How To Beat Your wife Proper rules From Quran

I don't know if it is really that bad of a law. Just think if USA had similar law, it was probable that we could have avoid the whole credit crunch and economic melt down.

For those who don't get a joke, it is a joke.

 

i saw one episode of Oprah in which husband was beating his wife as hell , they were Muslims??? i dont think so , islam teaches love , brotherhood , and equal rights between all Muslims (Men & Women) and between your friends (Christians or jews) , dont compare radical Islamist lectures with true islam please.

 

oh wow, never thought that this also needs explaining... but anyway

it means there is nothing that says a victim of rape should be punished, she is pardoned of course, because she is a victim, and since God is who set the law, she been pardoned already in these laws.

this is a proof that nothing in Islam says that the victim of rape should be punished, thanks for providing it, and for contradicting yourself, contrary to what you said, the cards here were against the rapist, not the woman, still can't see where they "stacked the cards against women - just a few: In terms of proving rape, or punishing her in the absence of such "proof"; "

I think, you went on with your thinking to assume that if the man was not found then she will be punished? and was enough for you to say "cards against women" wow! based on theory you made not an actual incident, now that's really ridiculous.

your other quote, of course you have the right, and I too have the right to reply:

If believing women flee their disbelieving husbands who are at war with the believers, they do not have to obtain a divorce before remarriage.

where are the cards and the games here? it's mentioned in other place in the Quran:

on another note, why when somebody opens a subject and gets a reply seems to insist that his own thinking is the correct one and try to force it or else the other will be playing games? what games exactly? Did you expect that you post your inaccurate info or wishful thinking without being corrected by somebody?

EDIT: just noticed this last part in your post:

hitting a woman, is utterly condemned by me and by Islam, whether the reason was she spends too much, or else, I thought this would be easily grasped from my previous posts, thanks anyway for the note.

 

An absolutely disgusting topic IMO, people from all religions, all walks of life beat women and abuse them in emotional ways. People like this should be shot IMHO, religion or no religion.

 

Imad, and all, knock yourselves out. Think, or don't think, whatever. It shouldn't be that difficult.

The rest, if we slow down, really ask yourself - does it make sense to try to torture religious text into a meaning other than what it says, simply because you can't stand the thought that perhaps it - and virtually every other tradition coming from the past - can be looked at with fresh eyes, under what one hope would be human development?

And I am not an Islamophobe, as I've tried to show many times - it is replete across all the religious traditions I've examined. That said, Imad, since you called on me to note where Islam falls short in this regard, I have. I won't continue to waste time, and my hope is that some of the others who know me here, who are also Islamic, will know where I'm coming from.

Pardon. n. a release from the penalty of an offense. I don't consider a woman raped as having committed an offense from which she needs to be pardoned from.

Rape, witnesses - sharia law in certain islamic theocracies requiring 4 witnesses to rape is ridiculous, as (1) how many times does someone "witness" rape? (2) If 4 are present, why the hell don't they just stop the act? If they "witness," are they to be considered "reliable" witnesses by any reasonable standard of jurisprudence? Yet absent such "witnesses," a woman is subject to death by stoning - on the basis of zina. Brilliant.

I quoted a hadith from Abu Dawad, who interpreted Sura 4:24 to mean that captive women of infidels were very much fair game. This hadith, as with hadith generally, has prescriptive jurisdiction. It also smells of "bullshit." Please stop playing games and condemn it, or continue to quote another's interpretation of the same Sura, which is not the issue I continue to raise.

All: I don't care what you (choose your philosophy, religion, or code) believe. I care if what you believe hurts people. For what I hope is the last time, I don't limit this to Islam. I limit it to fools who believe that a first-millenium text is to be taken as verbatim prescription for life today. That would include, again, the prescription to stone an adulteress, consider that only males are "inheritors" of a dharmic line, and all the rest of the garbage, across virtually all religion.

Realize this, or, forget it all, and return to your original line (that somehow I know nothing of what I'm saying), and live your life.

 

again, I find myself saying WOW! and you claim that you know Islam? where did you get that it requires 4 witnesses to prove rape? mind if you shared the source?

“And those who accuse chaste women [of adultery] and then do not produce four witnesses — lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient. Except for those who repent thereafter and reform, for indeed Allaah is Forgiving and Merciful.”
Quran 24: 2-5

what I see now, is that you trying to torture a meaning into a religious text other than what it says? where does it say rape?

Does Islam require four witnesses for rape?

 

And you know what, my signature is better than yours - not so much.. you don't get the Protestants were the first Zionist - they believed that Some one will come (i don't remember) when the Jews will sit in the lavent.

Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan and Mauritania are Islamic republics (Saudi Arabia also follows the Shari'a)
sometimes, terror organizations are the ones who picks the Shari'a:

i never saw a law who says you should kill to avoid hell in the bible.

more than that - we had a law which was very sexist (only man can divorce from the women) and all of the Rabbis changes it in 1914!!!

 

As you know, Imad, there laws we both know exist in Islamic theocracies that are promulgated based upon juridical readings of hadith and quaranic texts, in imposing sharia.

Let's start here.

In part, they do so by relying on:

- a woman's testimony is worthless, compared to a man's:

(Quran, 2:282 - let's just go with Yusufali): "...Let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her...."

(Let's keep in mind - not only is a woman's testimony worth 1/2 a man's, but as woman is a fickle creature, and unreliable, she needs to be "reminded if she errs.")

Before we go further, perhaps you can just answer:

Is it right, simply because it is written in the Quaran, that a woman's testimony is to be considered untrustworthy, relative to a man's? Or is it an antequated mindset, that needs to be rejected in light of human development. In other words, is a woman's word as good as a man's?

Secondly, given the existence of such laws (providing for the imposition of harsh punishment - to the point of death, in the absence of "4 male witnesses"), such as do exist in Pakistan, Iran, theocratic regions in Africa. Are they just? Or to be condemned?

I would appreciate a direct answer to the above bolded questions.

And I would like to reiterate that the only reason I'm limiting the discussion to Islam (and not the countless travesties against women in other religions) is because you have specifically asked me to discuss such travesties, in relation to Islam.

 

In Islam, a woman's testimony worth the same as a man's testimony, except in two cases, in the first:

1- a woman's testimony worth more than a man's testimony, which is in adultery and I posted the verses earlier in this thread

"[24:6-10] As for those who accuse their own spouses, without any other witnesses, then the testimony may be accepted if he swears by GOD four times that he is telling the truth.
The fifth oath shall be to incur GOD's condemnation upon him, if he was lying.
She shall be considered innocent if she swears by GOD four times that he is a liar.
The fifth oath shall incur GOD's wrath upon her if he was telling the truth.
This is GOD's grace and mercy towards you. GOD is Redeemer, Most Wise."

2- and in the other case a man's testimony is worth more than a woman's testimony, which is in financial transactions, which you posted the verse about it, and tried to generalize it on all cases, or to make it look like as if a woman worth 1/2 a man, as you said using your own words "a woman's testimony is worthless, compared to a man's:"

I wonder why you did not notice the first case where the woman's testimony worth more than a man's testimony and did not say for example: "a man's testimony is worthless, compared to a woman's:"?

why in this case? this already been discussed in details in a thread where you were active too, so it should not be new for you, unless if you forgot then here is the link:

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=7097587&postcount=86

do you understand now that there is nothing in Islam that says a rape victim should provide 4 witnesses?

 

Let's stay where we are, because any discussion beyond the instant seems to result in a spin-off, from what I can tell.

On the issue of "mental deficiency and women." You accuse me of cherry-picking this notion, as provided for in the "two women for one man" weight of their testimony, explicitly mentioned in the Quaran.

You say this is meant to relate solely to financial matters.

So be it. Why should a woman's testimony be worth only 1/2 a man's testimony in financial matters, as provided for in the Quaran? I'll ask directly again. Keeping - for the moment - the discussion to financial matters. Is it right, simply because it is written in the Quaran, that a woman's testimony is to be considered untrustworthy, relative to a man's? Or is it an antequated mindset, that needs to be rejected in light of human development. In other words, is a woman's word as good as a man's?

You then provide a link to a discussion you had on the forum, which itself links to relevant hadith (itself relying on the quaranic text I posted).

Here is that link you provide, in full.

http://www.ourdialogue.com/answers/articles.php?action=show&showarticle=1657

OK, because the bolded parts - from the hadith and discussion Imad provided - are so replete with what I would call "religious injustice towards women," I'd think what I am saying is rather obvious.

Imad, anyone else, please feel free to tell me:

1. Are the Quaran and hadith to be considered inviolate, or are they to be interpreted in light of historical context, with an understanding of modern, human development tempering the understanding?

If the former, please explain how the following does not utterly disdain women.

This is it - the hadith in full. There is no "cutting" or cherry-picking in place. The rest of the article you link to is an attempt at apologetic for that hadith, but the hadith remains. Is it just? Or unjust, to women?

Now, the rest - the article you've asked us to consider.

Does this make sense? That someone would call a group of women retards and woeful sinners, literally just to "get their attention?"

Call me kooky, but does it make sense to malign a group of women, because men are the dumbasses who can't think straight before a beautiful woman?

Secondly, women are "generally weaker" than men. Didn't you accuse me of generalizing, in saying the notion of "a woman's weight in testimony is worthless compared to a man's?" Wouldn't you call this statement, from a link you provide, a general statement of "women's weakness before men?" Yes? No?

Hmm. Again, call me kooky, but did you not accuse me of generalizing the "two women's testimony for one man" rule into Islamic theocracy generally? Um, isn't "the role of each of the two sexes in Islamic society" kind of a general statement on, uh, "the role of each of the two sexes in Islamic society?"

Hmm. So, most of the dwellers in hell are women, because they are ungrateful bitches - always moaning, even when you're kind to them. Now, could be me only - but isn't that kind of a harsh assessment on women, generally?

And yet women are murdered, precisely on a juridical reading of the Quaran and hadith. I'll ask a final time - please answer directly, a direct question:

Secondly, given the existence of such laws (providing for the imposition of harsh punishment - to the point of death, in the absence of "4 male witnesses"), such as do exist in Pakistan, Iran, theocratic regions in Africa. Are they just? Or to be condemned?

Now, Imad, you asked for evidence, and I have provided it. It is clear to me that you either cannot or will not consider that your document needs to be considered in the light of the times from which it sprang. You will find that I have had many edifying discussions with Gauharjk, for example, that have helped me to understand what many Muslims feel - that it is impossible to read the Quaran and hadith without reliance on the history of the time. But to tell me that there is nothing in the texts that shames women is flatly wrong.

And the same kinds of things can be found in many, many other religious traditions. Religion has made a mockery of justice, in its history on the earth, in my opinion. I'm glad some find comfort from it, but it cannot be denied that the very texts and traditions relied upon, too often, deny the very principles of justice discussed elsewhere within those very texts and traditions. Which isn't new...man has a problem living up to his highest, best nature; when the U.S. Constitution talks about liberty and freedom, while classifying a black man less than a white man, or a woman a non-entity, it is - or should be - obvious that most things written down were written by imperfect, if well meaning beings.

And so it is lunacy to enshrine a piece of history in gold, immutable and inviolate for all time.

 

If Northpointaiki and Imad continue this discussion, I may have to officially declare myself an atheist. I can't read this.

 

LOL - join the club, the water's fine!

Agreed - nothing worse than these discussions. I've said my peace - Imad, I note you're replying, but I've nothing else to add. Perhaps others have some thoughts.

 

you are spinning from point to point without acknowledging whether you got it, or still believe a rape victim should provide 4 witnesses.

I have provided you with a link to a post about the financial transactions, and this post included links for more info, you pasted some texts from there which is good, it tells me that you actually read it, and added to your info about Islam, and added to your discussion here some new material you did not know before, since the financial transactions is the only case where woman's testimony is worth less than a man's, you are stressing this point despite the links I provided you have detailed info about it, you mentioned:

- women are untrustworthy in regards of financial matters.
and you further go after that to make it look like women in Islam are inferior, have half brains, mentally deficient..etc

In Islam a woman and a man are equal, but they are different, they differ biologically, psychologically, and physiologically, such differences make each role different in life, Islam recognize these differences, and in recognizing these differences it came with rights for women, that are not for men, and rights for men, that are not for women,

for example, a woman is not responsible for spending on the family in Islam, it is a man's responsibility, but that does not take her right in working if she wanted to work, she still can work, and even if she works, she is still not responsible for spending on family, it remains the man's responsibility, unless if she voluntarily helped, without any obligation,

can this be understood as a woman is not trustworthy to spend on a family? or take care of financial matters of the family? or that she is not intelligent enough to take care of financial matters? for some it might be this way, but it is not like this in Islam, its protecting her rights, in not being responsible for spending on the family, same in the testimony of financial matters, Islam and Quran is for all times and places, since it came till now, I understand that you are being familiar with other religions, and this effect your judgment about Islam, where in other religions, the holy texts were asking while wondering: "how can a woman own?"

I m with you, when the religious text asks "how can a woman own?" then it is no longer holy for me, and it should not be holy for anybody, because clearly it is saying women are not full human beings, or it says they are inferior.

was this the case with the Islamic texts you read? if women are not trustworthy to witness financial transactions, then it would be of much logic not to accept their testimony at all, so it is not about trust, else it would have said bring 2 men as witnesses, and no mention to women, but still some might argue, why 2 women for 1 man in financial transactions? this leads us to the second point you tried to promote:

- a man's word worth more than a woman's word in Islam.

if you mean in general then as been said before, it would have not treated woman's word as more worthy than a man's word in adultery, and it would have not treated both words as the same in all other cases, except financial matters, but if you mean a man's word worth more than a woman's word in financial matters, then let me correct you here:

a man's testimony (not word) worth more than a woman's testimony ( not word again as you try to make us believe) in financial transactions in Islam.

when in court, and the judge wants to hear a testimony related to bacteria for example, who's testimony will worth more then, a baker because he use yeast? or a biology scientist? for sure the biology scientist testimony will worth more, but does that mean the bakery is mentally deficient? or half human being?

what if the judge wants to hear a testimony about the process of making bread? who's testimony will worth more in this case? the biology scientist? or the baker? of course the baker testimony will worth more in this case, and that does not mean the biology scientist is mentally deficient or half human being.

- name calling women in hadith just to get their attention (calling women retards and woeful sinners) or as you said because men are the dumbasses who can't think straight before a beautiful woman?

again like you did in the rape, where you assumed that if the man was not found, then the woman should provide 4 witnesses, or in other words following your wishful thinking to portray Islam in a bad image to maybe satisfy some needs in yourself that I do not know about them, here too, you are imagining beautiful women, and some men who ask for their attention by calling them names? this is of course, not true,

as already been explained in much details in the links I provided you, besides if the prophet needed a beautiful woman's attention he would just asked to marry her, in fact, many tribes then offered him to marry from them because they considered it a great honor.

I hope this will answer your question, about being mentally deficient, and such on.. more you can get back to the links I provided you because they explained these points in full details:

here is the link again

Quran and Hadith are different, Hadith is much like interpretation of Quran, so yes, Quran is to be interpreted and that's why there is Hadith, interpretation of Quran started right after it was started to be revealed, yet there are verses in Quran that are very clear, that no matter in what time or place they can't have two interpretations, example is in prohibiting alcohol, but even in this law, where it says alcohol is prohibited, if there was a need to drink it for maybe health matters, then it becomes allowed, more if alcohol was a medicine for somebody and no other medicine, and the person did not drink it then he will be considered a sinner for not drinking it.

this is called the concept of Ijtihad which is highly recognized and encouraged in Islam.

yes of course, women are generally weaker than men, else we would have seen women and men together in running races in Olympic games, I have not seen you or women complaining to Olympic games organizing committee for treating them as inferior, why?

this should not be understood as they are not equal, as I mentioned earlier in this post, they are different, they differ biologically, psychologically, and physiologically, such differences make each role different in life, but in no way it means one is less than the other, both are equal.

would you be more clear, providing 4 male witnesses for what? and the punishment on who?

so far I do not see a need to maybe edit religious text as you wish to do, what do you want them to say exactly? or which part you want to change? make adultery allowed for all without punishment? allow wife swinging and call it open minded or modern society?

oh I know, other religions punish women with death even if she was a victim of rape, other religions, do not allow women to own anything, other religions, do not allow women even to speak in Church, other religions, do not allow women to divorce, ..... we are speaking about Islam here, which you proved here that you are unfamiliar with, when you came saying rape victim in Islam need to provide 4 witnesses.

 

I cannot simply repeat things, Imad. You refuse to acknowledge that it is the very texts we're discussing that are the basis for the imposition of unjust laws, and crimes against women, in many Islamic theocracies. I have shown how, and where, and you have ignored these. I have also detailed the many, many flaws of thinking, inherent to the texts themselves, and used both Sura and hadith to show why. You have refused to answer questions put to you - which isn't a good sign that you are interested in an honest exchange. (By way of example, and only as a last, serving example, asking "who is punished" under the well-known cases of women being murdered under the "4 male witness" rule in shariac theocracies, I'd have to say, the woman murdered was punished. Is it this difficult?)

As I said, there isn't any point in continuing. Perhaps others - muslims, non-muslims, have further thought.

 

somebody is not focusing, maybe you, maybe me, if it was me can you help me in making a clear question, instead of keep accusing me for not answering your questions, I thought I did answer all of them,

again I will ask, and please, do not try to escape a simple question by accusing me of not answering your questions, you said:

now provided with the texts, which says: if somebody accused falsely a woman for adultery, and did not provide 4 witnesses to support his claims, then this person (not the woman) should be punished for slandering?

here it is again:

“And those who accuse chaste women [of adultery] and then do not produce four witnesses — lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient. Except for those who repent thereafter and reform, for indeed Allaah is Forgiving and Merciful.”
Quran 24: 2-5

in which way you see this text unjust to women? in which way you see this text asking a rape victim to provide 4 witnesses?

how can this text be understood as: "a rape victim need to provide 4 witnesses"?

the example you gave of a question you asked and I did not answer, is also not clear:

where is the question?

who is punished in that text?
is the person who slandered! not the woman..

who is required to provide 4 witnesses to support his accusations?
is the person who accused the woman of adultery... not the woman

who is punished if he failed to provide 4 witnesses?
the person who accused for slandering... not the woman

what is the punishment?
80 lashes

isn't that punishment harsh?
no it is not, he deserved it for slandering

if a rape happened, will this verse be used as a law?
not at all, the above text, and the 4 witnesses, are only required when somebody accuse a woman of adultery.

if it was rape, does the woman need to provide 4 witnesses?
no

if it was rape, will the women be punished if the rapist was not found?
NO


did I get your questions correctly, if not feel free to list them again,

now what has Pakistan, Iran, with that, are you asking me about my personal opinion about the regimes in these regions? or are you saying this verse above been used to allow punishing rape victims?

make a clear question, so I can give you a clear answer.

what do you want to condemn exactly, and why?

- the religion?
- the religious text because they are unjust?
- the interpretation of the religious texts?
- the existence of religious texts because they can be interpreted?


what exactly? with all respect to your valuable time, can you give it another try but this time by making it clear, list your questions, no matter how many they are will be more than happy to answer every one of them, and if I do not know the answer, I will be more than happy to say I do not know the answer, fair enough?

 

Imad, I am pretty willing to enter into an honest exchange, so will be glad to re-pose the questions again, and to again consider your thoughts with a fresh and open look, in the event I'm missing something - just not now. (As a starter, please see above - where I've asked, a couple of times, "Secondly, given the existence of such laws (providing for the imposition of harsh punishment - to the point of death, in the absence of "4 male witnesses"), such as do exist in Pakistan, Iran, theocratic regions in Africa. Are they just? Or to be condemned?" - in other words, forgetting all else - whether they are drawn properly from the Quran or hadith, or not - are these laws, where women have indeed been murdered in the name of Islamic justice, to be considered just?)).

I'll return later.

 

ok, I will return later too as I been here since long and I feel stressed, for now,

it is important to distinguish between the law, and the implementation of the law, the law that asks for 4 witnesses is very clear in the Quranic texts, which says, if somebody accused women of adultery, then he needs to provide 4 witnesses, there are rules also for these 4 witnesses, and even after they come they needed to be tested and reviewed for their honesty, but in order to not go out the topic, he is required to support his accusation with 4 witnessess,

so his testimony alone was not enough, he needs another 4 witnesses, so we will have 5 witnessing on adultery, then after these conditions are met, and the act of adultery been proved, the punishment will be on both, the woman and the man.

if you see this death punishment as harsh for the act of adultery, then this is another totally different topic, feel free to open it for discussion if you want, but we have been talking about being unjust against women,

I do not know what they did in Iran or Pakistan to which you refer? did they ask rape victims to provide 4 witnesses? if they did so then this is a clear violation on yet the very clear Quranic text, rape, is not adultery, if they see rape and adultery as same? who is fault then? the Quranic text? or they?

and how can the Quranic text above be blamed for their act in punishing rape victims? or asking them to provide 4 witnesses?

 

You know this arguement is stupid. Have you read the bible lately? Or any other religious books? They were written when? Ohhh I see.. Tell me how many non muslim men beat their wives here in the US daily.......All books that were written that are "holy" were written in a time when it was ok to marry a 12 year old and that all religions men were the enforcers of the house hold.....get a clue when you start your next thread will ya.
.....
in the bible there are so many outrageous sexist horrible things that could happen...
In the Bible's book of Deuteronomy it says that if a man marries a woman and then decides that he hates her, he can claim she wasn't a virgin when they married. At that point her father must prove she was a virgin. (How is not explained.) If he can't, then the girl is to be stoned to death at her father's doorstep.
If a betrothed virgin is raped in the city and doesn't cry out loud enough, then "the men of the city shall stone her to death." (Deuteronomy)

 

I agree with you, which is why I've said that there isn't a religion I know of that doesn't foist bullshit upon the gender that gave us birth, and nurtured us into life. I honestly don't think there will be justice on earth until this essential, primal reality is dealt with.

 

Just be Secularism, or Liberal Muslim. you don't have to leave your religion (but you have to agree with us that the Islam is going to far..)