Islam and Women

[WinterHold]

An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.

I'm pretty sure Nicki Minaj said that.

The example works best with tactical bombers:

X bombed my family.
I should bomb X; not their family.

If Nicki gave the finger to my kid, then I should give Nicki the finger.
Eye for an eye.

Not to her kids.

I make the whole world blind if I reply to nukes on cities, with nukes on cities.

Paulablo

But the verse is specifically addressed to the husband.
It's not just saying husband and wife, treat each other equally and remember and eye for a eye.
It's talking specifically about the wife's rebellion and obedience. 
It's not necessarily even mentioning the wife hitting the husband, just rebellion and obedience. 
If it was talking about the husband and wife attacking each other then there would be no need for this verse because the people concerned could just consult the eye for an eye verse for the relevant info.

The Quran probably is contradicting itself, it's not like it was written by anyone special.

It has one rule that says everything is based on an eye for an eye yet another rule that states punishment can be justified if one person fears another persons rebelion.
That could be seen as a contradiction I suppose but that's not the main intention of what I'm arguing.

Across the book, verses remind the followers that they should and must follow the verses.
So accepting the eye for the eye verse, is nothing but doing what the book says: accepting all the verses.

The case was always complicated; a perfect book has to discuss everything; even a situation like this where the wife rebels with no reason but inflicting damage to the husband.

Muslims can't even read the "eye for an eye" verse correctly. ISIS for example, blow you up for Trump's sins. You don't even have to look American.

So such a verse must be revealed. Or else I would just ask God:why is your book missing stuff?

It's for the husband. It reminds women that they are -just like men-: Humans.

---

The fundamentals of Islam is disgusting with regards to women. Period.

And no I am not saying that the old testament is any better. Both are TRASH.

Hello?

Or; high-heels. Making women dress like barbies to be accepted in a male dominated society, women have to twist the bones of their feet to get accepted,maybe spending hours putting make up for the public or even having to deal with systems 

Sexism is alive and well. If you think otherwise, you're a part of it.
It's easy to sum it all up in Islam. But that just doesn't work anymore.

http://fembotmag.com/2015/02/12/sexism-i...e-problem/

[Jesster]

An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.

I'm pretty sure Nicki Minaj said that.

The example works best with tactical bombers:

X bombed my family.
I should bomb X; not their family.

If Nicki gave the finger to my kid, then I should give Nicki the finger.
Eye for an eye.

Not to her kids.

I make the whole world blind if I reply to nukes on cities, with nukes on cities.

Sorry, but it's bad advice. I'm not going to stab someone who stabs me if I have a chance to be more humane. Not every action demands direct retaliation.

[WinterHold]

The example works best with tactical bombers:

X bombed my family.
I should bomb X; not their family.

If Nicki gave the finger to my kid, then I should give Nicki the finger.
Eye for an eye.

Not to her kids.

I make the whole world blind if I reply to nukes on cities, with nukes on cities.

Sorry, but it's bad advice. I'm not going to stab someone who stabs me if I have a chance to be more humane. Not every action demands direct retaliation.

You can forgive, and that's a nice thing.

But when you have someone to protect, knowing that they will be next, to get stabbed. You'll think otherwise.

[Jesster]

You can forgive, and that's a nice thing.

But when you have someone to protect, knowing that they will be next, to get stabbed. You'll think otherwise.

Sure, self defense in dire moments can be necessary. That's not how your book explains it, though. It calls for retaliation. It seems to need editing.

[WinterHold]

The fundamentals of Islam is disgusting with regards to women. Period.

And no I am not saying that the old testament is any better. Both are TRASH.

These Muslims..Like..My blood is so bumping!

damn..

---

You can forgive, and that's a nice thing.

But when you have someone to protect, knowing that they will be next, to get stabbed. You'll think otherwise.

Sure, self defense in dire moments can be necessary. That's not how your book explains it, though. It calls for retaliation. It seems to need editing.

The verse for fighting actually states that it's an act that is hated:

Sura 2
( 216 )   Fighting has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know not.

Doesn't seem like retaliation to me. More like an act so hated, but needed to keep bullies at bay.
Keep danger where it belongs.

[paulpablo]

he case was always complicated; a perfect book has to discuss everything; even a situation like this where the wife rebels with no reason but inflicting damage to the husband.

Muslims can't even read the "eye for an eye" verse correctly. ISIS for example, blow you up for Trump's sins. You don't even have to look American.

So such a verse must be revealed. Or else I would just ask God:why is your book missing stuff?

It's for the husband. It reminds women that they are -just like men-: Humans.

Nope.  It's reminding women that men have authority over them and telling men how to deal with rebelion against that authority and how to reward obedience.

Men have authority over women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient

Says it right there in the very verse that we're talking about.

Your problem is that you're starting your observations of the quran with the attitude of "Ok this book is definitely made by God so let's try and figure it all out.  Remember it has to be perfect."

Rather than "Ok let's check out this old crusty book, see if it's perfect and written by God."

Of course it's not perfect.  It gives out the vaguest rules.  Doesn't even say if eye for an eye is a literal rule. If it's a literal rule then you only need to worry about this rule if you take someone's eye out. This rule is about a wife's rebelion, whatever rebelion is, and how punishments can be dished out on the basis that the husband fears the rebelion.

[Jesster]

The verse for fighting actually states that it's an act that is hated:

Sura 2
( 216 )   Fighting has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know not.

Doesn't seem like retaliation to me. More like an act so hated, but needed to keep bullies at bay.
Keep danger where it belongs.

You're just trying to duck and weave now. Classic cherry picking.

An "eye for an eye" is a Quranic law. It can be found here:

Sura 5
( 45 )   And We ordained for them therein a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds is legal retribution. But whoever gives [up his right as] charity, it is an expiation for him. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the wrongdoers.

So, another verse cannot negate this one, or else, the Quran is contradicting itself.

Why are you suddenly changing your tune now? Did you find yourself in a corner?

[WinterHold]

he case was always complicated; a perfect book has to discuss everything; even a situation like this where the wife rebels with no reason but inflicting damage to the husband.

Muslims can't even read the "eye for an eye" verse correctly. ISIS for example, blow you up for Trump's sins. You don't even have to look American.

So such a verse must be revealed. Or else I would just ask God:why is your book missing stuff?

It's for the husband. It reminds women that they are -just like men-: Humans.

Nope.  It's reminding women that men have authority over them and telling men how to deal with rebelion against that authority and how to reward obedience.

No. You don't cut the Quran into pieces, and take each seperatly.
The book is 604 pages. To rule with it, you use the whole 604 pages.
In this case, page 115 says an eye for an eye.
                  page 84  allows men to beat their wives.
To practice page 84 without page 115, is ignorance with the laws of the book.
Men don't have authority over women. Sexist Sunnies and Shiites said that, but to make sure yourself, translate the verse yourself.

Says it right there in the very verse that we're talking about.

Your problem is that you're starting your observations of the quran with the attitude of "Ok this book is definitely made by God so let's try and figure it all out.  Remember it has to be perfect."

Rather than "Ok let's check out this old crusty book, see if it's perfect and written by God."

Of course it's not perfect.  It gives out the vaguest rules.  Doesn't even say if eye for an eye is a literal rule. If it's a literal rule then you only need to worry about this rule if you take someone's eye out. This rule is about a wife's rebelion, whatever rebelion is, and how punishments can be dished out on the basis that the husband fea

قوامون does not mean have authority.


Jesster

You're just trying to duck and weave now. Classic cherry picking.

Where !
I don't cherry pick

Why are you suddenly changing your tune now? Did you find yourself in a corner?

Also; where !

[Jesster]

Where !
I don't cherry pick

Why are you suddenly changing your tune now? Did you find yourself in a corner?

Also; where !

I mean... I just quoted you to show an example of doing exactly this.

[WinterHold]

Jesster

I wasn't ducking or taking dodges !