is being a woman a sin in islam?

[Sufi]

unless you are a female...

[4:34]
MEN SHALL take full care of women with the bounties which God has bestowed more abundantly on the former than on the latter, and with what they may spend out of their possessions. And the righteous women are the truly devout ones, who guard the intimacy which God has [ordained to be] guarded.
And as for those women whose ill-will you have reason to fear, admonish them [first]; then leave them alone in bed; then beat them; and if thereupon they pay you heed, do not seek to harm them. Behold, God is indeed most high, great!


* v.34 : it., “more on some of them than on the others.” – The expression qawwām is an intensive form of qā’im (“one who is responsible for” or “takes care of” a thing or a person). Thus, qāma ‘ala ’l-mar’ah signifies “he undertook the maintenance of the woman” or “he maintained her” (see Lane VIII, 2995). The grammatical form qawwām is more comprehensive than qā’im, and combines the concepts of physical maintenance and protection as well as of moral responsibility: and it is because of the last-named factor that I have rendered this phrase as “men shall take full care of women.”
* Lit., “who guard that which cannot be perceived (al-ghayb) because God has [willed it to be] guarded.”
* The term nushūz (lit., “rebellion” – here rendered as “ill-will”) comprises every kind of deliberate bad behaviour of a wife towards her husband or of a husband towards his wife, including what is nowadays described as “mental cruelty”; with reference to the husband, it also denotes “ill-treatment,” in the physical sense, of his wife (cf. verse 128 of this sūrah). In this context, a wife’s “ill-will” implies a deliberate, persistent breach of her marital obligations.
* It is evident from many authentic Traditions that the Prophet himself intensely detested the idea of beating one’s wife, and said on more than one occasion, “Could any of you beat his wife as he would beat a slave, and then lie with her in the evening?” (Bukhārī and Muslim). According to another Tradition, he forbade the beating of any woman with the words, “Never beat God’s handmaidens” (Abū Dā’ūd, Nasā’ī, Ibn Mājah, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ibn Hibbān and Hākim, on the authority of Iyās ibn ‘Abd Allāh; Ibn Hibbān, on the authority of ‘Abd Allāh ibn ‘Abbās; and Bayhaqī, on the authority of Umm Kulthūm). When the above Qur’ān-verse authorizing the beating of a refractory wife was revealed, the Prophet is reported to have said: “I wanted one thing, but God has willed another thing – and what God has willed must be best” (see Manār V, 74). With all this, he stipulated in his sermon on the occasion of the Farewell Pilgrimage, shortly before his death, that beating should be resorted to only if the wife “has become guilty, in an obvious manner, of immoral conduct,” and that it should be done “in such a way as not to cause pain (ghayr mubarrih)”; authentic Traditions to this effect are found in Muslim, Tirmidhī, Abū Dā‘ūd, Nasā’ī and Ibn Mājah. On the basis of these Traditions, all the authorities stress that this “beating,” if resorted to at all, should be more or less symbolic – “with a toothbrush, or some such thing” (Tabarī, quoting the views of scholars of the earliest times), or even “with a folded handkerchief” (Rāzī and some of the greatest Muslim scholars (e.g., Ash-Shāfi‘&#299 are of the opinion that it is just barely permissible, and should preferably be avoided: and they justify this opinion by the Prophet’s personal feelings with regard to this problem.

http://www.altafsir.com/ViewTranslations.asp?Display=yes&SoraNo=4&Ayah=34&toAyah=34&Language=2&LanguageID=2&TranslationBook=7

 

[waitasec]

[4:34]
MEN SHALL take full care of women with the bounties which God has bestowed more abundantly on the former than on the latter, and with what they may spend out of their possessions. And the righteous women are the truly devout ones, who guard the intimacy which God has [ordained to be] guarded.
And as for those women whose ill-will you have reason to fear, admonish them [first]; then leave them alone in bed; then beat them; and if thereupon they pay you heed, do not seek to harm them. Behold, God is indeed most high, great!


* v.34 : it., “more on some of them than on the others.” – The expression qawwām is an intensive form of qā’im (“one who is responsible for” or “takes care of” a thing or a person). Thus, qāma ‘ala ’l-mar’ah signifies “he undertook the maintenance of the woman” or “he maintained her” (see Lane VIII, 2995). The grammatical form qawwām is more comprehensive than qā’im, and combines the concepts of physical maintenance and protection as well as of moral responsibility: and it is because of the last-named factor that I have rendered this phrase as “men shall take full care of women.”
* Lit., “who guard that which cannot be perceived (al-ghayb) because God has [willed it to be] guarded.”
* The term nushūz (lit., “rebellion” – here rendered as “ill-will”) comprises every kind of deliberate bad behaviour of a wife towards her husband or of a husband towards his wife, including what is nowadays described as “mental cruelty”; with reference to the husband, it also denotes “ill-treatment,” in the physical sense, of his wife (cf. verse 128 of this sūrah). In this context, a wife’s “ill-will” implies a deliberate, persistent breach of her marital obligations.
* It is evident from many authentic Traditions that the Prophet himself intensely detested the idea of beating one’s wife, and said on more than one occasion, “Could any of you beat his wife as he would beat a slave, and then lie with her in the evening?” (Bukhārī and Muslim). According to another Tradition, he forbade the beating of any woman with the words, “Never beat God’s handmaidens” (Abū Dā’ūd, Nasā’ī, Ibn Mājah, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ibn Hibbān and Hākim, on the authority of Iyās ibn ‘Abd Allāh; Ibn Hibbān, on the authority of ‘Abd Allāh ibn ‘Abbās; and Bayhaqī, on the authority of Umm Kulthūm). When the above Qur’ān-verse authorizing the beating of a refractory wife was revealed, the Prophet is reported to have said: “I wanted one thing, but God has willed another thing – and what God has willed must be best” (see Manār V, 74). With all this, he stipulated in his sermon on the occasion of the Farewell Pilgrimage, shortly before his death, that beating should be resorted to only if the wife “has become guilty, in an obvious manner, of immoral conduct,” and that it should be done “in such a way as not to cause pain (ghayr mubarrih)”; authentic Traditions to this effect are found in Muslim, Tirmidhī, Abū Dā‘ūd, Nasā’ī and Ibn Mājah. On the basis of these Traditions, all the authorities stress that this “beating,” if resorted to at all, should be more or less symbolic – “with a toothbrush, or some such thing” (Tabarī, quoting the views of scholars of the earliest times), or even “with a folded handkerchief” (Rāzī and some of the greatest Muslim scholars (e.g., Ash-Shāfi‘&#299 are of the opinion that it is just barely permissible, and should preferably be avoided: and they justify this opinion by the Prophet’s personal feelings with regard to this problem.

http://www.altafsir.com/ViewTranslations.asp?Display=yes&SoraNo=4&Ayah=34&toAyah=34&Language=2&LanguageID=2&TranslationBook=7

you can quote me the all you want
like i said, i don't care...the thing is the people that commit these horrid acts misinterpret it...they care enough to believe what they are doing is what allah wants them to do....

tell me this, the people that commit these crimes, is it not to ultimately save face with allah?
how many muslims are there that are not religious?
and what is the predominant religion?
isn't it normal to place speakers in the streets for mid day prayers or is that in my imagination?

"You're sleeping in a bed... finally... after two days and nights on a bus. You're finally getting the rest you've been longing for. You intended on sleeping in... until 11 AM or maybe even noon! You're in the middle of a good dream, when all of a sudden something wakes you up. There's a loud voice, singing something in a foreign language over a loud speaker. It's loud enough for the entire city to hear it. Maybe it's time to get up, you shake your head in confusion. No, it's only 4 AM. What in the world could be going on to broadcast a call to wake up the city at 4 AM? Maybe there's some kind of emergency. You rush to the window, but there is no commotion in the streets. Within minutes, the man finishes his song and the microphone is turned off."

Muslim Devotion: Prayers Five Times A Day

 

[Badran]

thank you badran.

let me ask you this; those same people that believe the death penalty is justified, for those 3 reasons you disagree with, are they not the same people that would commit honor killings?

You're welcome.

I know it might seem as if people who would hold that position, or hold these beliefs would be capable of doing something like honor killing, but i can tell you from experience that its not like that at all. The mentality and reasons which people have while holding these beliefs are not similar to start with. You must put in mind first that the fact that these rules are not put to action today (except on rare occasions in a couple of countries), tends to make the issue trivial for a lot of Muslims. This is something they don't deal with in their lives. They have never seen a gay person, an adulterer or a convert being put to death, Its not a subject that they give much thinking. Also don't forget that not all muslims are religious to start with. Meaning that not all muslims really care very much about learning a lot about Islam or deciding an opinion on a certain religious matter. And this being a trivial matter for them, they just accept it without a lot of questioning.

As for people who hold these beliefs with conviction, it still doesn't mean that they would want to execute someone themselves, let alone do something like honor killings. I know a lot of Muslims who used to believe converts should be killed for example, but yet they would have never been able to kill someone themselves. My point is it is not necessary at all that anyone who hold these beliefs would be capable of killing people.

As Abibi said also, they can't because honor killings is condemned in Islam, and because you can't take the law into your own hands.

 

[Badran]

you can quote me the all you want
like i said, i don't care...the thing is the people that commit these horrid acts misinterpret it...they care enough to believe what they are doing is what allah wants them to do....

So is your question wether or not honor killings is Islamic or is it wether or not people do these things?

Or in other words, is your question " Is being a woman a sin in Islam" or " do some muslims treat women as if its a sin to be a woman"?

 

[waitasec]

You're welcome.

I know it might seem as if people who would hold that position, or hold these beliefs would be capable of doing something like honor killing, but i can tell you from experience that its not like that at all. The mentality and reasons which people have while holding these beliefs are not similar to start with. You must put in mind first that the fact that these rules are not put to action today (except on rare occasions in a couple of countries), tends to make the issue trivial for a lot of Muslims. This is something they don't deal with in their lives. They have never seen a gay person, an adulterer or a convert being put to death, Its not a subject that they give much thinking. Also don't forget that not all muslims are religious to start with. Meaning that not all muslims really care very much about learning a lot about Islam or deciding an opinion on a certain religious matter. And this being a trivial matter for them, they just accept it without a lot of questioning.

As for people who hold these beliefs with conviction, it still doesn't mean that they would want to execute someone themselves, let alone do something like honor killings. I know a lot of Muslims who used to believe converts should be killed for example, but yet they would have never been able to kill someone themselves. My point is it is not necessary at all that anyone who hold these beliefs would be capable of killing people.

As Abibi said also, they can't because honor killings is condemned in Islam, and because you can't take the law into your own hands.

my husband used to visit algeria a lot.
he was exposed to a very religious community where
men would stop whatever they were doing and pray 5 times a day
so my understanding is that muslims are religious and the religion is islam...
even if the quran explicitly said honor killings are wrong it also says do not kill any one unless it's in the pursuit of justice.
the bible says women are to be ruled by men
the NT says women ought to be quiet in the church yet here in the western world we have adopted human rights and women are not ruled by men (there are laws that protect women's equality) and women can be a pastor...
my point is how interwoven the muslim community is with islam regardless of the interpretation...and muslims do not agree on interpretation either, which makes this incredibly dubious.
however, one thing that is constant is how women are not equal in these muslim communities where you find these violent acts against women
no matter what the quran says... because it can and has been twisted to justify the injustice.
just like the bible has been used to justify injustices...even today.

 

[waitasec]

So is your question wether or not honor killings is Islamic or is it wether or not people do these things?

Or in other words, is your question " Is being a woman a sin in Islam" or " do some muslims treat women as if its a sin to be a woman"?

my question is...
why are women seen as "weaker" or "the cause of temptation"?

the men in the quran/bible hold the standard.
when women are being described it is always in the context of being subjected to men.
be obedient...to whom...her husband?
if a women is standing up for herself the quran tells the man it's ok to hit her and to ignore her until she gives in...
well, where in the quran does it say that a women has a right to hit her husband?
or husbands obey your wives?

 

[Looncall]

As Abibi said also, they can't because honor killings is condemned in Islam, and because you can't take the law into your own hands.

Yet muslims constantly do take the law into their own hands. Just look at all the fatally violent protesting and sectarian violence that is going on.

What counts is what people actually do.

 

[Badran]

my husband used to visit algeria a lot.
he was exposed to a very religious community where
men would stop whatever they were doing and pray 5 times a day
so my understanding is that muslims are religious and the religion is islam...

I wish all or most muslims were religious, but that quite simply is just not the case. Prayer is called for five times a day, and some people go to pray. If you went into a mosque any time of the year, and then went to a mosque again but in Ramadan, you'd understand what i'm talking about. In the normal days, few muslims are at the mosque. In ramadan, they fill mosques. Point being that not all muslims are religious at all, ask any muslim here and they'll tell you. Also, prayers, fasting etc.. don't necessarily mean one is into learning or studying religion in depth and making opinions on controversial matters. Lots of people pray and fast but they know little about Islam, and their knowledge is deeply affected by what they are told. They do not have the interest to spend time studying more about their religion, which makes it harder for them to make up opinions of their own, particularly in matters that has little to no effect on their lives, such as the 3 rules i mentioned earlier.

even if the quran explicitly said honor killings are wrong it also says do not kill any one unless it's in the pursuit of justice.
the bible says women are to be ruled by men
the NT says women ought to be quiet in the church yet here in the western world we have adopted human rights and women are not ruled by men (there are laws that protect women's equality) and women can be a pastor...
my point is how interwoven the muslim community is with islam regardless of the interpretation...and muslims do not agree on interpretation either, which makes this incredibly dubious.
however, one thing that is constant is how women are not equal in these muslim communities where you find these violent acts against women
no matter what the quran says... because it can and has been twisted to justify the injustice.
just like the bible has been used to justify injustices...even today.

A lot of things can be used badly. In case of books such as the Quran or the bible, some people naturally would try to argue or justify certain things under its umbrella. The point is though, in this particular case, (honor killings), its simply not possible. And by that i don't mean that nobody would try, or that nobody believes that honor killings are okay in Islam, may be there is a maniac out there who thinks honor killings are actually justified under Islam. However, my point is that for muslims this is a very clear subject, honor killings are simply condemned in any way you look at it.

Also, please put in mind that not every person who tries to justify something bad under the Quran, necessarily really believes that. Meaning that certainly some people intentionally misinterpret or represent the meaning of certain verses to suit their proposes. An example, a verse that means that men are responsible to provide certain things for women, would be interpreted by some, to mean that men are superior or have authority over a woman. If you're trying to argue wether or not something in particular is Islamic or not, that is what we're doing now. If however you're talking about the fact the some muslims are doing these things you mention, then sure. But that alone doesn't mean it is justified under Islam.

 

[Badran]

my question is...
why are women seen as "weaker" or "the cause of temptation"?

Seen like that by whom?

If you're referring to all or most muslims, then they are not viewed like that at all. If you're talking about some muslims, then in that case the answer is they are viewed like that for various reasons. The main one, in my opinion would be as mentioned before culture. Put in mind like you yourself said women where viewed like that also by people who weren't muslims, this is simply something that has happened and is happening all the time. Women have been treated unjustly in all kinds of cultures and still are.

the men in the quran/bible hold the standard.
when women are being described it is always in the context of being subjected to men.
be obedient...to whom...her husband?
if a women is standing up for herself the quran tells the man it's ok to hit her and to ignore her until she gives in...
well, where in the quran does it say that a women has a right to hit her husband?
or husbands obey your wives?

There are a couple of short threads in which the verse you have in mind have been discussed, alongside other issues concerned with women in the Quran. I could link one for you if you like.

 

[Badran]

Yet muslims constantly do take the law into their own hands. Just look at all the fatally violent protesting and sectarian violence that is going on.

Of course, nobody denied that some muslims do these things.

What counts is what people actually do.

Counts in what way?

I mean i'm getting confused here about what we're talking about. Are you saying that just because some muslims do bad things, means that these things are justifiable in Islam?

 

[Starsoul]

Yet muslims constantly do take the law into their own hands. Just look at all the fatally violent protesting and sectarian violence that is going on.

What counts is what people actually do.

Keeping the racist violence of the west to one side which you are brushing aside as a non-existent entity, Sectarian violence is nothing of that sort. None of the sects in Islam oppose each other or project violence against each other, it is Violent elements ( hired by secretly operating rival countries) to MAKE it look like sectarian violence, solely for de-stablizing the region so that bigger fish can maintain a strong hold over weaker economies. I suggest you read the book "The next 100 years" by George Friedman.

An unregistered violent element would go against another sect claiming to be from the different sect( yet being totally unrelated in reality to both) and pitch them against each other by creating mis-information and mis-trust between both. Tools of creating hatred would be scare firing, public bombings (which has recently gained its incidence) and brain washing innocent uneducated/unaware people with twisted inferences from the religious text, trying to reach their violent objectives by aggressive means.

But people being victimized by hostile mind programming no longer support it and have started to understand its actual implications and hence awareness regarding aggrressive elements who operate under the false cover of religion lie exposed with their fallacious hugely funded evil schemes.

 

[waitasec]

Seen like that by whom?

by a predominantly chauvinistic society


If you're referring to all or most muslims, then they are not viewed like that at all. If you're talking about some muslims, then in that case the answer is they are viewed like that for various reasons. The main one, in my opinion would be as mentioned before culture. Put in mind like you yourself said women where viewed like that also by people who weren't muslims, this is simply something that has happened and is happening all the time. Women have been treated unjustly in all kinds of cultures and still are.

this is why i disagree...

Women in Kabul voting for the first time in 2004.

in saudi arabia
Saudi women sometimes face discrimination in many aspects of their lives, such as the justice system. Although they make up 70% of those enrolled in universities, for social reasons, women make up just 5% of the workforce in Saudi Arabia,[7] the lowest proportion in the world. The treatment of women has been referred to as "sex segregation"[8][9] and "gender apartheid".[10][11] Implementation of a government resolution supporting expanded employment opportunities for women met resistance from within the labor ministry,[12] from the religious police,[13] and from the male citizenry.[14]

In June 2007 the National Assembly of Kuwait unanimously passed a law to restrict the hours that women are allowed to work. The law bars women from working between 8:00 pm and 7:00 am with an exception for women working in the medical profession. Women are also prohibited from jobs that "contravene with public morals" and that require women to be in otherwise all-male environments.[4]
[edit]

While Jordan, compared with many other Middle Eastern countries, scores quite highly in democratic league tables”[8] , human rights, especially women’s rights perform poorly. Freedom House, calculates women’s rights based on five distinct categories, each scored from one to five. One having least rights and five the most. Jordanian women score the following in each of these categories.
I. Non-discrimination & access to justice 2.4
II. Autonomy, security & freedom of person 2.4
III. Economic rights & equal opportunity 2.8
IV. Political rights & civic voice 2.8
V. Social & cultural rights 2.5

Iran
The Iranian legislation does not accord the same rights to women as to men in all areas of the law.[53]
In the section of the penal code devoted to blood money, or Diyya, the value of woman's life is half that of a man ("for instance, if a car hit both on the street, the cash compensation due to the woman's family was half that due the man's") [54]
the testimony of a male witness is equivalent to that of two female witnesses.[55]
A woman needs her husband's permission to work outside the home or leave the country.[53]
Evidence given by a woman in court is considered only worth half that given by a man.[53][56]
in the inheritance law of the Islamic Republic there are several instances where the woman is entitled to half the inheritance of the man.[57] For example:
If a man dies without offspring, his estate is inherited by his parents. If both the parents are alive, the mother receives 1/3 and the father 2/3 of the inheritance, unless the mother has a hojab (relative who reduces her part, such as brothers and sisters of the deceased (article 886)), in which case she shall receive 1/6, and the father 5/6. (Article 906)
If the dead man's closest heirs are aunts and uncles, the part of the inheritance belonging to the uncle is twice that belonging to the aunt. (Article 920)[58]
When the heirs are children, the inheritance of the sons is twice that of the daughters. (Article 907)[58]
- If the deceased leaves ancestors and brothers and sisters (kalaleh), 2/3s of the estate goes to the heirs which have relationship on the side of the father; and in dividing up this portion the males take twice the portion of the females; however, the 1/3 going to the heirs on the mother’s side is divided equally. (Article 924)[58]
According to Zahra Eshraghi, granddaughter of Ayatollah Khomeini,
"Discrimination here [in Iran] is not just in the constitution. As a woman, if I want to get a passport to leave the country, have surgery, even to breathe almost, I must have permission from my husband."[59]

egypt
Domestic violence is not dealt with by many police in Egypt. Also family law is traditionally based on Sharia. The Ministry of Health issued a decree in 1996 declaring female circumcision unlawful and punishable under the Penal Code,[28] and according to UNICEF the prevalence of women who have had this procedure has slowly declined from a baseline of 97% of women aged 15–49 since 1995.[29] According to a report in the British Medical Journal BMJ, "[t]he issue came to prominence...when the CNN television news channel broadcast a programme featuring a young girl being circumcised by a barber in Cairo. ...Shocked at the images shown worldwide, the Egyptian president was forced to agree to push legislation through the People's Assembly to ban the operation.[30]". Despite the ban, the procedure continues to be practiced in Egypt[citation needed] and remains controversial. In 2006, Al-Azhar University lecturers Dr. Muhammad Wahdan and Dr. Malika Zarrar debated the topic in a televised debate. Dr. Zarrar, who objected to the procedure, said..."Circumcision is always brutal...I consider this to be a crime, in terms of both religious and civil law". Dr. Wahdan defended the partial removal of the clitoris for girls who Muslim doctors determine require it, saying it prevents sexual arousal in women in whom it would be inappropriate such as unmarried girls and spinsters. He cited Muslim custom, Islamic law, and a study reporting that the procedure is a determinant of chastity in Egyptian girls.

In spite of the Yemeni Constitution of 1994, which stipulates equal rights for Yemeni citizens, women are still struggling with various constraints and secondary status. Yemen's Personal Status Law in particular, which covers matters of marriage, divorce, child custody and inheritance, gives women fewer rights than men, excludes women from decision making, and deprives them of access to, and control over, resources and assets.
The right to divorce is not given to women equally. It is far more difficult for a woman to divorce a man. A man may divorce a woman at will. While a man may divorce without justifying his action in court, a woman must present adequate justification. Women face many practical, social, and financial negative considerations in divorce procedure.[4] One significant case to gain worldwide publicity was that of 10 year old Nujood Ali, who succeeded in obtaining a divorce at age ten,[5][6] with the help of a prominent female Yemeni lawyer who agreed to represent her.[7]

~wiki

There are a couple of short threads in which the verse you have in mind have been discussed, alongside other issues concerned with women in the Quran. I could link one for you if you like.

yes thank you badran, i would greatly appreciate that...

 

[Looncall]

Keeping the racist violence of the west to one side which you are brushing aside as a non-existent entity, Sectarian violence is nothing of that sort. None of the sects in Islam oppose each other or project violence against each other, it is Violent elements ( hired by secretly operating rival countries) to MAKE it look like sectarian violence, solely for de-stablizing the region so that bigger fish can maintain a strong hold over weaker economies. I suggest you read the book "The next 100 years" by George Friedman.

An unregistered violent element would go against another sect claiming to be from the different sect( yet being totally unrelated in reality to both) and pitch them against each other by creating mis-information and mis-trust between both. Tools of creating hatred would be scare firing, public bombings (which has recently gained its incidence) and brain washing innocent uneducated/unaware people with twisted inferences from the religious text, trying to reach their violent objectives by aggressive means.

But people being victimized by hostile mind programming no longer support it and have started to understand its actual implications and hence awareness regarding aggrressive elements who operate under the false cover of religion lie exposed with their fallacious hugely funded evil schemes.

Yet Iran, the worst troublemaking country in the middle east, is actually a theocracy. It is supposed to be run by experts in islam, yet it vigourously supports terrorism and threatens its neighbours. Do you really claim that this is due to outside influence?

in Iraq, imams (experts in islam again) have many times been reported as sending crowds to do murder after Friday prayers.

In Scandinavia, one reads, imams (here are those experts again) have told male muslims that it is permissible to rape non-muslim women.

Again, we see that the more enthusiastic the muslims, the worse is their behaviour.

The contortions undertaken by muslims to claim that their religion is peaceful are quite astounding. I would be better impressed if this hypocrisy was abandoned and efforts were made to reform islam.

i would be quite happy to see muslims following their own religion in peace. As things stand, in many places, muslims are a danger to their neighbours and to each other.

 

[Badran]

this is why i disagree...

~wiki

Sorry for being dense, but i fail to see what you mean by that.

yes thank you badran, i would greatly appreciate that...

Here is one discussing the verse you have in mind.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/100207-six-translations-quran-4-34-can.html

 

[Badran]

Again, we see that the more enthusiastic the muslims, the worse is their behaviour.

Thats not true at all. The level of enthusiasm or in other words how serious one takes their religion is not a reason to be bad.

The contortions undertaken by muslims to claim that their religion is peaceful are quite astounding. I would be better impressed if this hypocrisy was abandoned and efforts were made to reform islam.

There is no hypocrisy here, its a very obvious situation. As is the case with other religions and groups in general, there are bad muslims who do bad things. Pretty basic idea. Thats really what everything posted here revolves around.

i would be quite happy to see muslims following their own religion in peace. As things stand, in many places, muslims are a danger to their neighbours and to each other.

I would be quite happy if Americans for example live their lives in peace. As things stand, in many places, Americans are a danger to other countries and to each other. Does that mean all or most Americans are bad, no. Does that mean that the American lets say values or laws are particularly bad, no. So whats your point?

 

[beenie]

unless you are a female...

this is why i disagree...

Women in Kabul voting for the first time in 2004.


yes thank you badran, i would greatly appreciate that...

Sorry for being dense, but i fail to see what you mean by that.

Badran, i don't understand it either, so i guess we're both dense.

Thats not true at all. The level of enthusiasm or in other words how serious one takes their religion is not a reason to be bad.

beware of bringing logic into it.

There is no hypocrisy here, its a very obvious situation. As is the case with other religions and groups in general, there are bad muslims who do bad things. Pretty basic idea. Thats really what everything posted here revolves around.

agreed. i don't think there is a Muslim in this world who would deny that there are bad Muslims doing bad things. and i agree; waitasec is spending his time trying to find them all.

I would be quite happy if Americans for example live their lives in peace. As things stand, in many places, Americans are a danger to other countries and to each other. Does that mean all or most Americans are bad, no. Does that mean that the American lets say values or laws are particularly bad, no. So whats your point?

i think we're spinning our wheels trying to find the point.

 

[Looncall]

There is no hypocrisy here, its a very obvious situation. As is the case with other religions and groups in general, there are bad muslims who do bad things. Pretty basic idea. Thats really what everything posted here revolves around.

The point is that there are societies in which bad actions are generally approved. Many of these are muslim societies.

Bad things are done by individuals in other societies, but it seems to be mainly muslim ones in which the bad things are integral parts of how things are done. You cannot pass off that picture of of a queue of burka-clad women as the effect of just a few bad people. There seems to be something about islam that promotes or at least tolerates barbarities, yet muslims are loath to acknowledge that, much less do anything about it.

Stephen Weinburg
Good people will do good things and bad people will do bad things. It takes religion to get good people to do bad things.

(from memory, maybe not exact)

 

[Faithfreedom]

I would be quite happy if Americans for example live their lives in peace. As things stand, in many places, Americans are a danger to other countries and to each other. Does that mean all or most Americans are bad, no. Does that mean that the American lets say values or laws are particularly bad, no. So whats your point?

(note: bold and enlarged letters is by me)

The point is: They don't go around shouting, "JESUS CHRIST IS THE GREATEST!!", before they do their bad thing.

 

[waitasec]

my question is...
why are women seen as "weaker" or "the cause of temptation"?
the men in the quran/bible hold the standard.
when women are being described it is always in the context of being subjected to men.
be obedient...to whom...her husband?
if a women is standing up for herself the quran tells the man it's ok to hit her and to ignore her until she gives in...
well, where in the quran does it say that a women has a right to hit her husband?
or husbands obey your wives?

Seen like that by whom?

If you're referring to all or most muslims, then they are not viewed like that at all.

it has only been within the last 6 yrs women have been aloud to vote in kabul

in saudi arabia
The treatment of women has been referred to as "sex segregation"[8][9] and "gender apartheid".[10][11] Implementation of a government resolution supporting expanded employment opportunities for women met resistance from within the labor ministry,[12] from the religious police,[13] and from the male citizenry.[14]

In Kuwait Women are prohibited from jobs that "contravene with public morals" and that require women to be in otherwise all-male environments.[4]

While Jordan, compared with many other Middle Eastern countries, scores quite highly in democratic league tables”[8] , human rights, especially women’s rights perform poorly. Freedom House, calculates women’s rights based on five distinct categories, each scored from one to five. One having least rights and five the most. Jordanian women score the following in each of these categories.
I. Non-discrimination & access to justice 2.4
II. Autonomy, security & freedom of person 2.4
III. Economic rights & equal opportunity 2.8
IV. Political rights & civic voice 2.8
V. Social & cultural rights 2.5

iran
The Iranian legislation does not accord the same rights to women as to men in all areas of the law.[53]
In the section of the penal code devoted to blood money, or Diyya, the value of woman's life is half that of a man ("for instance, if a car hit both on the street, the cash compensation due to the woman's family was half that due the man's") [54]
the testimony of a male witness is equivalent to that of two female witnesses.[55]
A woman needs her husband's permission to work outside the home or leave the country.[53]
Evidence given by a woman in court is considered only worth half that given by a man.[53][56]
in the inheritance law of the Islamic Republic there are several instances where the woman is entitled to half the inheritance of the man.[57] For example:
If a man dies without offspring, his estate is inherited by his parents. If both the parents are alive, the mother receives 1/3 and the father 2/3 of the inheritance, unless the mother has a hojab (relative who reduces her part, such as brothers and sisters of the deceased (article 886)), in which case she shall receive 1/6, and the father 5/6. (Article 906)
If the dead man's closest heirs are aunts and uncles, the part of the inheritance belonging to the uncle is twice that belonging to the aunt. (Article 920)[58]
(Article 907)[58]
- If the deceased leaves ancestors and brothers and sisters (kalaleh), 2/3s of the estate goes to the heirs which have relationship on the side of the father; and in dividing up this portion the males take twice the portion of the females; however, the 1/3 going to the heirs on the mother’s side is divided equally. (Article 924)[58]
According to Zahra Eshraghi, granddaughter of Ayatollah Khomeini,
"Discrimination here [in Iran] is not just in the constitution. As a woman, if I want to get a passport to leave the country, have surgery, even to breathe almost, I must have permission from my husband."[59]

egypt
Domestic violence is not dealt with by many police in Egypt. Also family law is traditionally based on Sharia. The Ministry of Health issued a decree in 1996 declaring female circumcision unlawful and punishable under the Penal Code,[28] and according to UNICEF the prevalence of women who have had this procedure has slowly declined from a baseline of 97% of women aged 15–49 since 1995.[29] According to a report in the British Medical Journal BMJ, "[t]he issue came to prominence...when the CNN television news channel broadcast a programme featuring a young girl being circumcised by a barber in Cairo. ...Shocked at the images shown worldwide, the Egyptian president was forced to agree to push legislation through the People's Assembly to ban the operation.[30]". Despite the ban, the procedure continues to be practiced in Egypt[citation needed] and remains controversial. In 2006, Al-Azhar University lecturers Dr. Muhammad Wahdan and Dr. Malika Zarrar debated the topic in a televised debate. Dr. Zarrar, who objected to the procedure, said..."Circumcision is always brutal...I consider this to be a crime, in terms of both religious and civil law". Dr. Wahdan defended the partial removal of the clitoris for girls who Muslim doctors determine require it, saying it prevents sexual arousal in women in whom it would be inappropriate such as unmarried girls and spinsters. He cited Muslim custom, Islamic law, and a study reporting that the procedure is a determinant of chastity in Egyptian girls.

In spite of the Yemeni Constitution of 1994, which stipulates equal rights for Yemeni citizens, women are still struggling with various constraints and secondary status. Yemen's Personal Status Law in particular, which covers matters of marriage, divorce, child custody and inheritance, gives women fewer rights than men, excludes women from decision making, and deprives them of access to, and control over, resources and assets.
The right to divorce is not given to women equally. It is far more difficult for a woman to divorce a man. A man may divorce a woman at will. While a man may divorce without justifying his action in court, a woman must present adequate justification. Women face many practical, social, and financial negative considerations in divorce procedure.[4] One significant case to gain worldwide publicity was that of 10 year old Nujood Ali, who succeeded in obtaining a divorce at age ten,[5][6] with the help of a prominent female Yemeni lawyer who agreed to represent her.[7]

~wiki

Sorry for being dense, but i fail to see what you mean by that.

Badran, i don't understand it either, so i guess we're both dense.

are you serious?
just give it a shot, what do you think this means?

 

[Badran]

The point is that there are societies in which bad actions are generally approved. Many of these are muslim societies.

As long as you're not saying that this is exclusive to Islamic society, but rather that its evident in a lot of them, i agree. As that is found in a lot of societies around the world, non-muslims societies i mean. However, the reason for that is not religious, or at least not always. Also put in mind the part where we said that there have indeed been very negative cultural ideas attached to Islam through time, which manifests itself quite evidently.

Also, of course not all people in these societies approve of such actions, i know you said generally but i'm saying that just in case.