lets me clear something here Che, no one is saying that Islam is compatible with the western views of women rights, its not. What i'm saying here is that these extreme practices against women that some people are throwing around do not stem from islamic teachings, they are old cultural practices that any regular muslim will reject, but they somehow get associated with religion because these backwarded thinking people happen to live in "islamic regions".

ACMRox wrote:

che wrote:http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=30731

official statement by the muslim brotherhood rejecting sexual freedom for girls, teaching them how to use contraception, equal inheritance rights and, my personal favourite, cancelling the need for a husband's consent for travel and work because they oppose sharia law, they even cite what the "prophet" said as justification

but but but islam has nothing to do with infringing on women's rights :(

then again i suppose the ruling democratically elected political party of egypt doesn't represent the true muslims™

Really che? Looking through that article (a list of 10 major points that a declaration by the UN consists of) there's exactly TWO things I would agree with, which is why on the whole I'm definitely on their side when they denounce such things.

Why? Because contrary to what you're trying to imply, this document is not about equal rights and freedom for women, but instead about "protecting and giving respect to prostitutes".

I really cannot express by disgust enough. This isn't about equal rights, it's about protecting sick and horrible practices that the UN has deemed 'moral'.

Two things? out of curiosity; what do you agree with?

1) Granting girls full sexual freedom, as well as the freedom to decide their own gender and the gender of their partners (ie, choose to have normal or homo- sexual relationships), while raising the age of marriage.

Disallow heterosexual marriage and sexual affairs, how does that feels? Contrary to what your beliefs are; it's undemocratic and opposes basic human rights.

2) Providing contraceptives for adolescent girls and training them to use those, while legalizing abortion to get rid of unwanted pregnancies, in the name of sexual and reproductive rights.

Contraception allows responsible family planning, avoids unwanted pregnancies, prevents sexually transmitted diseases, helps space time between births (which is better for the mother and child), etc...

We should also note that when contraception availability goes down, abortion rates go up; in which in your own religion according to Hadith and assuming it's authentic is forbidden.

3) Granting equal rights to adulterous wives and illegitimate sons resulting from adulterous relationships.

Surely if a wife made a mistake their completely innocent sons shouldn't be punished as a result? or should they?

4) Granting equal rights to homosexuals, and providing protection and respect for prostitutes.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1: Right to Equality

5) Giving wives full rights to file legal complaints against husbands accusing them of rape or sexual harassment, obliging competent authorities to deal husbands punishments similar to those prescribed for raping or sexually harassing a stranger.
6) Equal inheritance (between men and women).
7) Replacing guardianship with partnership, and full sharing of roles within the family between men and women such as: spending, child care and home chores.

Need I elaborate on those?

8) Full equality in marriage legislation such as: allowing Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men, and abolition of polygamy, dowry, men taking charge of family spending, etc.

Again; The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1: Right to Equality Allowing Muslim men to marry non-Muslim women and disallowing the opposite falls into this category, allowing Muslim men to marry up to four women and limiting the opposite to one also falls into this category,

9) Removing the authority of divorce from husbands and placing it in the hands of judges, and sharing all property after divorce.

Common sense, really.

10) Cancelling the need for a husband’s consent in matters like: travel, work, or use of contraception.

Wait, should we also ask them if we should drink water, or even take a shower? should we also have their consent if we need to use the bathroom? or even breath?


I could see logical arguments put forward against one, maybe even two of the list above, however saying you only agree with two is either stupid or insane.

zizzle wrote:RWO, whatever image you have about islam is wrong, and whatever source of information you're using is misguiding to say the least. The four witnesses are needed to prove that a woman committed adultery, not raped. Rape like any other crime needs only 1 witness, and that was before modern medicine ended the need for witnesses all together.

I'm working in counseling (among some other things) and the things I bring up is stuff I have been told by muslim women who managed to flee and get to Germany and who need psychological counsel and thus talked to me. That is stuff they have been subjected to, and I have to admit I believe them more as it is what they encountered in practise as opposed to reading theoretical texts. You may claim "yeah in case of rape only one witness is needed", but what if the men then says "sorry, it was not rape, but she willingly committed adultery"?

zizzle wrote:This is not the first time you post something that proves that you are misinformed. If you're truley interested in knowing what Islam says about these issues why dont you review islamic sources ? i mean you willingly listen to anti islamic propaganda so it's only fair that you listen to what the other side says. and dont worry, muslims will not sugar coat the truth for you becuase they truly believe that their religion is perfect.

I'm not misinformed, I'm actually talking to women who experienced this stuff and who luckily managed to end up in Germany somehow. I don't need any propaganda, I'm counseling women, and among them were victims of these practices.

(By the way, I'm not explicitely counselin muslim women, but others, too, and of course non-muslim women are more often than not also subjected to violence by men, but at least it is easier for them to get legal help here than in countries under the shariah.)

rwo power wrote:

zizzle wrote:RWO, whatever image you have about islam is wrong, and whatever source of information you're using is misguiding to say the least. The four witnesses are needed to prove that a woman committed adultery, not raped. Rape like any other crime needs only 1 witness, and that was before modern medicine ended the need for witnesses all together.

I'm working in counseling (among some other things) and the things I bring up is stuff I have been told by muslim women who managed to flee and get to Germany and who need psychological counsel and thus talked to me. That is stuff they have been subjected to, and I have to admit I believe them more as it is what they encountered in practise as opposed to reading theoretical texts. You may claim "yeah in case of rape only one witness is needed", but what if the men then says "sorry, it was not rape, but she willingly committed adultery"?

What if scenarios will get you no where. I get the feeling that you have an issue with the need of an eye witness, but thats how every judicial system on earth operates. When it's her words against his not a single judge on earth can reach a fair conclusion. If you cant back a claim with evidence then what do you expect a judge to do ? and im not talking religion here, this is how the world operates. I understand your sensitivity about this issue seeing the nature of your work but you shouldnt allow your feelings to effect your objectivity.

rwo power wrote:

zizzle wrote:This is not the first time you post something that proves that you are misinformed. If you're truley interested in knowing what Islam says about these issues why dont you review islamic sources ? i mean you willingly listen to anti islamic propaganda so it's only fair that you listen to what the other side says. and dont worry, muslims will not sugar coat the truth for you becuase they truly believe that their religion is perfect.

I'm not misinformed, I'm actually talking to women who experienced this stuff and who luckily managed to end up in Germany somehow. I don't need any propaganda, I'm counseling women, and among them were victims of these practices.

(By the way, I'm not explicitely counselin muslim women, but others, too, and of course non-muslim women are more often than not also subjected to violence by men, but at least it is easier for them to get legal help here than in countries under the shariah.)

If the majority of muslim women that immigrate to the west require counselling then you can use your experience to create a conclusion about Islam, but tell me, is it the case ? ever since this section was created we've been saying that you shouldnt judge the majority by the actions of the minority but you continue to do so. The women you work with are the exception, but your constant exposure to these cases makes you think that this is all what is there. Tell me, did you talk to everyday regular muslim women before ? did you seek those who do not seek you ? im not sure you did...

zizzle wrote:I understand your sensitivity about this issue seeing the nature of your work but you shouldnt allow your feelings to effect your objectivity.

Well, you ask for objectivity, but I can objectively tell the injustice and cruelty commited against the women I have talked to. If you counter this with "but in the texts it is written it shouldn't be so", while in practice things look completely different, how is that subjective?

zizzle wrote:If the majority of muslim women that immigrate to the west require counselling then you can use your experience to create a conclusion about Islam, but tell me, is it the case ? ever since this section was created we've been saying that you shouldnt judge the majority by the actions of the minority but you continue to do so. The women you work with are the exception, but your constant exposure to these cases makes you think that this is all what is there.

Well, if these are the minority, then the minority is pretty numerous. After all, I'm not the only person who counsels women, there are houses around to which abused women can flee and there are even special groups that shelter muslim girls who fled from their families as their male relatives tried to forcibly marry them to people they choose. The violence women are still subjected to nowadays is really horrifying, and partriarchalic and religious traditions are more often than not the root of the problem.

zizzle wrote:Tell me, did you talk to everyday regular muslim women before ? did you seek those who do not seek you ? im not sure you did...

I did. I even mentioned above the two Turkish gals I met at the university with whom I talked and who said they didn't dare go there (or elsewhere) without headscarf for fear of their fathers and brothers beating them up.

I'm living in an area with a very high percentage of Turkish guestworkers, so there are quite a lot of muslims around. The way these guys treat women is often really unsavoury and I have been subject to name callings and jeers by such guys ever so often, too. Of course you can probably say again this is because of their partriarchalic upbringing and not because of the Islam, but obviously being muslims doesn't prevent them from treating women with little respect.

Of course there are always positive examples around, too, but when I compare the amount of guys that treated me respectlessly, there were more whom I would identify as from foreign backgrounds (as I could tell from their accents).

Once again, people mistake Islamic Law direct from the Holy Islamic book, for the ultra zealot fundamentalist law which is so saturated beyond its original context, that it cannot be considered Islamic.

I'm not even a muslim and I know this.

There is nothing wrong with wearing a veil to cover your head. No concrete reason has been provided as to why not bar some neo-feminist dross.

Arquitecto wrote:There is nothing wrong with wearing a veil to cover your head. No concrete reason has been provided as to why not bar some neo-feminist dross.

Sure. But there is something wrong with beating women up who don't want to wear a veil to cover their head.

rwo power wrote:

Arquitecto wrote:There is nothing wrong with wearing a veil to cover your head. No concrete reason has been provided as to why not bar some neo-feminist dross.

Sure. But there is something wrong with beating women up who don't want to wear a veil to cover their head.

RWO of course there is.

Your debates are usually immaculate except when you confuse Islamic Law directly from the original, unaltered context of the Koran, to the Warped Fundamentalist and taken out of context law for power.."Islamic" Law.

The most educated of Muslims oppose and condemn the backward countries with these ludicrous laws which cannot be considered Islamic bar the basic principles which in itself are warped beyond recognition.

We have to separate the reason on why the Hijab is chosen to be worn, and the "Islamic" laws behind that enforce it. Both are not congruent with each other.

rwo power wrote: but when I compare the amount of guys that treated me respectlessly, there were more whom I would identify as from foreign backgrounds (as I could tell from their accents).

Read that again. And if you still don't see why I find that incredibly immoral, disrespectful, and hypocritical, then I don't know what to say.

Well, you ask for objectivity, but I can objectively tell the injustice and cruelty commited against the women I have talked to. If you counter this with "but in the texts it is written it shouldn't be so", while in practice things look completely different, how is that subjective?

if you indeed believe that the texts forbid this then your problem is with the people, not their religion. That's a completely different issue. But if you believe that islam allows husbands to beat their wives then you're looking at the wrong texts.

Well, if these are the minority, then the minority is pretty numerous. After all, I'm not the only person who counsels women, there are houses around to which abused women can flee and there are even special groups that shelter muslim girls who fled from their families as their male relatives tried to forcibly marry them to people they choose. The violence women are still subjected to nowadays is really horrifying, and partriarchalic and religious traditions are more often than not the root of the problem.

Again I ask for subjectivity. I'm not gonna play the numbers game here coz that's not my argument. Even if ALL muslim men beat their wives that doesn't change the fact that this is NOT permitted. Why do you refuse to admit to this fact ? I seriously suggest that you actively look for those who are not abused because given the nature of your job they simply (and thankfuly) don't require the help you offer.

I'm living in an area with a very high percentage of Turkish guestworkers, so there are quite a lot of muslims around. The way these guys treat women is often really unsavoury and I have been subject to name callings and jeers by such guys ever so often, too. Of course you can probably say again this is because of their partriarchalic upbringing and not because of the Islam, but obviously being muslims doesn't prevent them from treating women with little respect.

Being a muslim doesn't guarantee a thing. A large number of mulims drink eventhough its not allowed by their religion. I wanna see you apply the same logic on both cases

Of course there are always positive examples around, too, but when I compare the amount of guys that treated me respectlessly, there were more whom I would identify as from foreign backgrounds (as I could tell from their accents).

Being abusive to women is a plague of the majority of third world countries regardless of religion. You need to distinguish between how people behave and how they're supposed to, and I seriously don't blame you for making these conclusions because the problems you mention are truly out there. It's not your fault that muslims give the wrong impression about their religion, but there is no excuse for being judgmental when the truth is always a click away.

ACMRox wrote:

rwo power wrote: but when I compare the amount of guys that treated me respectlessly, there were more whom I would identify as from foreign backgrounds (as I could tell from their accents).

Read that again. And if you still don't see why I find that incredibly immoral, disrespectful, and hypocritical, then I don't know what to say.

She's at fault for being judgmental but we simply cant deny that sexual harassment (for example) is a huge problem in the middle east and south east Asia.

zizzle wrote:lets me clear something here Che, no one is saying that Islam is compatible with the western views of women rights, its not. What i'm saying here is that these extreme practices against women that some people are throwing around do not stem from islamic teachings, they are old cultural practices that any regular muslim will reject, but they somehow get associated with religion because these backwarded thinking people happen to live in "islamic regions".

it doesn't matter what they stem from, the fact is that they are being enforced for religious reasons... it's not "women have to do x because it's in our culture", it's "women have to do x because the prophet said so", and this isn't coming from some lonely lunatic with a personal agenda, it's coming from the ruling party of one of the most populous muslim countries in the world

che wrote:
it doesn't matter what they stem from, the fact is that they are being enforced for religious reasons... it's not "women have to do x because it's in our culture", it's "women have to do x because the prophet said so", and this isn't coming from some lonely lunatic with a personal agenda, it's coming from the ruling party of one of the most populous muslim countries in the world

I really don't understand your point Che. What are you trying to prove? That we shouldn't use Shariah law in Western countries because people will use it to abuse women?

a) That's not relevant to this thread.
b) That's not happening any time soon.
c) Once again, the problem is cultural. If the Middle East was a democracy, you'd still see this. Would you then blame democracy?

Potential wrote:

ACMRox wrote:

che wrote:http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=30731

official statement by the muslim brotherhood rejecting sexual freedom for girls, teaching them how to use contraception, equal inheritance rights and, my personal favourite, cancelling the need for a husband's consent for travel and work because they oppose sharia law, they even cite what the "prophet" said as justification

but but but islam has nothing to do with infringing on women's rights

then again i suppose the ruling democratically elected political party of egypt doesn't represent the true muslims

Really che? Looking through that article (a list of 10 major points that a declaration by the UN consists of) there's exactly TWO things I would agree with, which is why on the whole I'm definitely on their side when they denounce such things.

Why? Because contrary to what you're trying to imply, this document is not about equal rights and freedom for women, but instead about "protecting and giving respect to prostitutes".

I really cannot express by disgust enough. This isn't about equal rights, it's about protecting sick and horrible practices that the UN has deemed 'moral'.

Two things? out of curiosity; what do you agree with?

1) Granting girls full sexual freedom, as well as the freedom to decide their own gender and the gender of their partners (ie, choose to have normal or homo- sexual relationships), while raising the age of marriage.

Disallow heterosexual marriage and sexual affairs, how does that feels? Contrary to what your beliefs are; it's undemocratic and opposes basic human rights.

2) Providing contraceptives for adolescent girls and training them to use those, while legalizing abortion to get rid of unwanted pregnancies, in the name of sexual and reproductive rights.

Contraception allows responsible family planning, avoids unwanted pregnancies, prevents sexually transmitted diseases, helps space time between births (which is better for the mother and child), etc...

We should also note that when contraception availability goes down, abortion rates go up; in which in your own religion according to Hadith and assuming it's authentic is forbidden.

3) Granting equal rights to adulterous wives and illegitimate sons resulting from adulterous relationships.

Surely if a wife made a mistake their completely innocent sons shouldn't be punished as a result? or should they?

4) Granting equal rights to homosexuals, and providing protection and respect for prostitutes.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1: Right to Equality

5) Giving wives full rights to file legal complaints against husbands accusing them of rape or sexual harassment, obliging competent authorities to deal husbands punishments similar to those prescribed for raping or sexually harassing a stranger.
6) Equal inheritance (between men and women).
7) Replacing guardianship with partnership, and full sharing of roles within the family between men and women such as: spending, child care and home chores.

Need I elaborate on those?

Full equality in marriage legislation such as: allowing Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men, and abolition of polygamy, dowry, men taking charge of family spending, etc.

Again; The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1: Right to Equality Allowing Muslim men to marry non-Muslim women and disallowing the opposite falls into this category, allowing Muslim men to marry up to four women and limiting the opposite to one also falls into this category,

9) Removing the authority of divorce from husbands and placing it in the hands of judges, and sharing all property after divorce.

Common sense, really.

10) Cancelling the need for a husband’s consent in matters like: travel, work, or use of contraception.

Wait, should we also ask them if we should drink water, or even take a shower? should we also have their consent if we need to use the bathroom? or even breath?


I could see logical arguments put forward against one, maybe even two of the list above, however saying you only agree with two is either stupid or insane.

I agree with 5 and 9. Cases could be made for 2 and 7, but there are aspects of those that I don't agree with either (legalizing abortion for example). All in all, it's really a quite useless declaration in that even the two I agree with won't 'end violence against women'.

EDIT: I left out 10 because that's a very complicated one, some of the stuff mentioned I agreed with, some I didn't, and some were iffy (for lack of a better term). Once again however, it wouldn't accomplish much if it was instituted anyway.

@ACMRox

I wonder if you would disagree with these articles if you were a woman or if it were men who were denied the rights mentioned there.

rwo power wrote:@ACMRox

I wonder if you would disagree with these articles if you were a woman or if it were men who were denied the rights mentioned there.

What rights? The right to be a prostitute?

Stop making this an issue of feminism and women's rights. It isn't. Once again, these articles are not about giving women rights, but are about legalizing extremely immoral things such as abortion, and promoting similarly immoral things such as prostitution.

Abortion immoral? I laughed.

bazinga wrote:Abortion immoral? I laughed.

So you are of the opinion that murdering babies is a humorous thing?

ACMRox wrote:

bazinga wrote:Abortion immoral? I laughed.

So you are of the opinion that murdering babies is a humorous thing?

See in the "my body my choice" ultra liberal world, its perfectly okay to purge a living breathing entity from the womb in the most merciless manner. You'll have to get used to it.

ACMRox wrote:

bazinga wrote:Abortion immoral? I laughed.

So you are of the opinion that murdering babies is a humorous thing?

No, but I recognize that there is a big difference between a collection of fertilized molecules and a living, breathing baby.

What I found humorous is your ridiculous assumption that you have a grasp on morality.

bazinga wrote:What I found humorous is your ridiculous assumption that you have a grasp on morality.

And therein lies your problem.

You believe, arrogantly, that your moral stance is the most correct one in all matters and that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiotic buffoon. Such a stance not only hurts your credibility, but hurts yourself, for you shall never learn if you refuse to consider the possibility that you actually need to.

ACMRox wrote:

bazinga wrote:What I found humorous is your ridiculous assumption that you have a grasp on morality.

And therein lies your problem.

You believe, arrogantly, that your moral stance is the most correct one in all matters and that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiotic buffoon. Such a stance not only hurts your credibility, but hurts yourself, for you shall never learn if you refuse to consider the possibility that you actually need to.

Pot, kettle, etc

bazinga wrote:

ACMRox wrote:

bazinga wrote:Abortion immoral? I laughed.

So you are of the opinion that murdering babies is a humorous thing?

No, but I recognize that there is a big difference between a collection of fertilized molecules and a living, breathing baby.

What I found humorous is your ridiculous assumption that you have a grasp on morality.

Nope, cells, a somatic cell is functionally only a part of a larger organism. The human embryo, by contrast, possesses from the beginning the internal resources and active disposition to develop himself or herself to full maturity. By simply being an embryo, a child has all it needs to develop and grow. Thus it is not part of a whole, but a whole life. This is why the embryo is a self-integrating organism from the meeting of sperm and egg. AND this is not even explaining 1/4th of the living mannerism of a fetus. Therefore it is technically infanticide. Calling it a clump of fertilized molecules is simplified and frankly a large misconception.

RedOranje wrote:

ACMRox wrote:

bazinga wrote:What I found humorous is your ridiculous assumption that you have a grasp on morality.

And therein lies your problem.

You believe, arrogantly, that your moral stance is the most correct one in all matters and that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiotic buffoon. Such a stance not only hurts your credibility, but hurts yourself, for you shall never learn if you refuse to consider the possibility that you actually need to.

Pot, kettle, etc

Meh. Nice try, but it really is just a far fetched accusation considering you know next to nothing about me... Except my religion. Could it be that you're generalizing?

Except that you've made posts specifically calling certain things immoral in this thread and others, without qualifying such statements at all... AND have attacked others for disagreeing with those posts. So really, I know all I need to to know that that post was hypocritical.

RedOranje wrote:Except that you've made posts specifically calling certain things immoral in this thread and others, without qualifying such statements at all... AND have attacked others for disagreeing with those posts. So really, I know all I need to to know that that post was hypocritical.

Thank you. That is my point.