Jump to content
Islamic Forum

foody

Member
  • Content count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About foody

  • Rank
    Jr. Member

Previous Fields

  • Marital Status
    Single
  • Religion
    Islam
  1. Maybe so but it is amazing how still you label the blame on the male sex. It did not cross your mind perhaps that even if they DID have problem with the love of their life and now they are waging war at the entire male sex or cause stir that perhaps maybe it is partially her fault? Perhaps her nagging and ungratefulness is a good reason for a problem with her spouse? Perhaps he does not want to be beaten up like a dog as much as the comic shows here the West proclaim it to be funny and men are dogs and women are not. Funny how again and again and again it is the fault of men? Amazing.
  2. Dude! It is influecable in modern feminist you are just too sexist and blind to see it. These things you see right now...is EXACTLY what I have been taught in high school here in Canada ten years ago and also what I have being taught in University. Everyone is happy men and women for these to be taught so when I know that it is ok, and I scream for female empowerment and male genocide YOU STILL ACCUSE ME of being anti-women. So I don't give a ***** what you think or say!
  3. You are right I wouldn't and before I close this debate I will send you a link to proof that I have nothing to do with the quote and it is in fact written by women: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_no-maam.blogspot(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2007/03/stuvwxyz.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_no-maam.blogspot(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2007/03/stuvwxyz.html[/url]
  4. Oh yes typical! It is impossible for women to do bad but all faults goes to men. I am afraid not! Who is being sexist now! You are! You are the ultimate sexist! You assume women are good, perfect little princess while men are evil beasts. That was written by a woman and it is no guy who is bitter about his ex-wife. I think there is no BENEFIT for a man to getting married, I think men should not get married! I think men should not have children with a woman and I believe 100% men should not support for a wife. All these will go for granted and he will be the monster and it is all about the comfort of the wife while the men is the worker. No thank you! You can have all your wives if you like thank you very much! I want to enjoy my life with no headache and drama. If it means not, quote and quote, growing up then be it! If I want children I will adopt! If I want to have my own I will simply wait for further scientists to liberate men from needing women to having children as they are succeeding in doing the same for women in needing men and lesbians alike to having children.
  5. WOW!! THERE IS NO WINNING IS THERE!? So women ruling the earth is anti-women? Men ruling the earth is anti-women? Women dominating is anti-women! I am prone for women ruling over all the work forces and doing great in education and getting paid more than men is anti-women, I am prone for women empowering I am anti-women. I am pro for male to be destroyed and wiped from the earth is considered anti-women! Everything I say weather for women or against women I am anti-women. You know what I think about women???!! * raises my middle finger *
  6. Ones again and again and again it is all about the female sex. Never change huh? Look, I told you before I am all ok for women ruling the earth I am all ok for it. This will teach us men to have oppressed women for millions of years. First oppression male have did to the female sex is he caused her pain and agony when she is pregnant. Male should be castrated for this. Second thing, HOW DARE THESE MEN not suffer the same pain as women for delivering children. He have an orgasm and that is that. The evil male gentile must be destroyed. This is a punishment for men, punishment for being males. Men must be destroyed! I pray all men be wiped from the face of earth Muslim or not Muslim...we don't need men. I want to donate to this organization and give support for lesbians to have babies at well at anytime. I want to support only women group and I want to put signs on school and company for supporting boys and men. No! You are being sexist! No! I want to be the ultimate political correct person that walked this earth. The greatest ahadith I have read is that there will be 50 female to 1 male. This is wrong, there should have being no male around. Let the female alone witness the end of time....at least one thing positive comes from this is that it will be women alone who face the Dajjal. It will be women alone who see the end of time, it is unfair that men should be even existing. I love it when I see brothers killing each other, I am the ultimate male hating ######...I will strive pleasure to see brothers hurt brothers, brother oppress brothers. But as I will fight for women right, I will fight for women empowerment. Women must rule the earth! Like for example this article below: Is the best thing that ever happened to humanity. Now both women and men can separate and form their own society. Finally women don't need to deal with the bad evil male sex who have done nothing at all for her. Who have done nothing to love her, who have done nothing to support her. The bad evil man and boys will disappear from their lives. The women now can have their own sperm to produce girl, the ultimate girl power. I will clap and cheer and throw my hat in the air for the ultimate female liberation. Go Muslim sisters and non-Muslim women, this is your ticket out of your mess. Take this technology and start forming a group. Start forming a revolution against the evil male tyranny. Go and form your own society and build it. Sure there are defects now, but wait until scientists perfect it. Go Muslim sisters and non-Muslim sisters, form a complete lesbian society. Form a society with only female sex and rule with an iron fist. Show us that you can have it all! Don't worry brothers: The choice is available for you too, sure you need a surgate mother to install your genes but eventually scientists will resolve this problem. If you find living in this life style hell then don't procreate and prepare for the after life and die a natural death. If men cannot handle this new form of life...then don't. Let us die and be a complete female society. I am all for it. ONES AGAIN I AM NOT A MALE SEXIST! I AM ALL FORWARD FOR AN ALL FEMALE SOCIETY! I AM ALL FOR, FOR FEMALE EMPOWERMENT. If anything I want women to take all jobs from men, if anything I want women to dominate and destroy men. If anything I want women to conceive without men and most importantly I WANT ALL WOMEN TO BE LESBIAN. InshaAllah, ALL WOMEN BE LESBIAN male hating female. Go for it. Girl power. See, I told you I am not sexist and told you I am all for women right. What I don't want is for men to have right! I want men to be destroyed! I want boys to be destroyed! I want all school system to be run by girl and women alone! I want jobs to be illegal for men and only for women. (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetdailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/technology/technology.html?in_article_id=511391&in_page_id=1965"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetdailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1965[/url] ARTICLE British scientists are ready to turn female bone marrow into sperm, cutting men out of the process of creating life. The breakthrough paves the way for lesbian couples to have children that are biologically their own. Gay men could follow suit by using the technique to make eggs from male bone marrow. Researchers at Newcastle upon Tyne University say their technique will help lead to new treatments for infertility. But critics warn that it sidelines men and raises the prospect of babies being born through entirely artificial means. The research centres around stem cells - the body's 'mother' cells which can turn into any other type of cell. According to New Scientist magazine, the scientists want to take stem cells from a woman donor's bone marrow and transform them into sperm through the use of special chemicals and vitamins. Newcastle professor Karim Nayernia has applied for permission to carry out the work and is ready to start the experiments within two months. The biologist, who pioneered the technique with mice, believes early- stage 'female sperm' could be produced inside two years. Mature sperm capable of fertilising eggs might take three more years. Early-stage sperm have already been produced from male bone marrow. Taking stem cells from an adult donor - possibly a cancer patient - removes the ethical problems associated with using embryos. The race to find a cure for infertility is global. Greg Aharonian, a U.S. analyst who is trying to patent the technologies behind female sperm and male eggs, said he wants to undermine the argument that heterosexual marriage is superior because it is aimed at procreation. "I'm a troublemaker," he said. Read more... I was the daughter of a sperm donor - shame no-one told me Scientists discover a way to reverse memory loss Researchers at the Butantan Institute in Brazil, meanwhile, claim to have turned embryonic stem cells from male mice into both sperm and eggs. They are now working on skin cells. If their experiments succeed, the stage would be set for a gay man to donate skin cells that could be used to make eggs. These could then be fertilised by his partner's sperm and placed into the womb of a surrogate mother. Irina Kerkis, a researcher at the Brazilian centre, said this development is possible, but raises ethical questions. Laboratory-grown sperm and eggs offer hope for those left infertile by radiotherapy treatment when they were young. The experiments could also provide an invaluable insight into dealing with infertility, a little understood condition that affects one in six couples. Other scientists warn however that the research is still in its infancy and any treatment is still many years away from use in hospitals and clinics. There are also fears that children born from artificial eggs and sperm will suffer severe health problems, like the mice in the Newcastle experiments. Couples who have children from artificial sperm created from women would be able to have girls only. This is because the female sperm would lack the Y-chromosome needed for boys. Robin Lovell-Badge, of the National Institute for Medical Research in London, said the creation of female sperm is at least a decade away. Josephine Quintavalle, of Comment on Reproductive Ethics, a campaign group, said: "We are looking at absurd solutions to very obscure situations and not addressing the main issue. Nobody is interested in looking at what is causing infertility - social reasons such as obesity, smoking and age. "All these things would provide solutions which wouldn't grab the headlines, but a lot more people would get the response they want - which is to be able to have their own children." Mike Judge, of the Christian Institute faith group, said the Newcastle project flies in the face of research showing that children do best when raised by a married mixed- sex couple. "Children need male and female role models in their lives," he added. "Yes, there are children raised by single parents through all sorts of circumstances, but when you are talking about deliberately creating children in that way, that is morally wrong." Debra Matthews, a U.S. bioethicist, said: "People want children and no one wants anyone else to tell them they can't have them." An update of Britain's ageing fertility laws is going through Parliament and is likely to allow the use of artificial sperm and eggs in IVF treatment - but only for heterosexual couples. The Newcastle research also paves the way for a woman to grow her own sperm and use it to fertilise her natural eggs, creating a child to which she is both mother and father. Similarly, a man could be both father and mother to a child created with his own sperm and a lab-grown egg. Such children would be at high risk of genetic abnormality.
  7. I agree with you in this regard. Originally feminism is exactly like that, but you are not reading the whole story. Feminist have went through different waves for the past 30 to 40 years, it originally started this way. Originally it started that men should have equal share in raising children, then it started that no women should only raise the children and have equal pay and opportunity from then be submissive to their husband. All seems fine and all seems excellent and the women there worked hard and achieved great feat to reach their goal...a great applaud for such great success. But that have changed though...are you seeing what is going own on Society now in USA and Canada and all other places. While it moved women away from the work house to work majority of the women out there prefer to work than be a stay at home mom. While you are blessed to have a mother to have sacrificed her success in this world to raise you majority of them outside prefer to get child care to take care of their offspring. Let me give you some quotes of modern feminist and we cannot keep talking about old feminist's main intention, all organization starts well but eventually get corrupted when too much power is giving to them (while your argument is that those bad feminist is tiny in size, they have great power and affecting society in large number): Here are some quotes from modern feminist, " "The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it." -- Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race, (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923) "I do want to be able to explain to a 9-year-old boy in terms he will understand why I think it's OK for girls to wear shirts that revel in their superiority over boys." -- Treena Shapiro . "In general, I support a girl's right to offend any member of the opposite sex who happens to cross her path. In fact, I'd much rather see a little girl wearing a shirt that mocks boys than one that turns them on." -- Treena Shapiro . Read Mzzzz Shapiro's article about how her own son should be discriminated against here: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_the.honoluluadvertiser(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/article/2006/Jan/03/il/FP601030304.htm"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_the.honoluluadvertiser(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/article/...FP601030304.htm[/url] "To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo." --Valerie Solanas, Authoress of the SCUM Manifesto . “Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation, and destroy the male sex.†-- Valerie Solana, SCUM founder (Society for Cutting Up Men.) "When women can support themselves, have entry to all the trades and professions with a house of their own over their heads and a bank account, they will own their bodies and be dictators in the social realm." -- Elizabeth Cady Stanton . "It would be ridiculous to talk of male and female atmospheres, male and female springs or rains, male and female sunshine... how much more ridiculous is it in relation to mind, to soul, to thought, where there is undeniably no such thing as sex, to talk of male and female education and of male and female schools." -- Elizabeth Cady Stanton" I support feminist in regard that women should have equal job opportunity, get paid equally to men, be able to have their own company, own their own house, etc, etc, etc ,etc ,etc ,etc. I agree one hundred percent, however what we keep missing the point and we keep looking at women's right over and over and over and over and over and over as if society is composed of one gender is the following: 1) While women are getting empowered and becoming successful and taking over jobs of men 2) The court system favors women (for whatever the reason is) especially in terms of child support, custody and so on 3) Men are reducing nothing more to sperm and bank So all I am saying in this regard and the regard of the article is that women have proofed they are more than capable of running their lives without men. Women have proofed they are better than men or equal to him in everything, so why should a woman want to marry a man to help raise HER children. I don't think it should be his responsibility. She should run her affairs and he runs his affairs, he provide her the sperm she needs and she lives her life and he lives his life. I don't care if it is a matriarchy society or not. I believe women running the society while men fade away and hide from view is an excellent society, there will be peace, harmony, intelligence will be great and will be peace on earth. No more violence, no more war and if there are no men AT ALL and it is a complete female society is even better. One final note: I am sick and tired of hearing about I am having masculinity complex or whatever....I am all for feminist...I am all for female empowerment....I am all for female domination.....I am all for male genocide. So don't you go ahead and tell me I have masculinity complex because I am not. I also believe that men are unnecessary and unimportant and his role is not important. I believe women can have it all, there should be women day, girl day, etc. We should always praise women twenty four hours and put her a billion time higher than men and tell men the truth we don't need them, because we don't. It is time we cleanse the society and make it all female. I also find it funny, when women do everything it is injustice. When men share in, it is male oppression. When men share in, women nag and demand he do it her way as if he is her cattle I am EVEN MORE THAN ever convinced never TO GET married!!! ------------------------------- Here is another article: Another good reason for a man not get married. Since male as sex as thrown as in the trash and fatherhood is not needed and children are better off with mothers than fathers and men have to pay child support and vaginamony till the end of his day and still mistreated in the end there is no reason to get married. Look below for more details: From WomenPayingSupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link)--'Be a Man...Don't Ask for Spousal Support "You've never heard complaints about paying child support until it's a woman who has to pay it."--Seattle Family Law Attorney Lisa Scott "The only way to abolish alimony is to make women pay it."--Tom Leykis, nationally-syndicated talk show host. When men work hard to support their families, they're often accused of victimizing their poor wives who have to stay at home, chained to their children. The National Organization for Women and other feminist groups often argue that these men don't deserve joint custody after divorce because they "never took primary responsibility for raising their kids while they were married." When divorce comes and men have to pay child support and alimony, they dare not complain, or they'll be accused of disrespecting their long-suffering ex-wives who sacrificed their careers for their families. So if men who are primary breadwinners can't win, what about men who are primary caregivers? As usual with the gender wars, men can't win here, either. Primary caregiving men are often looked upon with contempt by society and sometimes their wives, while their value as caregivers is short shrifted, as mom is still the "real" parent. (Example--I've been my kids' primary caregiver for the past nine years, but whenever there's a new employee at my kids' schools, they call my wife at her office during the day if one of our kids is ill and needs to go home early.) (Another example--I recall a meeting at my son's school several years ago when a visiting female administrator walked in, warmly greeted my wife, and then looked at me and asked, "And who might you be?" I felt like replying, "The person who's taken my kids to school, picked them up and done their homework with them every day, as well as having gone to every single Parent Conference/Back to School Night/Open House for the last I don't know how many years." I stifled it and just replied "I'm the dad," at which point she said hello and then turned to my wife and began explaining the issues my son was having. I wish I had it on film.) (One more example--A little while ago I actually read a feminist blogger criticize me for victimizing my poor, hard-working wife and sponging off of her, a phrase I've never heard her use when describing a woman who both works full-time and is the primary caregiver for her children. For the record, I earn a living with my writing, etc., and my wife wants to be a stay-at-home mom about as much as she'd like to test experimental parachute designs.) As the press release below shows, when divorce comes, primary caregiving men had better not dare ask for child support or alimony, or they're not "real men." Funny how when dad is the primary breadwinner, it's poor mom who is the burdened one, yet when mom is the primary breadwinner, all of a sudden she's the hard-working hero and dad is a lazy bum. In reality, despite the "lazy husband" myth, research clearly shows that both men and women contribute an equal number of hours towards their households--to learn more, see my co-authored column Are American Husbands Slackers? (Tallahassee Democrat, 3/22/06). Unlike many in the men's and fathers' movement, I believe that alimony does have a place. I believe alimony is warranted when one partner--male or female--really has put aside or cut back his or her career to be the primary caregiver for his or her children, and is economically disadvantaged because of it. I certainly think alimony can be abused, usually by women but occasionally by men. Below is a new press release I just received from you are not allowed to post links yetWomenPayingSupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link) . In their view, men who receive alimony are lazy bums, and they attempt to shame men out of it by using the phrase always used to get men to do something which is not in their best interest--"Be a Man." That being said, the ladies may well have a legitimate grievance. But if we're going to tackle the inequities of divorce and family law in order of importance, we have many, many problems to tackle before we get all the way down to the problem of women paying alimony. Women are Increasingly Paying Spousal Support; WomenPayingSupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link) Launched You don't have to be as successful as Britney Spears or Reese Witherspoon to fear getting sued for alimony. Like the founder of WomenPayingSupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link), more women today are obligated to pay their ex-husbands some form of financial support. Call it the dark side of the liberation coin. SACRAMENTO, Calif., October 18, 2007 - The picture of equality looks awfully strange to a 36-year old State of California worker and business owner. (AKA "Ms. Bread Winner".) She pays her ex, a 41 year-old fellow state worker, hundreds of dollars per month in temporary spousal support. He's not seeking alimony to help pay for their son's after-school sports program or music lessons - there are none. Nor was he instrumental in building Ms. Bread Winner's business as he sat on the couch, smoked pot and professed he was "sick" throughout their 15-year marriage. The daughter of an Air Force Master Sergeant, she started working for the state when she was 18 and has since risen and excelled as an IT Analyst. She's also worked furiously to ensure the additional education and success of her home business while raising a family. Small wonder she is outraged at having to write a monthly alimony check. "I thought spousal support was for people who were out of the work force, to raise a family for example. It might take them longer to support themselves.", says Ms. Bread Winner. "Maybe it's my upbringing, but it never occurred to me that I, as a woman, would have to pay spousal support. It was bad enough that I primarily supported him when we were married, but to continue when we are divorced?! I'm so mad that I created a pixel support website, you are not allowed to post links yetWomenPayingSupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link) where people can vent and get a t-shirt with my logo on it!" No doubt Ms. Bread Winner will find more than a few buyers for her t-shirts. The idea that men can receive spousal support from their ex-wives may feel like a freakish concept but as the alpha-earner woman by need, not desire as in the case of Ms. Bread Winner, have emerged, it's increasingly common. A lot of women are indignant now that the shoe is increasingly on the other foot, says Carol Ann Wilson, a certified financial divorce practitioner in Boulder, Colo. "There's a sense of, "What's yours is ours, but what's mine is mine." Wilson says, "My first response to that is, "All these years we have been carrying our families while looking for equality; well this is what it looks like upon divorce. I know women get angrier about having to pay than men do." The ordeal has been played up in gossip magazines and tabloids, which have closely followed countless examples of celebrity breakups in which men have sought, or have threatened to seek, spousal support. Teen idol Nick Lachey reportedly requested the right to seek spousal support from ex-wife pop singer Jessica Simpson last year. [Lachey is seven years older than Simpson and worth significantly less.] In another splashy case, Hardy Boy Parker Stevenson sought $18,000 per month from actress Kristie Ally when they divorced, just to cover the rent on his Bel Air home. As men set their sights on women's earnings, women have become more protective of those dollars. In fact, according to the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 44% of all attorneys included in a recent survey said they've seen an increase in men wanting alimony and more and more women asking for prenuptial agreements over the last five years, where in previous decades, prenuptial agreements and alimony were almost always sought by men. Just as women object to men's request for spousal support, some real men are particularly uncomfortable seeking it. Either they find it emasculating to ask, or they find the idea of receiving an allowance from their ex-wives humiliating. Right or not, as women's earnings grow, so will their financial responsibility during divorce. That's equality for you. Contact: Press Room 916-648-1884 media[at]womenpayingsupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link) you are not allowed to post links yetWomenPayingSupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link) This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 23rd, 2007 at 11:47 am and is filed under Child Support/Child Support Enforcement , Divorce, Spousal Support/Alimony. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Related Posts * No Related Posts Tags: WomenPayingSupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link) Related Tags: None del.icio.us:From WomenPayingSupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link)--'Be a Man...Don't Ask for Spousal Support digg:From WomenPayingSupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link)--'Be a Man...Don't Ask for Spousal Support Sign-up for Glenn's weekly E-Newsletter Email page Online Dating Rights Online Dating Rights opposes the new federal International Marriage Broker Regulation Act, which requires Americans who seek to meet foreigners via the internet to have a criminal background check and an intrusive report about intimate details of one's life BEFORE any communication--the first time in US history that such checks have been required. 24 Responses to "From WomenPayingSupport(contact admin if its a beneficial link)--'Be a Man...Don't Ask for Spousal Support" 1. callum Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 12:59 pm 'Real men' And while feminists have fought long and hard to counter outdated and generic steriotypes of women; here we see those same steriotypes of men, being used to force men to act a certain way. If I'm correct, that's exactly what the white feather women who shamed men into their deaths during WW1 said. Be a man. Essentially these people are saying, we're greedy, and it's your duty as a man to support that. A woman CAN focus on her carreer, but when it comes down to who has to pay, men still bear that burden. I don't normally write like this, but what an utter pile of ####. 2. Chris_C Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 1:12 pm So people should be able to get out of paying spousal support by claiming that their ex was lazy? Sounds like a new standard for everyone! 3. Tony S Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 1:32 pm Women want equality when it's convenient. You'll notice they never protested the fact that they do NOT have to register for the draft, but then are very vocal about wanting a woman to be commander in chief. This is why I warn you not to warm up to the Amanda Marcotts of the world. You're crazy if you think their goal is equality -- it's tyranny. 4. Al Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 1:48 pm I don't have a problem with someone seeking spousal support if they were taking care of the children while the other parent is working. That is fine. Being a stay-at-home parent is a full time job and in case of divorce, the parent that was taking care of the children was putting off their career and thus should get some measure of alimony for the amount of time that they were taking care of the children. What I find so disgusting and hypocritical from these femasupremasists is that when the roles are reversed, then they are the ones that cry the most about their responsibilities. Be a man and don't seek spousal support if you were the stay-at-home parent and being the full time parent for you and your spouse's children while your spouse is away creating wealth and career experience for themselves? WTF!?!? Obviously if the couple didn't have children, or the spouse was not contributing to the wealth of the other spouse (such as one person working for nothing for the other spouses business to get it up and running or something like that), then no, the person does not deserve any alimony upon a divorce. However, if they were contributing to either of these things stated above, then yes, they do deserve some spousal support. So, in my opinion, if you were the stay-at-home dad and took care of the children while your wife is getting work experience and building a career, then if she seeks a divorce (and we know for a fact that most divorces are initiated by women) then : BE A MAN AND SEEK SPOUSAL SUPPORT. Don't let the femasupremasists fool and shame you into thinking otherwise. You deserve it, and you will need it to get time to get a career of your own going. Manning up to a situation does not only mean stepping up to the plate of responsibility, it also mean stepping up to the plate of fairness and justice. Femasupremasists don't understand this concept, so don't expect them to agree with this belief. What is important is that you understand this principle, no matter what others think. 5. jerry Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 2:46 pm testing experimental parachute designs All else being equal, that sounds like a really fun job. 6. AnonymousPampleteer Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 3:19 pm One way to accelerate the demise of the present family court regime would be as follows: 1. provide top-quality legal backing to as many men as possible with "super-strong" cases as possible to help them win custody in those states known for excessive child support awards 2. demand a mirror image support award against the "mother" with income, and sue under the equal protectection clause any judge who fails to give such an award 3. massively publicize the fact that a WOMAN lost custody and that a WOMAN is paying so many thousands of dollars per month. It is important that the losing woman not be a rock star or other "unusual case" parent, but just a regular woman with a regular job and stay-at-home husband or simply lesser-paid, mostly at-home husband. As this information circulates among women, I can guarantee you that the rate of women filing for divorce and dragging men into court will fall. Right now, women feel that the court is their privilege, taking the kids is their right, being paid endlessly is their due, and men are the grist to fuel their needs But many, many women are fundamentally self-protective in their nature, and don't like being stuck with significant cash outlays to someone else. So, this is a way to slowly strangle the gender-biased divorce industry. Might be worth putting some funds and efforts behind it. Could render lots of ligitation-mongering pig lawyers underemployed at family court, so they would have to move over to chasing ambulances or some other activity within their capabilities -- like driving cabs. 7. David Maas Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 3:24 pm What feminists are really after is not equality it is servtitude. A man should serve them no matter what. Thay already have more than equality. While more men drop out of high school, many times more than women, there are only federally funded programs for girls. Women can get into college easier than men. More women are enrolled in college than men. A woman does not have to be even close to being competitive with a man to get a job in the fire department or police department. If a relationship fails the man has automatically failed to maintain the relationship. If she cheated, he drove her to it. If she is mentally or emotionally ill some man is behind it. The feminists just want men to serve them and be quiet. If they ( women) move on to another relationship the last man should pay and each subsequent man should pay in sequence. A man should just be an ATM to dispense money at the woman's request and be on call if she decides she needs something. Women have the right to vote and equality to anything they choose to participate in. What they don't want is equality in family court where they currently have a huge advantage. Equality would be losing this advantage and actually being treated equal. No lady wants that! 8. callum Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 3:38 pm Besides, the suffragettes of yesterday were of a totally different breed to today's feminists. They wanted to give women rights they needed in a rapidly changing society. People like Glenn try and do that today (what use would shared parenting be in the fifties?) while the feminists are as reactionary as they wish if it benefits women. 9. Matt Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 3:52 pm Glenn, you should buy an ad on there and link it to this post. Specifically, you should link it directly to my comment, which would likely cause a rupture in the space/time continuum. That and it'd be funny. 10. Mike D Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 5:18 pm That was a great story. Men have been paying spousal support and alimony for years and now that the tables have turned they want to complain. I about fell out of my chair laughing at this one. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Welcome to equality ladies....Hope you enjoy the ride. Hilarious!!!!! 11. Christian J. Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 5:34 pm Hahahaha.... I love equal opportunity. 12. Sungjun Says: October 23rd, 2007 at 8:00 pm Glenn- this blog entry should have read "Not recommended for the ------------------------------------------- IT IS AMAZING HOW no matter how had I try to give some credit or support for men's right IT ALWAYS switches back to women's right. ----------- A Glen Sachs article for our new visitors.. Have Anti-Father Family Court Policies Led to a Men's Marriage Strike? By Glenn Sacks and Dianna Thompson Kathleen is attractive, successful, witty, and educated. She also can't find a husband. Why? Because most of the men this thirty-something software analyst dates do not want to get married. These men have Peter Pan Syndrome--they refuse to commit, refuse to settle down, and refuse to "grow up." However, given the family court policies and divorce trends of today, Peter Pan is no naive boy, but instead a wise man. "Why should I get married and have kids when I could lose those kids and most of what I've worked for at a moment's notice?" asks Dan, a 31 year-old power plant technician who says he will never marry. "I've seen it happen to many of my friends. I know guys who came home one day to an empty house or apartment--wife gone, kids gone. They never saw it coming. Some of them were never able to see their kids regularly again." The US marriage rate has dipped 40% over the past four decades, to its lowest point ever. There are many plausible explanations for this trend, but one of the least mentioned is that American men, in the face of a family court system which is hopelessly stacked against them, have subconsciously launched a "marriage strike." It is not difficult to see why. Let's say that Dan defies Peter Pan, marries Kathleen, and has two children. There is a 50% likelihood that this marriage will end in divorce within eight years, and if it does the odds are two to one that it will be Kathleen, not Dan, who initiates the divorce. It may not matter that Dan was a decent husband--studies show that few divorces are initiated over abuse or because the man has already abandoned the family. Nor is adultery cited as a factor by divorcing women appreciably more than by divorcing men.While the courts may grant Dan and Kathleen joint legal custody, the odds are overwhelming that it is Kathleen, not Dan, who will win physical custody. Over night Dan, accustomed to seeing his kids every day and being an integral part of their lives, will become a "14 percent dad"--a father who is allowed to spend only one out of every 7 days with his own children. Once divorced, odds are at least even that Dan's ex-wife will interfere with his visitation rights. Three-quarters of divorced men surveyed say their ex-wives have interfered with their visitation, and 40% of mothers studied admitted that they had done so, and that they had generally acted out of spite or in order to punish their exes.Kathleen will keep the house and most of the couple's assets. Dan will need to set up a new residence and pay a substantial portion of his take-home pay to Kathleen in child support.As bad as all of this is, it would still make Dan one of the lucky ones. After all, he could be one of those fathers who cannot see his children at all because his ex has made a false accusation of domestic violence, child abuse, or child molestation. Or a father who can only see his own children under supervised visitation or in nightmarish visitation centers where dads are treated like criminals. He could be one of those fathers whose ex has moved their children hundreds or thousands of miles away, in violation of court orders which courts often do not enforce. He could be one of those fathers who tears up his life and career again and again in order to follow his children, only to have his ex-wife continually move them. He could be one of the fathers who has lost his job, seen his income drop, or suffered a disabling injury, only to have child support arrearages and interest pile up to create a mountain of debt which he could never hope to pay off. Or a father who is forced to pay 70% or 80% of his income in child support because the court has imputed an unrealistic income to him. Or a dad who suffers from one of the child support enforcement system's endless and difficult to correct errors, or who is jailed because he cannot keep up with his payments. Or a dad who reaches old age impoverished because he lost everything he had in a divorce when he was middle-aged and did not have the time and the opportunity to earn it back. "It's a shame," Dan says. "I always wanted to be a father and have a family. But unless the laws change and give fathers the same right to be a part of their children's lives as mothers have, it just isn't worth the risk." This column first appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer (7/5/02). Glenn Sacks' columns on men's and fathers' issues have appeared in dozens of America's largest newspapers. Glenn can be reached via his website at GlennSacks(contact admin if its a beneficial link) Copyright © 2001 - 2006. Sacks Media Group, LLC All Rights Reserved ----------------------------------------- YOU KNOW WHAT THE FUNNY thing about it...even if I pasted 3,000 pages of worth evidences of articles of how bad it is for men you will ignore it all and direct it to the women. The hero sex, etc, etc, etc, etc. It will return back to women's right. This will again show ones more what my status for me if I do get married, I will be the bad man and she will be the good person...the angel, the sacrificial, oh my I should kiss her feet. No! I refuse to sell my honor! No thanks. I am going to adopt, but I will not get married. TELL ME IF THIS IS WHAT YOU CALL FAIR: I can't take it. I had to say it, maybe later when I calm down I'll change my tune, but I doubt it. It's the bitterest of ironies: thousands of men who've given up work to care for their children are being ditched by their high-flying wives - who wanted them to stay at home in the first place An enlightening article on quite a few points. I'll address them as they come up. The article is pretty long so I'll mention the salient points here, feel free to read through the whole bloody thing though. At the time it seemed like a good idea. After all, Richard Dean told himself, he was earning less than his wife Louise, a high-flying marketing executive. And did it really matter who was at home to look after their children? With that in mind, it was not such a difficult decision for him to give up his career as a manager in the manufacturing industry to look after their ten-month-old son, Jack. So he gave the woman what she wanted. She didn't want to quit her high flying job, he left his job to look after his children and she can continue work. Sounds very modern, she must have been happy... He hoped it would bring them closer together as a family. In reality, it sounded the death knell for their marriage. "I sensed that Louise was becoming more detached and less interested in me sexually within a year of becoming a househusband," says Richard, 50. "She was always picking on me for silly little things she said I hadn't done, like the washing up or not tidying away the toys. Ah, going to work while your other half stays at home with the kids isn't the easy option it seems. Well, women don't appreciate anything these days, until they actually have to go through it. "It was as if she was losing all respect for me, just because I was the one at home, doing the domesworktic duties. Then, one day two years ago, she announced she was leaving me - and taking the children with her. She told me she was going to go and live with her mother 20 miles away. To say I was devastated does not do my feelings justice. It was as if the bottom had fallen out of my world." Notice that a woman can do this with a marriage and children. Render it null and void at a moments notice, take the children away and the father automatically has almost zero rights in the matter, if that. For five years Richard, from Watford, Herts, had worked hard to become a perfect "mother" to their sons, Jack, who is now nine, and Edward, seven. But from the moment he gave up his job, Richard says Louise, 47, failed to see him as a "man". He did what she wanted and because of that, she stopped respecting him. Can you see a lesson to learn here gents? Divorce lawyer Vanessa Lloyd-Platt says that in her experience, the decision to allow the wife to be the main wage earner will have a detrimental effect on as many as half of these relationships, and that divorce statistics in these cases have risen by at least five per cent in the past two years. Majority of divorces are initiated by women. (Up to three quarters). Richard says: "Our elder son was just a baby and I was intrigued by the thought of spending all day, every day, with him. It didn't offend my masculinity at all - we'd also just moved into a bigger house and there was a lot of renovation work to be done, so when the baby was asleep I would don my hard hat and do some building work. So not only was he doing all of the household chores, which he had no problem doing (don't hear him complaining do you?) he also used his spare time to fix up the house. Something that selfish *** would never even begin to know how to do, or even care. You see, that is something else she would nag at him to work on, after he finished working at the job of course. If he didn't do it, just another excuse to divorce him, and take the kids. And women have the audacity to moan about family life being hard? LOL So women can't handle being the main breadwinner then. A man can't win. He goes to work, wife complains about having to look after the kids (being a mum is sooooo hard!) and of course, she deserves some sort of wage from the husband for this. Wife goes to work, can't handle husband not working (as he is doing the childrearing). So women just can't be happy. With their selfish meandering, following her emotional whims that change very five minutes, who loses out? The husband and the children. As inevitably, in a breakup, the wife/ woman/ dumb *** will take the children and leave the man out in the cold, regardless of what he has contributed to the family. So to continue... "Yes, it's hard not making your own money, but I was doing the essential job of bringing up our children." Being a man, he obviously understands the sacrifices necessary to keep the family strong and together. Women do not seem to want to sacrifice anything at all. Which is why they initiate so many ***ing divorces. (It isn't going all their way you see). But then the hammer blow fell, and Louise walked out, taking the boys with her. "I begged her not to go, but I think she had simply decided she could find someone more dynamic than me," he says sadly. "Suddenly, the children I'd cared for since they were babies were being taken away. Bingo, it was only a matter of time. Notice how the article brazenly mentions the women taking the kids away. As if that's OK. You know, she's the woman, she takes the kids, regardless of the circumstances. This is ***ing bullshit. When it comes to the breakup, unfortunately it's just the same old story MRA's have been blogging about for years. There is a marriage. Woman isn't happy for whatever ***ing selfish reason. Doesn't matter what it is. She leaves, takes the kids. Man has no say. Then starts having to pay her legal fees, child support, her accommodation, his accommodation, in effect, he has to pay for everything. 'But Field Marshall, surely this can't be the case here? I mean, he was technically the 'mother' here, shouldn't he have those rights, plus he wasn't working, so how can he pay for all of these things!!' Hey, doesn't matter what he does. He has a penis, ergo he exists to serve the woman. It's a matriarchy. It matters not what he has contributed. He is entitled to nothing if the female says so. And of course he has to pay for everything! He's a male! For two years he fought through the family courts, desperately trying to gain full access to Jack and Edward. And at the same time, he was forced to find to meet maintenance payments. Having effectively quit his career five years earlier, he had to start at the bottom all over again. "I was left out in the cold," he says. "It left me in an impossible situation, because I'd been out of the workplace for five years, caring for my children, and yet now I was expected to get straight back to work and start paying her some maintenance." Lovely. Note the next paragraph. The moment Richard's wife said she was leaving him and taking the children, she c hanged her working hours from full to part-time so she could spend more time with the boys, while her mother helped with the rest of the childcare. "It was very cleverly done," he says. "I've had to take a series of menial part-time jobs just to keep me going financially, and on top of all that I've had two years of solicitor's bills in taking my wife to court to get better access to the children, which has cost me at least £12,000. ***ing ***. She literally discarded this man because she didn't like what he was doing although they mutually decided he would do it so she could follow the feminist crap of 'career wimman/wimmin/***ing idiot' What about the kids, how would they feel about being taken away from their father. She obviously isn't thinking about them either. And he has to pay her solicitors fees. Although she was working. In a high flying job. He wasn't. This is as biased as it gets. It's all about her you see. There is another case in the article about another man that had another *** do this to him. I'll quote the parts that will sum this up, just in case you think I'm talking ####. "There weren't many couples doing this when we first made the decision, and I think some other mothers thought I was trying to seduce them when I'd chat to them at coffee mornings and play groups,' he says. "In the park, they'd all be sitting chatting to each other while I rushed around physically playing with my kids and they ignored me. Women. Sitting about gossiping instead of interacting with their children. But that's another subject. "One day she came home suddenly and told me that she didn't love me any more, and she was fed up with being the main breadwinner. "It came out of the blue to me - we'd jointly agreed that this was the best plan, and it was as if the rug was being pulled from under my feet to be told that she was not happy and deeply resented having to earn all the money. Well men do it all the time you ***ing ***. Deal with, girl power remember? As both Richard and James were to discover, the British courts still favour the mother when it comes to deciding where the children should live in divorce cases, even if the father has previously been the primary carer. James says: "It's madness that in this day and age fathers do not have more rights over their children. I think it's appalling that courts should be able to rule that a father's needs are somehow less than those of a woman. Just because someone gave birth to the children doesn't mean they love them more. David is still very bitter about the outcome of their divorce. "Even though I had been looking after my daughter for two years, when it came to our divorce the judge assumed my wife should be the one to have custody of our child - just because she's a mother," he says. "This was despite the fact she was working full-time, and I had been the primary carer. Now that she has full custody of Alexandra, she works part-time from home. It is a situation that makes me weep - I miss my daughter so much." Exactly what MRA's have been saying all of this time. "She lives 110 miles away from me, away from the friends she made when she lived in our village, and my family, in the area that was her home. I'm allowed to see her for two weekends a month. That means a round trip for me of more than 200 miles. It is annihilating me, both emotionally and physically." Again, it's all about her. This man's life is being battered. And he has done nothing wrong. It's purely her selfishness. But how many of those men - who no doubt start out by regarding themselves as paragons of sensitive modern manhood - will end up wishing they had never left the office at all? *** that. Don't get married at all men! Don't have children with these selfish ***s. Unless you think that the above stories sound nice to you. *** em all. Keep the marriage strike going! Go your own way! -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  8. Actually it is not true. Feminist have morphed into declaring that we don't need men and we don't need fathers that women can have it all. That they can raise and work children on their own (which is true) but also the law in USA and Canada and every other law out there is biased toward men to an extent that if a woman divorces she gets to obtain more than 70% of the men's wealth. He have to pay child support for the rest of his life. He have to pay Alimony for the rest of his life, he is not allowed to see or visit his children. The women here in USA she can cheat on her husband and she will be rewarded by obtaining wealth from the husband who she cheated on him. She nags him and tries to train him as if he is a dog, the media is anti-male, etc....so many men here in USA don't believe in marriage anymore. Many men prefer not to get married as to prevent risk from having his wealth taking away from him. Lots of men now have girlfriends for sexual purposes then they dump them for a newer fresher one and many now are performing vasectomy, etc. However, if you have noticed this article is written by a women and majority of these women declare men as evil and women as victim. Look, I don't think women should be victim for not having a spouse or not having a husband. I think this is the ultimate female power, I believe women are strong, smart and capable of living alone. Why is it when a woman lives independently it is considered victim of a childish thing done by a man and when she gets married it is considered oppression by the male sex? Haven't women fought hard for equality of the sexes, that they are equal to men in every ounce of way. They are as physical strong as men, equal in intellect and equality in handling pressure? Why is it a fault of a man if a woman finally is independent but also is a mother? What choice a man have? It is not like men have the ability to conceive. Women have this ability, so now that women are like men in jobs etc but still hold her default ability to conceive should be no worse to construe that it's a man being child for not getting married. What I have learned in the west that we are all alone, we live alone, women should go outside work and not get married, men should go outside and not get married. Women want to have baby, she can use a sperm bank or something, or she can marry a man, divorce him, take all his wealth and that is that. For a man however, the smart thing to save his money is not to get married. For me I don't believe marriage is a sign of growing up, I want to enjoy my life. As for marriage being half your deen it is meant to prevent people doing bad things (sexually), me I am proud to say I have controlled myself well. I don't need a nagging wife or a wife to take my wealth and children away in a the scope of being mature and adult. I am as adult as anyone else here and I am happy this way.
  9. (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetcity-journal(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2008/18_1_single_young_men.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetcity-journal(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2008/18_1_single_young_men.html[/url] The question is: Is this what Muslim women want of their Muslim men? I mean, Muslim women becoming feminist, they take care of the male and female role all together while men simply enjoy his life, playing video games, not bothering going to school etc? I personally welcome it. Let the women do all the work outside and inside and use men as sperm donor, I don't mind it. In some areas in China women do everything in the house and out the house, raise children etc. The father have no rights to his children, have no right to teach his children, etc, he mate with a woman, she takes the children and he returns back to his mother's house where his mother takes care of him. A man there is used only for lifting heavy objects. Other areas in Africa, boys and girls are treated equally but when they grow up a little more, the boy is not allowed to do anything and the girl dominate her village. He is simply pushed aside not needed and not wanted. Other areas a woman marry a man and anytime she can divorce him, throw his stuff out, he leaves and she takes care of her stuff. He simply have fun with his male partners and majority of these men end up homosexual. At least a high percent of these men are homosexual, anyways. I like I said, if Muslim women feel oppressed by the unfair gender role and she wants to be a man and a woman takes 100% of her husband's wealth, take full custody of her children, raise her children alone, divorce her husband at well, takes all the roles of men (in name of gender equality and the same time women take over from the male oppression) and have men be evil and women the superior and good sex I am all for it. I love this world, imagine a world where women rule the earth, she is the president, worker, laborer, engineering, doctor, airplane pilot, military women, etc and men are not needed and only used for sexual reasons and sperm. Ones she have her baby from him, he is tossed aside to be with his male partners and never have any female relationship or wife. What do you guys think? Do you think feminist and anti-male, pro-female, women dominating the best thing ever happened to man kind?
  10. Is Hell In Islam Eternal?

    Yes for the Muslims who will be released from the Hell fire and head to heaven to heaven the people who are already in heaven will point out that these Muslims was in Hell fire first.
  11. Is Hell In Islam Eternal?

    For the Muslims they will be released from the Hell fire eventually for the non-believers they will be for eternal hell fire. If a Muslim brother kills another Muslim brother for fun or for evil purpose then they will be for eternal in hell fire. For a Muslim brother or a Muslim sister who find that the Islamic law giving to them is unfair where it be the distribution of wealth, etc and prefer to use the non-Muslim court because it favors them then they have left the fold of Islam and will live in in eternal hell fire. However, be it 14 million years is still very long time to be in the hell fire, so avoid hell fire if you can do it. For the non-Muslim or unbeliever hell fire will be their home for eternity.
  12. Honour Killing

    Thank you all for those sweet comforting words. Sadly the incident happened in Saudi Arabia Riyadh a philipinoe school following the American System. By the time the item was discovered and removed it was here in Canada...and it have being years since that incident have happened. Nothing can be done about it, I was also grade 10 when it happened. Don't worry they where non-Muslim people...no Muslim boy fearing Allah (SWT) would even have this cross his mind. It was not a private school it was a public school and there was intermingling of the sexes in the school...boys and girls there are disgusting they do lesbian and homosexual act, very horrible experience there. When you defy Allah's law and deny the true religion you will cross any bound. You will play with Allah's creation, you will perform the worst sexual act, you will act and think only for yourself. Remember for the Kafiroon this world is their heaven but for the Muslims this is a jail and the heaven is waiting for us InshaAllah in the Akhira. I know I will get my rights in the after but that boy is heading to hell anyways either way (because he is non-Muslim), so all this would do is ad on the punishment. I prefer to get my justice in the after life than here.
  13. Honour Killing

    I am wondering. Have it crossed the sisters mind that the reason things are good for them and not good for the brothers is it's a gender issue? Girls learn differently than boys therefore you cannot direct your experience to the brothers right away and assume your experience is the correct one or is the final conclusion. I know I have had a miserable experience in high school: I got beaten up, spit on the face, said mean things like your breathing precious oxygen leave this country you are not worth it. That is in public school here in Canada. When I was living in Saudi Arabia I went to school using the American system: there I was beaten up too, and I was raped by a boy using a pen. Yup...raped. I told this story to my mother but she did not believe me at all and since then for 4 to 5 years I have had intense fever. I start to turn thiner and thiner and thiner...I start to bleed from my anus when I sit down. Blood leaked all over my underwear and when rip cage finally showed I was headed to the hospital only to discover that a pen cover was inside me from the incident that I told my mother when I was a little boy. I assure you....boys experience are different than that of the girls you have to see what what is the best ways for boys to be educated and improve in their life. For example, did you know now in USA almost 60% of the students out there are female. Lots of boys are doing drugs, violence, committing suicide, dropping out of school yet not a single organization or anything is made to support them. You don't hear it on the western television, you only hear the female is in pain and she needs support.
  14. Over the last few weeks there has been a lot of discussion regarding a new Canadian comedy sitcom known as "Little Masjid on the Prairie" aired on Canada's CBC network, it centers on a community of Muslims who have moved to a rural part of Canada. CBC believes that the series will break down stereotypes and improve relations between Canada's Christian majority and the Muslim community. The show drew two million viewers for its debut. Since then, Muslims have been commenting on the sitcom, with many believing that this is a positive step for Islam and the Muslims, and with others less than enthusiastic about its significance. After going through the first three episodes I was compelled to write something. As many of us are aware of, as Muslims our constitution is the Qur'an and the Sunnah, and when it comes to contemporary issues we have to take the Qur'an and Sunnah as our governing rule of law and our measuring tool to reach a conclusion. So what I present here is not just my personal opinion that I came up with by following my ego, rather it is based upon supportive evidence from the Qur'an and Sunnah as understood by the early Muslims consisting of the Companions and all those who followed in their footsteps. So let us take the Qur'an and Sunnah as our legislator, and let us look at how our pious predecessors dealt with situations like this, and then after the truth is made clear from the falsehood let us submit to the truth, that is if we really claim to be Muslims. Anyone who watched the first few episodes will have realized that the producer has an agenda that she is trying to push forward, a message that she is trying to get across to both the Muslims and the non-Muslims in Canada, this agenda can be summarized in the following list of points: 1. The Message to the Muslims: a) We need to put the Traditional Orthodox version of Islam behind us and move on to adopt the Western Modernist Liberal Progressive approach to Islam. B) We need to adopt the Western approach to Women's rights (Feminist approach). c) We need to integrate into the Western society. d) The young Muslims must look down upon the 'old-style backward' Muslims and must take a stand against against them. 2. The Message to the non-Muslims: a) There are extreme elements in the Muslim community who don't want to progress into the modern world, whereas the majority of the Muslims do. B) Islam can be changed and watered down to meet the standards of the Modern Western world. c) The Muslim community is always in conflict and can never come to terms with each other. Examples of this agenda being pushed forward: 1. Mockery of serious devout practicing Muslims and displaying them as being backward people who have no affiliation with modern day society. 2. Un-Islamic music being played in the background. 3. The Hijab not being worn properly by the Muslim women. 4. Over-intermingling between the genders. 5. A clean shaven Imam. 6. Shaking of the hands between the genders, especially the Imam. 7. The flirting of the girl with the Imam. 8. The claim that Islam is democracy. 9. The barrier issue between the men and the women. 10. The Imam asking the reverend for guidance and advice (as if Islam does not have the solution to every problem). 11. Muslim spouses making out in public. Now I'm not going to reply to each of these points respectfully, rather I'm going to comment on the general idea that the show is portraying, and that is the idea of modernism and progressiveness that the Muslims must adopt. Firstly, it is important to know that the modernist movement that is being spread among the Muslims in the West can be traced back to, ideologically at least, one sect in the past. This sect is known as the Mu'tazilah, which dates back to the third century after Hijrah. Although they accepted the Qur'an and Sunnah they made their own Ta'weel (interpretation) of it, and said that the 'Aql (intellect) takes precedence over the Naql (the texts of the Qur'an and Sunnah). However, over time this school of thought died out. The modernist movement of today did not evolve from them, however they are very similar to them. The modernist movement is saying that the West and the world has changed and that Islam must become "civilized" to meet this change, and it is trying to harmonize Islam with modern values of human rights and freedom. So they look at the Qur'an and Sunnah and try to interpret it according to their own views based on the modern western world. This leads them to reject the texts of the Qur'an and Sunnah outright, or to try to reinterpret them. The main factors for the spread of the modernist movement in the West: 1. A lack of Islamic knowledge from its correct sources. 2. A lack of scholars available to teach the people and to refute the modernist ideology. 3. Being disconnected from the Muslim world, its people, its Islamic based principles, values, traditions which go back 14 centuries. 4. It allows Muslims to become part of and integrate into the Western society without having to be recognized as Muslims. 5. It grants Muslim women equal rights as Muslim men, and encourages the woman to forget about her modesty and take on the role that Allah has specified for men. 6. It allows Muslims to practice an easy and flexible version of Islam, far from its correct teachings. 7. It calls for an end to religious differences between Islam and Christianity, and promotes inter-faith dialogue. 8. Much of the non-Islamic literature, scholars, and institutions in the West reflect the modernist thinking. 9. It is endorsed by the private and governmental sectors, and is therefore recognized as the mainstream version of Islam that is to be accepted. Some of the main points that act as the driving force for the modernist movement: 1. They look to the West and try to reinterpret the "old religion" with modern science and modern times. They assume that: a) The present situation is advanced or different, so you hear some of them say: "this is not the Prophet's time!" B) Religion is relative to time and place, so you hear them say: "therefore we need to judge Islam in light of modern science!" c) The way of thinking of a society is based on its environment, so they say: "therefore we must practice Islam according to the Western environment we live in!" 2. The methodology they use is the way they mislead people to the wrong conclusions. They claim to be scientific, but they are usually inconsistent or have no proof or foundation for their beliefs. Some of the means and principles they use include: a) The Sunnah and Hadeeth. They claim the Qur'an to be authentic and that they only follow "authentic" Ahadeeth. However, the method they use to judge the authenticity of Ahadeeth is the 'Aql (intellect). And although they claim to follow only "authentic" Ahadeeth, it turns out that many of them use "weak" and "fabricated" Ahadeeth to help prove their points and arguments. It is also to be noted here that they especially dislike Ahadeeth which have specific meanings and prefer ones which only have general principles. B) Vague terms without defining them. They use terms like democracy, freedom, and equality, but they never define what they mean by them. The danger in using vague terms is that a knowledgeable person will pass over the word or concept thinking they meant the Islamic or acceptable definition while in fact they did not, while others may believe what they are saying is true. c) Concealing relevant information that is available on the subject. That is, from the Qur'an and Sunnah. They only present that which will support their views. This tactic is used to avoid beliefs that they do not like, so they just do not mention them. d) Forcing their interpretation onto the text by using their 'Aql (intellect). Many of them say that Islam is the "rational" religion. This is true if you mean everything is from Allah and there is no contradiction, but to say that we can study everything in Islam by judging it with only our intellect is unacceptable and there is also no proof for this. To avoid implementing what the Qur'an and Sunnah says, they say we need to follow the "spirit" of Islam and not worry about the laws in specific. But it is clear from the Qur'an and Sunnah that we are to take both. e) Strange and rejected opinions. They try to revive some of the old opinions that got buried over time because the scholars rejected them, and this is because these opinions help them to prove their points, and so they say that such and such writer said it in the past so it must be a valid opinion. They try to open the door to these opinions and choose what is the most suitable and easy to follow. However, we are supposed to look for the opinions that are the closest to the truth, not the most suitable and easiest. Now that the reality of the modernist movement has been made clear, the question arises: what do the true teachings of Islam have to say about all of this? One of the fundamental aspects of Islam is complete submission to what has come to us of this religion from the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and his Companions, for they knew his Sunnah best, they loved him more, and they followed the teachings of Islam better than those who came after them. We have been commanded to follow and forbidden to innovate. This is because of the perfection of Islam and the sufficiency of what Allah and His Messenger (SAW) have given to us. Then there came after the Companions the Tabi'een, they were the followers of the Companions, they were the best of generations after the Companions, and they took their understanding of Islam directly from the Companions. After that there came the Taba-Tabi'een, they were the followers of the Tabi'een, they were the best of generations after the Tabi'een, and they took their understanding of Islam directly from the Tabi'een. These are the three best generations of Islam that we as Muslims have been ordered to follow. All the succeeding generations who followed in their footsteps till our time are known as Ahl-us-Sunnah Wal-Jama'ah (those who adhere to the Sunnah – the narrations of the Prophet (SAW) – and the Jama'ah – the beliefs and methodology of the general body of the Companions). Ahl-us-Sunnah Wal-Jama'ah believes that there is only one true Islam that will be accepted by Allah, and this is proven by the Qur'an and the Sunnah: 1. Allah (SWT) said: "Truly, the religion with Allah is Islam." [Aal 'Imran 3:19] 2. And He (SWT) said: "And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him." [Aal 'Imran 3:85] 3. And He (SWT) said: "This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." [Al-Ma'idah 5:3] 4. Abdullah bin Mas'ood (RA) related that the Messenger of Allah (SAW) drew a line with his hand (in the sand) and said: "This is Allah's path, leading straight." He then drew lines to the right and the left of that line and said: "These are the other paths, on each path there is a devil who calls to it." He then recited: "And verily, this is My straight path, so follow it, and follow not other paths, for they will separate you away from His path." [Al-An'am 6:153] [Reported by Ahmad] 5. The Messenger of Allah (SAW) said: "Indeed the children of Isra'eel split up into seventy-two sects, and my Ummah will split up into seventy-three sects, all of them are in the Fire, except one." It was said: Who is the (saved) one? He replied: "That which I and my Companions are upon." [Reported by at-Tirmidhee] 6. And he (SAW) said: "For indeed those of you who live after me will see much disagreement, so stick to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly-guided Caliphs after me. Hold onto it and bite down on it with your molar teeth (i.e. strictly adhere to it). And beware of newly invented matters, for verily every newly invented matter is a Bid'ah and every Bid'ah is a going astray." [Reported by Abu Dawood and at-Tirmidhee] 7. And he (SAW) said: "There will not cease to be a group from my Ummah victorious upon the truth, not being harmed by those who oppose them, until the command of Allah comes, and they are upon that." [Reported by Muslim] 8. And he (SAW) said: "This knowledge will be carried by the trustworthy ones of each generation. They will expel from it the alteration of those going beyond bounds, the false claims of the liars, and the false interpretations of the ignorant ones." [Reported by al-Bayhaqee] All of these above statements are clear-cut supporting evidence that prove that the only true version of Islam that Allah will accept is that Islam that was practiced and understood by the Prophet (SAW) and his Companions and all those who followed them till the Day of Resurrection. As for those who go off on a different path, other than that of the Prophet (SAW) and his Companions, and come up with their own understanding of how Islam should be practiced, such as the modernist understanding of Islam, then none of them are following the true and correct teachings of Islam, and it will not be accepted from them by Allah. It is important to note here that there will be those among the Muslims who will say that there is no need to be so harsh or extreme. In response to this, I say that the truth is clear from the falsehood, the choice is yours to either accept or reject, because in the end it doesn't matter whether you feel your opinion is correct or I feel my opinion is correct, rather we must go back to the fundamentals. As Muslims we've been ordered to submit completely to the will of Allah, not partially, Allah (SAW) says: "O you who believe! Enter into Islam completely, and follow not the footsteps of Shaytan. Verily, he is to you an open enemy." [Al-Baqarah 2:208]
×