to abuse the wife (becomes the problem) it's not required and certainly forbiden .

This is despicable. Where do you draw the line between "soft-beat" (which is horrible) and abuse? Soft beat IS abuse. 100% ABUSE.

See my post above, please.

 

[gnostic]

that's right .
old scholars explain it it's "soft-beat" by SIWAK.


YES i agree with Ssainhu, when she said prophet Muhammad (pbuh) should be our Ideal person , because he never soft-beat his wives , BUT he and also there is VALID hadith about this ,but Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) explain the verse of Quran, when/why/how to soft-beat the wife .

sister Ssainhu :
EDITED : I believe if the soft-beat used in the right time and place INSTEAD of divorce .especialy when it's used as solution not problem (instead of divorce ) .it's required, i believe it's a solution of mariage problem ,BUT if it's use to abuse the wife (becomes the problem) it's not required and certainly forbiden .

Domestic violence is never acceptable - PERIOD!

Hitting wife is never acceptable no matter what religion you follow or what culture you were brought up. It is violent crime.

If you have no self-control whatsoever, then it is far better for you divorce her than to hit her until she submit to you.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Similar to how addictions start with a 'little amount', domestic abuse seems to escalate from ''discipline'' into blatant physical violence.

I don't think I'd marry a woman who saw it fit for men to raise their hands against women. Those are not things that I'd want instilled in my children's minds in any way.

 

[Rakhel]

Domestic violence is never acceptable - PERIOD!

Hitting wife is never acceptable no matter what religion you follow or what culture you were brought up. It is violent crime.

If you have no self-control whatsoever, then it is far better for you divorce her than to hit her until she submit to you.

IF I may borrow your words...
A better solution is that if you have no self-control whatsoever, then it is far better to not get married at all.

 

[Twig pentagram]

I AM Pantheist and I hate this law.

 

[Twig pentagram]

I just noticed that no christians or people practicing judaism on this forum agree with the law..........Yet.

 

[gnostic]

IF I may borrow your words...A better solution is that if you have no self-control whatsoever, then it is far better to not get married at all.

I don't disagree with that. You're right, it would be better.

Still if you're already married (not "you" personally) then it would be better for husband to divorce his wife than for him to hit her.

The thing is that no couple actually know what marriage is like until they live with each other. Neither husband nor wife can predict if he would hit her.

But for someone, like truthspeaker & godobeyer, who would blindly followed their interpretations of their Qur'an that it is ok to hit their wives - then yes, they shouldn't be married at all. To them, wives are no better than slaves or dogs. They don't deserve to be married or have children.

 

[gnostic]

Similar to how addictions start with a 'little amount', domestic abuse seems to escalate from ''discipline'' into blatant physical violence.

I don't think I'd marry a woman who saw it fit for men to raise their hands against women. Those are not things that I'd want instilled in my children's minds in any way.

All so true, esp the 1st statement.

Domestic violence can also lead to murder or - in some cultures - to honor killing.

Recent news showed how horrific assaults can be. Some muslim husbands (and even ex-husbands) would disfigure their (ex-) wives' faces, by battering their faces or throwing acid on them. If you believe eye-for-eye as they do, then their faces should be disfigured too.

 

[Draka]

I don't know if this has been posted here yet or not, but if it hasn't...it should.

POWER and CONTROL
Abusers believe they have a right to control their partners in the abusive relationships by utilizing the tactics found in the power and control wheel, by:

Telling them what to do and expecting obedience
Using force to maintain power and control over partners
Feeling their partners have no right to challenge their desire for power and control
Feeling justified making the victim comply
Blaming the abuse on the partner and not accepting responsibility for wrongful acts.
The characteristics shown in thepower and control wheel are examples of how this power and control are demonstrated and enacted against the victim.

Isolation

limiting outside involvement
making another avoid people/friends/family by deliberately embarrassing or humiliating them in front of others
expecting another to report every move and activity
restricting use of the car
moving residences

Emotional and Mental Abuse

putting another down/name-calling
ignoring or discounting activities and accomplishments
withholding approval or affection
making another feel as if they are crazy in public or through private humiliation
unreasonable jealousy and suspicion
playing mind games

Economic and Financial Abuse

preventing another from getting or keeping a job
withholding funds
spending family income without consent and/or making the partner struggle to pay bills
not letting someone know of or have access to family/personal income
forcing someone to ask for basic necessities

Intimidation

driving recklessly to make another feel threatened or endangered
destroying property or cherished possessions
making another afraid by using looks/actions/gestures
throwing objects as an expression of anger to make another feel threatened
displaying weapons

Using Children or Pets

threatening to take the children away
making the partner feel guilty about the children
abusing children or pets to punish the partner
using the children to relay messages

Using Priviledges (perceived or cultural)

treating another like a servant
making all the big decisions
being the one to define male and female roles
acting like the master or queen of the castle

Sexual Abuse

sex on demand or sexual withholding
physical assaults during sexual intercourse
spousal rapes or non-consensual sex
sexually degrading language
denying reproductive freedom

Threats

threats of violence against significant third parties
threats to commit physical or sexual harm
threats to commit property destruction
threats to commit suicide or murder

Physical Abuse

biting/scratching
slapping/punching
kicking/stomping
throwing objects at another
locking another in a closet or utilizing other confinement
sleep interference and/or deliberately exhausting the partner with unreasonable demands and lack of rest
deprivation of heat or food
shoving another down steps or into objects
assaults with weapons such as knives/guns/other objects

Source: Power and Control Wheel

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

AmbiguousGuy
all of us , first of all whom been offened , and whom feel that the others been offened.

You must realize that your answer makes no sense.

If we let the offended ones decide, then they will always decide that they have been offended. Every movie will be banned. Every movie offends someone. So if we allow the offended ones decide about banning, then every movie will be banned.

Do you agree? Do you want to have no more movies (or books) in the world?

You also say that 'all of us' should decide. So you mean that if I am offended by a movie, I can call for a worldwide vote -- to see if the movie should be banned? Everyone in the world gets to vote?

I'm sorry, but both of your answers are unworkable.

So I ask you again: Who will be in charge of deciding whether a movie is offensive and should be banned? Specificallly. I need you to tell me who will be on that committee. Who will appoint the members of that committee?

for exemple, as i understand , most of non-muslim here condemned the morkery carton and mockery film because they feel that muslims been offened .

Sure. But none of us want to ban it. So if you allow us to vote, we will not ban the movie.

edited : i heard some suggest a COPY RIGHT of all religions .i agree with that

I'm sorry, but I have no idea what that means. A copyright? Do you understand what that term means in English?

sorry ,i don't understand your point here .

I mean: Who -- exactly who -- will decide whether a certain movie has offended a certain religion?

Please don't answer 'everyone'. That makes no sense. The world population cannot vote every time someone claims to be offended by a movie.

Please don't answer 'the ones who are offended.' That makes no sense. It would mean that we cannot have anymore movies, books, cartoons, debate forums, etc.

You need to explain how the UN will make a committee to enforce the law. Who will be the judge of offense and lies?

 

[Godobeyer]

sister Ssnaihu , I read a long Tafsir of Ibn Kathir , and Al-Qurtobi ,AlSaadi , Aljalain (it's resume)

Nashiz: is statut when the wife becomes the arrogant/high , which she had no respect to her man .
first step ask her and explain to her this is wrong way of treating , from the Quran and Hadith, second step leave her alone in the bed, thrid step beat her softly ,"beat not harm or make marks in the skin" as sign of blame .four step deal congress family (member from her family and member from his family) ,if ALL these steps failed , final step divorce.

there is Hadith about Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) women ask him to ask Sahaba, to stop beat them !!! , and He ask the sahaba "Don't beat your women" , then he explain how the verse , it's soft beat

 

[Looncall]

sister Ssnaihu , I read a long Tafsir of Ibn Kathir , and Al-Qurtobi ,AlSaadi , Aljalain (it's resume)

Nashiz: is statut when the wife becomes the arrogant/high , which she had no respect to her man .
first step ask her and explain to her this is wrong way of treating , from the Quran and Hadith, second step leave her alone in the bed, thrid step beat her softly ,"beat not harm or make marks in the skin" as sign of blame .four step deal congress family (member from her family and member from his family) ,if ALL these steps failed , final step divorce.

there is Hadith about Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) women ask him to ask Sahaba, to stop beat them !!! , and He ask the sahaba "Don't beat your women" , then he explain how the verse , it's soft beat

You don't seem to get the point.

No matter what may be written in the quran or the hadiths, it is wrong to beat people. Ancient barbarities, even if written down, do not excuse present barbarities.

 

[Rakhel]

It a coward of a man that feels that he must beat his wife, no matter how hard, to put her into submission.
I mean, seriously, Doesn't "submission" mean to give of yourself freely?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I don't know how many times I've asked this, so it'll be the last time:

A wife-beating creed is highly insulting to women - and to men who find wife-beating barbaric.

Because it is insulting to an entire demographic, should the U.N. prohibit the creed because of its provocation?