Beating women in Islam

[WinterHold]

I said if it said that, would you do it?

I’ll answer for you:

No, you wouldn’t do it, even if the book said so. So why use it as an authority when your use of it is dependent on morality you already hold?

It's not a matter of if.
The scenario we have now is the verse does speak and talk about when women rebel against a husband, and how the husband can retaliate.

I did learn all my morals from this book. I mean there are some more harsher and strange sentences in it, and I still believe they are the right thing to do.

[robvalue]

So you can’t answer this hypothetical? If it had said that all along, then you’d have learnt that as being moral, and you’d have done it. Yes?

Or would you have objected and decided it wasn’t a good authority after all? If so, on what basis?

Or maybe you don’t know what you would have done.

Or maybe you’re saying god would never write something like that, which is also based on your own morality. If it’s just god's, he can’t be wrong.

[The Grand Nudger]

I strongly doubt that you learned "all your morals" from magic book...but if you did..I suppose that would explain alot?

In any case, since you contend that you did learn all of your morals in magic book..and that you do find even the difficult verses compelling, wouldn't the answer to robs question be yes?

Yes, you would do or say whatever the hell magic book told you too. You would think..that -that- was right.

[Deesse23]

Of course you are going to argue that this is ok, since it doesnt really discriminate, but only takes into account that women are "different" from men.  

2:228 Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart, three (monthly) courses. And it is not lawful for them that they should conceal that which Allah hath created in their wombs if they are believers in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands would do better to take them back in that case if they desire a reconciliation. And they (women) have rights similar to those (of men) over them in kindness, and men are a degree above them. Allah is Mighty, Wise.

The degree men have over women is in marriage -as the context of the verse suggests-; and we already know that this "degree" that men have over women in marriage is because they -the men- spend from their money & protect their wives

So unlike what feminism suggests, men are not slaves to women and men deserve this degree. It's essential for the balance of the family. Please see the divorce rates in the non-Muslim western world where this verse is unknown..

Breaking news: The medieval times are over. where the fuck are you living? Did you ever consider to move to the civilized part of the world.
Men and woman make earnings and are feeding their families, by having a job. I have several co-workers who earn less than their wifes, whose wife are the main source of income.
By the way read my very first sentence and please not my powers as a prophet.  

2:282 And call two witness from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not at hand, then a man and two women

Why don't you quote the whole verse?

Would that change the meaning of what is said here, or would it only be a kind of backpedaling like with beating wifes, which is totally cool.....but of course noone would seriously consider it.  

Sura 2, The Quran:
Sahih International
https://quran.com/2/282?translations=

(282) O you who have believed, when you contract a debt for a specified term, write it down. And let a scribe write [it] between you in justice. Let no scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him. So let him write and let the one who has the obligation dictate. And let him fear Allah, his Lord, and not leave anything out of it. But if the one who has the obligation is of limited understanding or weak or unable to dictate himself, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. And if there are not two men [available], then a man and two women from those whom you accept as witnesses - so that if one of the women errs, then the other can remind her. And let not the witnesses refuse when they are called upon. And do not be [too] weary to write it, whether it is small or large, for its [specified] term. That is more just in the sight of Allah and stronger as evidence and more likely to prevent doubt between you, except when it is an immediate transaction which you conduct among yourselves. For [then] there is no blame upon you if you do not write it. And take witnesses when you conclude a contract. Let no scribe be harmed or any witness. For if you do so, indeed, it is [grave] disobedience in you. And fear Allah . And Allah teaches you. And Allah is Knowing of all things.

So the verse is about "debts".
How many women in ancient Arabia used to know math or even memorize complex calculations and rights? I mean they didn't used to work on caravans like men.

So two women, with very limited knowledge is better than one. .

So it was ok to discriminate against women, because they were uneducated because of discrimination in the first place?   BRAVO
Why didnt Allah tell people "do fucking eduate your fucking women"?
Almost like YHWH telling people not to eat shellfish, but forgot to tell tell them not to have slaves.
Weak ass, stupid gods i say.
Or, almost as if YHWH and ALLah were both made up by the same fucking stupid ancient, ignorant, MEN.

4:11 Allah chargeth you concerning (the provision for) your children: to the male the equivalent of the portion of two females

Yes, because in most societies -even today- men are the ones responsible for feeding their family, so they deserve a little bit of extra cash to start with..

Not in my society. Probably because its more civilized than yours (at least in this one aspect of life).
Remider: We have left the middle ages......hundreds of years ago. You need to catch up.  

Remember that the real miracle is that women were a part of the heritage; that is so rare -or even non existent- in the ancient world.

Oh you could inherit a woman? How..............medieval.  

Thank you for confirming all my points so clearly and explicitly, visible for all, yet you didnt notice at all. If i would have told someone that a real muslim would anser like oyu did, they probably would have written it of as "anti muslim propaganda", but no, you went "full retard".

Look at him kids: Thats what religion can make out of you. His mind is so poisoned, his moral compass is sverving like a carousel. He has no clue anymore whats right and wrong, which is a good state, if you are the one who needs a puppet like him. All you need is to stick your hand up his ass and make him talk (misogynist) nonsense, all day long.

Yes, i am brutal in my assessment, just as brutal as his claims about the perceived roles of women and men (even in todays societies!) are and should be. I treat everyone and every idea with respect, if the deserve respect. His position, dont, not a single one of them, not.a.single.one.

[WinterHold]

So you can’t answer this hypothetical? If it had said that all along, then you’d have learnt that as being moral, and you’d have done it. Yes?

Or would you have objected and decided it wasn’t a good authority after all? If so, on what basis?

Or maybe you don’t know what you would have done.

Or maybe you’re saying god would never write something like that, which is also based on your own morality. If it’s just god's, he can’t  be wrong.

I won't answer an "what if scenario", and this goes to all serious cases I'm interested in. Frankly I only find it useful to do so (think about the if scenarios) if it served my understanding of a certain fact, otherwise it's just energy burned at circling the same spot over and over.

If I married and my wife beat me someday, I would chose forgiving her over hurting her back; but that's a personal preference that the verse gave me; I would choose to invest in forgiveness for the sake of the love between me and her, but it doesn't mean that I don't know what some other women do or the amount of sad damage they cause to their husbands.

I will know very well if my mate is just being "emotional"; or if she is waging a crusade on me.

God created us both, and woe to me if I ever hurt somebody that doesn't deserve it.

[robvalue]

So you can’t answer this hypothetical? If it had said that all along, then you’d have learnt that as being moral, and you’d have done it. Yes?

Or would you have objected and decided it wasn’t a good authority after all? If so, on what basis?

Or maybe you don’t know what you would have done.

Or maybe you’re saying god would never write something like that, which is also based on your own morality. If it’s just god's, he can’t  be wrong.

I won't answer an "what if scenario", and this goes to all serious cases I'm interested in. Frankly I only find it useful to do so (think about the if scenarios) if it served my understanding of a certain fact, otherwise it's just energy burned at circling the same spot over and over.

If I married and my wife beat me someday, I would chose forgiving her over hurting her back; but that's a personal preference that the verse gave me; I would choose to invest in forgiveness for the sake of the love between me and her, but it doesn't mean that I don't know what some other women do or the amount of sad damage they cause to their husbands.

I will know very well if my mate is just being "emotional"; or if she is waging a crusade on me.

God created us both, and woe to me if I ever hurt somebody that doesn't deserve it.

Okay. You seem to have burned a lot of energy writing all that, when you could have just said yes or no. To me, the fact that both answers produce big problems in your description of learning morality is why it’s an important question.

But I’ll leave you alone now. I think you know the answer already.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

And, once again, an Islamic proves Islamics want to be assholes.

[brewer]

---

Why the fuck is this even a topic?

Oh, religion. Screw yourself god.

Ask the boyfriends and couples who beat the shit out of each other.

Shouldn't you be doing that?

[Mystic]

The Prophet in his last will made three pleading requests for his people.


1. God's book, honor it.
2. His family, honor them and their rights.
3. Women, treat them kindly and respectfully.



The Muslims regarding God's book, have preferred fabrications in forms of hadiths just because their leaders and great men authenticate those reports over the truth and bright signs of the Quran. The hadiths are the cure to understanding the Quran and removing the evil, but that is the true hadiths, which we have to find mixed with false ones.


As for his family, they deny every verses that points to them and turn away rebelliously and are ever afflicted with envy to them and blindness to them in Quran.


As for women, this isn't orientalism or anything, but we have disregarded their rights.

[unfogged]

No, it says that we have 3 levels of rebellion: ...

You can stop right there because that is where I see the fundamental mistake. Calling it 'rebellion' because a wife is not submitting to the will of her husband is barbaric thinking.

It's not a matter of if.
The scenario we have now is the verse does speak and talk about when women rebel against a husband, and how the husband can retaliate.

I did learn all my morals from this book. I mean there are some more harsher and strange sentences in it, and I still believe they are the right thing to do.

Your morality has been deeply warped by your religion. The more I hear apologists for Islam the worse that religion looks.