Jump to content
Islamic Forum
c-kow

A Message To Non-muslims

Recommended Posts

Salam

 

Right so are all christians against what israel has done to palestine in the past and continues to do. Right. Regarding christian doctrines could you kindly quote these doctrines which outlines that "not according to christian doctrine" please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
Salam

 

Right so are all christians against what israel has done to palestine in the past and continues to do. Right. Regarding christian doctrines could you kindly quote these doctrines which outlines that "not according to christian doctrine" please?

 

With pleasure. I am happy to educate you on the TEN COMMANDMENTS given onto Moses, before I do, will you now answer my oft repeated question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

 

Sorry you might think I am avoiding answering your question. In general terms no the teaching of Islam do not say that non-believers should be killed, rather the opposite generally the lives of all humans and non humans are to be protected. Proof of this is in the following quranic verse:

(Surah Al-Maaida 5:32)

roughly translated

 

"...If anyone killed a person not in retaliation for murder or to spread mischief in the land, it would be as if he killed the whole of mankind. And (likewise) if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the whole of mankind"

 

Wassalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam

 

Quickly read up the ten commandments and sure it does say you shall not kill. But you must agree that this is a general statement and that there are exceptions and what the exceptions are have varied in the history. Some I guess are in the bible itself such as stoning the adulterer and some have cropped up in history such as the crusades.

 

Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam

 

Just to correct one of my earlier posts were I mentioned humans and non humans i meant to say muslim and non muslim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam

 

I am curious that under your heading it says other religion rather than christianity which you could have selected. It is clear from your post here and reading information about you when I click on your name that you must be christian, right? Otherwise why would you in your introduction would you invite us to join the christian church. You also make statement which are clearly untrue in your introduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A simple question......

 

Is it true that 'non believers' are to be killed if they do not accept Allah as God?

 

To ask such a question and demand a yes or no answer is invalid. It's like asking, "Is it true that criminals are to be killed under the American law?". The reason why those questions cannot be answered with a simple yes or no answer is because there are different types of non-believers and criminals. Some non-believers and criminals commit crimes that merit death and some don't. It depends on some factors, mainly the factor is the person waging a war on Muslims. For example, you haven't taken up arms against Muslims, therefore, you shouldn't be killed. However, an American soldier fighting against Muslims, for example, could be killed, not necesserily though because he could be taken captive.

 

Now, here is a little lesson for you on the TEN COMMANDEMENTS given to Moses(pbuh) and on the Hebrew language. In Hebrew language there exist two different words just like in English - "murder" and "kill". Murder is a sin, crime in the Hebrew language while killing is lawful, non-sinful. The verb "murder" is used in the Ten commandments in Hebrew, not the word "kill". Furthermore, you have to take context into account, read the Bible and you'll find that the israelites are told plenty of times by God to kill some people which would make the commandment "don't kill" quite nonsensical and ironic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mofwtomy,

 

You seem to come with specific worries that revolve around this subject of whether Islam advocates killing non-believers or not, and are looking for a straight up answer. The short simple answer to your question is no, non-believers shouldn't be killed because they do not believe in God. It is dictated and practiced in Islam from the very beginning till today.

 

What Redeem and Kab are trying to communicate is that God's religion is sent for all people, and preventing the message from being delivered is an act of warfare against God. That is the definition of "An enemy of Islam". So you have the personal option of accepting the message or not, up to you. If you prevent it by blocking the people carrying the message, they are to use force to carry it through. If you still stand in the way and bare arms, you are an outright warrior and will receive arms against your arms. Do you now understand?

 

So now you are discussing and asking and debating, no muslim has been given right to you just as much as you don't have right on my blood. You go and decide that you don't subscribe to this and wish to live and die a non-believer, that is also your choice and right. Whether or not you live in a muslim nation, you are untouched. If you start inciting hatred and redicule towards Islam, this is where a separation is brought: If you are in a non-muslim nation with which there is a treaty, the muslim authority has no right over you, but if you are in a muslim nation and you blast the country's religion, you will be put under the rule of the law, as I think you would be in any nation, whether it is Russia or China or israel or Saudi. If war is declared and muslims are fighting in foreign land, any non-believer who raises arms or does not confine himself to his home, or a house of worship, is of course a hostile target that is permissible to fight and kill, unless the person surrenders.

 

In all cases, no civlian has the right to kill someone whether believer or not, enemy of Islam or not, it is otherwise the job of the authorities and there needs to be due process and evidence or witness accounts to prove the case. Even at war the combatants are given the code of conduct set by Islam which was explained above (not to attack inside a home or a house of worship, or someone surrendering) in addition to not killing non-combatants like women and old people, not to even frighten or scare children (through separation from their families or acts of terror or threats), and not to tear down trees or pillage, and to follow the orders of the commander at all times unless they violate the code of conduct.

 

 

 

 

 

I hope this clarifies the whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not follow Islam, am I an 'enemy' of Islam?

You advocate murder yet profess to be a man of religion. This must make surely your 'god' a false 'god.' - No creator would want his creation destroyed over 'mischief' - it appears my worries are well founded.

 

Let me say it again. If you're here to learn about Islam, you're allowed to be here. We don't want to hear your opinions on our religion if they include words such as "fake" "violent" "deluded" "barbaric" "backward" and whatever negativity you might feel the urge to throw at people. We ask people to be verbally respectful toward Islam and the same courtesy will be shown to you.

 

With that said, you shouldn't make it such a blatant point to misconstrue what your opponenet is saying and blow everything out of context. I said "enemy". You know the meaning of that word is. I don't need to explain it.

 

And secondly, are you trying to tell us that people shouldn't be punished for crime?

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is simply not the case, I ask the question are non believers to be killed? I ask this to clarify a point made to me. So again, a yes or no answer, are non those that refuse to believe to be killed?

 

Are people to be killed?

 

Yes, the question you keep asking is as broad as the one I just asked. I'm sure you would agree that if a man came toward you with the intention of killing you, then self-defense is hardly murder.

 

Let me add that if you're Jewish, there are some pretty harsh laws in the Torah itself. So you shouldn't make it a point to wag your finger at others.

 

And also, you mentioned in your introduction something about women being oppressed in Islam, so I would like to touch on that subject also, especially since I'm a Muslim woman.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And also, you mentioned in your introduction something about women being oppressed in Islam, so I would like to touch on that subject also, especially since I'm a Muslim woman.

 

Do feel free, I believe that many Muslim women are oppressed. Forgive my ignorance, but are you allowed to share your husbands bed whilst menstruating? Are you allowed to vote, if you live in an Islamic nation? Are you your husbands 'equal' or is his word law?

 

Let me say it again. If you're here to learn about Islam, you're allowed to be here. We don't want to hear your opinions on our religion if they include words such as "fake" "violent" "deluded" "barbaric" "backward" and whatever negativity you might feel the urge to throw at people. We ask people to be verbally respectful toward Islam and the same courtesy will be shown to you.

 

I have shown nothing but respect, please show where negativity has been 'thrown?' I assume that questioning your beliefs is allowed, for the purpose of debate, or what is the point in posting?

 

With that said, you shouldn't make it such a blatant point to misconstrue what your opponenet is saying and blow everything out of context. I said "enemy". You know the meaning of that word is. I don't need to explain it.

 

Now forgive me, I respond to your post, I was not aware that you were my opponent nor that I had blown 'everything' anywhere - I understand 'enemy' to mean just that, what is your interpretation?

 

And secondly, are you trying to tell us that people shouldn't be punished for crime?

 

Define crime, someone who steals becomes he is hungry? A woman that cheats on her husband? A rapist, A terrorist? Someone that exceeds the speed limit whilst driving?

 

Not all 'crime' fits the punishment laid down in statue now does it?

 

What Redeem and Kab are trying to communicate is that God's religion is sent for all people, and preventing the message from being delivered is an act of warfare against God.

 

If I chose that my family do not wish to listen to preaching, am I then committing an 'act of warfare against God?'

 

but if you are in a muslim nation and you blast the country's religion, you will be put under the rule of the law,

 

This is dual standards, I can give examples, I am sure you aware of, Muslim extremists in the United Kingdom 'blasting' the country's religion. (Christianity) - How can this be just and equitable when measured against what you state?

 

I am curious that under your heading it says other religion rather than christianity which you could have selected. It is clear from your post here and reading information about you when I click on your name that you must be christian, right? Otherwise why would you in your introduction would you invite us to join the christian church. You also make statement which are clearly untrue in your introduction.

 

I am a lapsed Roman Catholic, I do not need to mouth words parrot fashion to have a relationship with my 'God', I do not need to blindly follow others, nor do ~I make assumptions. I am not a 'Christian' in anything other then my baptism, I have made my own path in life, I have my belief, but could a theologian categorise me as a 'Christian?' I am also a person that tells the truth, and I take offence to your inference that I have lied in my introduction, I await your apology.

 

 

Salaam

 

Just to correct one of my earlier posts were I mentioned humans and non humans i meant to say muslim and non muslim.

 

DISGUSTING.

 

"...If anyone killed a person not in retaliation for murder or to spread mischief in the land, it would be as if he killed the whole of mankind. And (likewise) if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the whole of mankind"

 

In the course of my working life, I have saved many lives, however do not expect to be venerated for doing my job, I like to be paid, and have the satisfaction that I have done my best.

 

Has anyone watched the film 'Islam what the west should know?'

 

I have further points to make, and hope that this has answered the more pertinent issues raised in my absence.

 

Until tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

 

Non-Believers cannot be killed because of their disbelief, but because of other reasons such as treason or they invade the land, however, this would also apply to Muslims.

 

However, the punishment for apostasy in general is capital punishment.

 

The Prophet is someone who is to be followed, because God Almighty sent him the revelations and those revelations are infallible. God Almight sends us the Prophets as guidance which must be followed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, the punishment for apostasy in general is capital punishment.

 

This is simply not true, most civilised nations do not have the death penalty of which you speak. Some radicals in Europe have taken the law into their own hands, Evidence provided below if you wish - as we are aware however the law states that the taking of life is forbidden, unless very extenuating circumstances prevail. A woman choosing who she has sex with, can never be grounds to kill, can it?

 

Muslim husband who killed his wife and children because of their Western ways

 

By Ian Herbert

 

Wednesday, 21 February 2007

 

* Share

 

The Independent Close

o DiggDigg

o del.icio.usdel.icio.us

o FacebookFacebook

o RedditReddit

o GoogleGoogle

o Stumble UponStumble Upon

o FarkFark

o NewsvineNewsvine

o YahooBuzzYahooBuzz

o BeboBebo

o MixxMixx

o Independent MindsIndependent Minds

* Print

* Email

* Text Size

o Normal

o Large

o Extra Large

 

Mohammed Riaz made every conceivable attempt to prevent his wife and daughters enjoying their Westernised lifestyle. He destroyed their clothes - modest by Western standards but tight fitting by his own - when they came out of the wash and he railed against plans to allow alcohol at his terminally ill son's 18th birthday party - which had been brought forward because of his prognosis.

 

Increasingly alienated and in despair over the illness of his son, Adam, the labourer killed his wife and four daughters by throwing petrol over them as they slept and igniting it.

 

At the inquest in Blackburn, Lancashire, yesterday the coroner, Mike Singleton, recorded a verdict that Caneze Riaz, 39, and her four daughters, Sayrah, 16, Sophia, 15, Alicia, 10, and Hannah, three, were unlawfully killed at their terrace home in Accrington, and that Mr Riaz, who died in hospital two days after the fire, took his own life. Adam died six weeks later.

 

Police investigations revealed how estranged Mr Riaz, a traditionalist and a practising Muslim who grew up in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan, had become from his vivacious wife, a high-profile community worker who had co-founded the local Aawaz women's group, mentored teenage girls at a high school in nearby Rishton, and was a school governor and board member on several diversity groups.

 

Mrs Riaz, whose father married an English woman after becoming one of the first Asian men to emigrate to the area in the 1960s, was sent back to Pakistan for 15 years after completing primary school, but she returned in the early 1990s with Mr Riaz, with whom she had an arranged marriage. The children flourished in Britain. The eldest daughter, Sayrah, was a "second mother" to her sisters, according to the family, and had a passion for fashion design; Sophia, 13, loved rap music and wanted to be an MC, while Alicia was the closest to her father. She embraced Asian culture the most and was a regular at the Masjid.

 

While their mother thrived, their father struggled to find employment, eventually working for a plastic bag manufacturer in Blackburn. Their relationship had deteriorated rapidly after the death of Mrs Riaz's father, in 2003, and her husband had taken to sleeping downstairs. The pressures on their relationship were made worse when Adam, who had moved in with his uncle, was diagnosed with Ewing's sarcoma, an aggressive form of cancer. Doctors said he would live only six months.

 

"[it meant] the financial situation was bad," said Det Supt Mick Gradwell, of Lancashire Police. "A lot of money was being spent on presents for Adam as he was coming to the end of his life. They were spending a lot more than they earned - at Caneze's will, not Mohammed's."

 

The pressures drove Mr Riaz to drink heavily. Sclerosis of the liver was found after his death. On their last afternoon, Mr Riaz saw his wife being dropped off after enjoying a meal with friends in Manchester, but police say there was no suggestion she was involved in a relationship with anyone else.

 

Early on 1 November last year, Mr Riaz decided the pressures were too much. As his wife and daughters slept in three upstairs bedrooms, he threw petrol over them and trailed more around the house, then lit three fires.

 

Police believe his wife awoke and may have tried to throw one of the two petrol cans he used away from her bed. But she died almost immediately. Mr Riaz stood downstairs and waited for the flames to come down and engulf him. When they didn't, he ran back upstairs through a wall of fire and was found by firefighters in the bathroom. He died of 65 per cent burns and smoke inhalation.

 

Barry Khanan, 38, Mrs Riaz's brother, said her alienation from Mr Riaz was a result of "the different ways in which they approached their lives". He said: "She had become frustrated with his lack of emotional support and involvement throughout Adam's illness. Caneze was outgoing and wanted to better herself. Her husband was more withdrawn. Words cannot express how we feel about the man we believe killed our family."

 

LINK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam

 

Let me first make the point that you need to make your own postition clear before pointing the fingers at others. When you say you feel muslim women are oppressed are you implying christian women are not, or western women are not? Make your points clear so we know what you are comparing to when you refer to terms like oppression, oppressive etc. As for points regarding that I am sure sister redeem will answer you.

 

Regarding negativity then you have cleared done this, as you would agree terms like oppressive are negative in the manner you are using, and you are clearly linking this with the religion of Islam. I would prefer you ask the questions that you are rather than commenting and mentioning your current negative believes with regards to islaam.

 

Now coming onto what you have said with regards to my posts:

 

I have nothing to apologise for. I asked you a question to clarify which you have done. You mention in your introduction : The Christian church is so much easier to join, have you considered doing so?

Hence the reason for the question. Why would you want us to join something which you don't believe or do not abscribe to yourself. I did not call you a liar and what I infered was some clarification as you must admit it is a bit confusing.

 

Now what i mentioned of a correction in what I wrote was a genuine mistake and hence the term correction. I meant to write muslim and non-muslim not human and non human, it came about because i was reading the quote which refers to human and so not realising it, it went in. As soon as i realised it i put in post to make it clear what I meant. Now I do find what you are insinuating about me absolutely disgusting. Why did you put disgusting after you quoted me, I would like atleast an appology but it tells me a lot about you. I would like to make it absolutely clear muslims are my brothers and sisters in the religion and non-muslims are my brothers and sisters in humanity. I would want the best for you my brother in this world and the hereafter. Now all I can say is that I am being absolutely genuine and if you don't believe that that is upto you but you will see from all my posts I have never made any personal attacks against anyone, rather I try my best not to.

 

Regarding the quote I really don't know what you are on about. The quote clearly shows that in Islam human life is sanctified. What is your job got to do with it? I am not saying that you don't sanctify life?

 

Regarding pasting an article about a muslim man, I don't really know why? The questions are about Islam not about a muslim who in this case did not follow his religion and murdered his wife and children.

 

Wassalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is simply not true, most civilised nations do not have the death penalty of which you speak. Some radicals in Europe have taken the law into their own hands, Evidence provided below if you wish - as we are aware however the law states that the taking of life is forbidden, unless very extenuating circumstances prevail. A woman choosing who she has sex with, can never be grounds to kill, can it?

<a href="you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetindependent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/muslim-husband-who-killed-his-wife-and-children-because-of-their-western-ways-437199.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">LINK</a>

 

 

Salaam

 

Let me first make the point that you need to make your own postition clear before pointing the fingers at others. When you say you feel muslim women are oppressed are you implying christian women are not, or western women are not? Make your points clear so we know what you are comparing to when you refer to terms like oppression, oppressive etc. As for points regarding that I am sure sister redeem will answer you.

 

I stand by the point I made, a Christian woman or a western woman are equal to their menfolk. They are not expected to cover themselves, while their men strut about wearing anything they please. They walk at the side of their men, not behind like some throwback to Neanderthal times. My point is clear, which part of it would you like me to clarify? I look forward to sister Reedem's contribution.

 

Regarding negativity then you have cleared done this, as you would agree terms like oppressive are negative in the manner you are using, and you are clearly linking this with the religion of Islam. I would prefer you ask the questions that you are rather than commenting and mentioning your current negative believes with regards to islaam.

 

I would not agree that commenting that in my limited experience, as an outsider looking in, that finding something oppressive is ipso facto negative in essence. Educate me, please?

 

 

Now coming onto what you have said with regards to my posts:

 

I have nothing to apologise for. I asked you a question to clarify which you have done. You mention in your introduction : The Christian church is so much easier to join, have you considered doing so?

Hence the reason for the question. Why would you want us to join something which you don't believe or do not abscribe to yourself. I did not call you a liar and what I infered was some clarification as you must admit it is a bit confusing.

 

Are you human? I am, yet was referred to as non human, because I choose not to embrace Islam, I find this deeply offensive, and your glib explanation here, does you no justice. vvvvvvvvv

 

Now what i mentioned of a correction in what I wrote was a genuine mistake and hence the term correction. I meant to write muslim and non-muslim not human and non human, it came about because i was reading the quote which refers to human and so not realising it, it went in. As soon as i realised it i put in post to make it clear what I meant. Now I do find what you are insinuating about me absolutely disgusting. Why did you put disgusting after you quoted me, I would like atleast an appology but it tells me a lot about you. I would like to make it absolutely clear muslims are my brothers and sisters in the religion and non-muslims are my brothers and sisters in humanity. I would want the best for you my brother in this world and the hereafter. Now all I can say is that I am being absolutely genuine and if you don't believe that that is upto you but you will see from all my posts I have never made any personal attacks against anyone, rather I try my best not to.

 

Regarding the quote I really don't know what you are on about. The quote clearly shows that in Islam human life is sanctified. What is your job got to do with it? I am not saying that you don't sanctify life?

 

This was in reply to -

And (likewise) if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the whole of mankind"
Having served in both the military and the emergency services, do I become neutral if I have had occasion to both take and save life?

 

Regarding pasting an article about a muslim man, I don't really know why? The questions are about Islam not about a muslim who in this case did not follow his religion and murdered his wife and children.

 

Wassalam

 

Do you not feel that is an illustration of the oppression of women?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do feel free, I believe that many Muslim women are oppressed.

 

I wouldn't doubt that many Muslim women are oppressed. Nor would I ignore the fact that many non-Muslim women are oppressed.

 

Forgive my ignorance, but are you allowed to share your husbands bed whilst menstruating?

 

Most assuredly and this is based on a number of Hadiths.

 

Are you allowed to vote, if you live in an Islamic nation?

 

We don't follow democracy in an Islamic State. Both men and women follow the laws of Allah. Before we get into a discussion about Shari'ah, let's continue discussing the issue of women, since it pertains to me in particular.

 

Are you your husbands 'equal' or is his word law?

 

Men and women are halves of one another and they complete one another's faith when they become married. As for his word being the law, God's word is always the law. But the man is given greater responsibilities (don't forget this part, most people conveniently do) toward his family and therefore gains greater rights.

 

Men and women are not physically or mentally identical, and therefore do not share identical obligations and rights.

 

I have shown nothing but respect, please show where negativity has been 'thrown?' I assume that questioning your beliefs is allowed, for the purpose of debate, or what is the point in posting?

 

Telling someone that their God "must surely be a false god" is not being respectful nor is it merely questioning of beliefs. Would it be less insulting if I said "Your mother must surely be a prostitute" instead of a direct "Your mother is a prostitute"? In the same way, implying that Allah is fake is an insult. And so we ask, on this forum, that you be cordial and refrain from making assertions that render Allah, His messengers or the Muslims in a negative light.

 

The goal of this forum is to give non-Muslims an opportunity to learn about Islam and to engage in discussions with Muslims. Disrespecting any aspect of Islam is not allowed.

 

I hope you will keep this in mind and let's focus on the subject at hand.

 

Now forgive me, I respond to your post, I was not aware that you were my opponent

 

An opponent is the person you debate with. It is a technical term used in debates. That is the context in which I'm using it.

 

Muslim husband who killed his wife and children because of their Western ways

 

If you want to make judgements about Islam, you're much better off looking at the laws of Islam themselves rather than the actions of the Muslims. Because as I've said, Muslims aren't robots programmed to follow Islam. They have capabilities of doing unIslamic things.

 

They are not expected to cover themselves, while their men strut about wearing anything they please.

 

So you think we're oppressed because our religion tells us that women should practice outward modesty and preserve their bodies from the sneering and lustful gazes of society? A religion that tells us not to conform to degrading ideologies that plaster half naked female bodies everywhere for strange men to observe to their hearts' delight?

 

It is absolutely indisputable that men and women's bodies are not treated the same way in society. The woman's body is idolized and put on exhibit at every possible occassion. For what purpose? So that men will feel the urges of attraction toward the woman and the woman will gain some sort of morbid pleasure out of feeling desired.

 

Since men and women's bodies have different degrees of effects on one another and are regarded as being different in society, why should they be treated the same by God's laws? Why shouldn't God expect us to protect our bodies in a way that he hasn't ordered men to?

 

You are thinking that the Hijab oppresses Muslim women. Let me, as a Muslim woman, say otherwise. Islam has given women a sense of dignity that has been far neglected in modern society. It is comforting to know that God cares enough about our bodies that He has commanded us to protect ourselves behind a Hijab.

 

Let me make this more appropriate for you to understand. If you had a 13 year old daughter and she decided to go to school one day wearing a tank top and a mini-skirt just long enough to be considered legal, what would you do? A sensible father would order her to change into something less revealing. Now why would he do this? Is it because he is oppressing her? Or is it because 1) He does not want her reputation to be ruined, 2) He does not want the entire student male body disrespecting her by staring lewdly at her body and fantasizing about what they would like to do if given the chance, or 3) He does not want her to attract the attention of someone sick enough to do her harm.

 

It could be all three reasons, or it could be just one reason. But you wouldn't be quick to assume that he is being oppressive and you shouldn't assume the same about Islam.

 

Let me give you an example of why the way Allah created us shapes the laws that he has sent down on us.

 

Men are commanded to fight in Jihad. A man who refuses to fight is committing a major sin. On the other hand, women do not have to fight. Can you guess why? Because of the physical characteristics of the two genders. Men are physically superior to women in strength, agility and endurance.

 

If you wanted Islam to treat men and women equally, then you would actually be advocating for the weaker sex to be obligated to fight alongside the other.

 

Fairness in rules, not equality.

 

They walk at the side of their men, not behind like some throwback to Neanderthal times.

 

And I'm assuming that in your mind, walking behind anyone is a sign of submissiveness and is also oppressive.

 

Let me clarify one thing: A Muslim woman can walk alongside a Muslim man who is related or married to her. And a Muslim man can walk alongside a Muslim woman who is related or married to him. So when you say "their men", yes, they can walk alongside their men.

 

There is nothing that I know of that commands women to walk behind men. But if there was, it doesn't have to be as ugly as submissiveness and oppression. Men and women who are non-Mahram (unrelated) cannot stroll down the street together. So what are the options? Either for the man to walk ahead of her, or for the woman to do so.

 

As I've already covered, Islam protects the dignity and modesty of women. It isn't suitable for a woman (rather disgusting, if you ask me) to have a man trailing behind her and staring at her shape and form and the movements of her body. If the man takes the lead, she is shielded from his eyes. He does not have eyes at the back of his head.

 

Do I think you'll agree with our outlook on life? Most assuredly not. But do consider that there is more to everything than meets the eye. Actions are based on intentions, as we say in Islam, and every law has wisdom behind it. And I, as a Muslim woman, couldn't have preferred it any other way (the same goes for other educated Muslim women, I'm sure).

 

I do hope you'll take into consideration the perspective that I have given you. Because obviously what you consider to be oppressive is protective in my eyes and what you consider to be unfair is just.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam

 

It is clear to me from your posts you are going to believe what you want to believe but now that I know what you are comparing with let me make a few more points other than what has already been mentioned:

 

In the western society women are far from being equals. In fact they do same job as men and yet get less pay. Not only that if you look at most top companies hierarchy you will not find many women amonst them especially not proportional to population. And the truth is many women are oppressed you expect them to work like men but when they come back home they end up doing most of the housework. You are not now going to try and pretend that the housework at home in western society is shared equally between man and wife.

 

Let's use defenition of equality and tell me why are men's and women sports seperate. Why in athletic don't they run in the same races. Why is maternity leave so much longer than paternity leave?

Why are there bodies displayed in tabloids and not men? Why in the media you find young female presenters, especially news, but not old, when in men you find more older? Etc.......

 

Regarding dress sense why the double standard. If a muslim women chooses to dress like a christian nun you call it oppressive!! Address all the points rather than doing a scatter gun approach of jumping here to there without acknowledging the points made.

 

Wassalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me add something to what brother Kab is saying about society already being unfair.

 

Men and women in America, for example, have different dress codes. A man can walk down the street in shorts only. A woman who does the same will most likely be arrested. So it's not entirely equal. Imagine someone in another society in which men and women can both reveal their naked chests (certain tribes in Africa, for example) who hears about the dress code of America. I'm sure they would think it was unfair, if not oppressive.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam

 

Sorry but I did not get your last post. The question was not about what you do but about general terms the western / christian world. Your points don't show equality anyway, rather it shows you are being oppressed if your wife/partner was around and you did all the housework, the question is about equality and as mentioned many times lets not make it personal, your not going to tell me your situation is the most common and there are no oppressed women in your society!!

 

Regarding women dressing then that is her choice not the man and it is not the man telling her but what she feels god is telling her, it is personal thing with her and got not MAN.

 

Right so you now want to play on words, how appropriate!!

 

Salaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam

 

You are getting very touchy and very personal now. My comment was not personal because it had a clause, and that was if your wife/partner was around. I am sure everyone would agree if your wife/partner was around and did none of the house work and you did it all is that not being opressed? Please read posts carefully and concentrate on points such as IF. In this case as you have disclosed your wife/partner is not around then it does not apply to you and hence you are not being oppressed.

 

You are also getting terribly defensive. Just by making a statement does it become fact. Just coz you say in my society women are equal to men does it become so. I think it may be better if you let the women of your society come on this forum or invite them to speak about themselves rather than you speaking on their behalf and claiming things which may or may not be true.

 

Wassalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam

 

Your absolutely right that is not the case. I have not heard of such rubish in my life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This discussion is apparently over because mofwtmy has no desire to be respectful.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam

 

I notice that mofwtmv last few posts have disappeared. I mean I understand why his last post was not really appropriate for this kind of forum, but what does this mean, he can't post again, he is no longer a member or what?

 

Wassalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I've already covered, Islam protects the dignity and modesty of women. It isn't suitable for a woman (rather disgusting, if you ask me) to have a man trailing behind her and staring at her shape and form and the movements of her body. If the man takes the lead, she is shielded from his eyes. He does not have eyes at the back of his head.

 

i understand and respect this ratonale concerning the man walking in front of the woman in order to portect her modesty but i must ask one question

 

does a woman also not derive some sort of prurient interest from the shape and form of the man and the movements of his body as well

 

no a man does not have eyes in the back of his head and neither does the woman

 

since the woman is already bound to cover herself for modesty and has the burqa available to her for this purpose then her form and movements are obscured from view

 

why then is the woman still required to walk behind the man even if she is covered by the burqa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i understand and respect this ratonale concerning the man walking in front of the woman in order to portect her modesty but i must ask one question

 

does a woman also not derive some sort of prurient interest from the shape and form of the man and the movements of his body as well

 

I appreciate that you have taken the time to reflect on my own thoughts on such an issue, that is all I could hope from anyone. To agree to disagree with an understanding of one another.

 

Certainly, there are cases in which this would be true. However, if it came to a situation in which either the man or the woman would have to walk behind the other, then the modesty and dignity of the woman would carry more importance. Always.

 

why then is the woman still required to walk behind the man even if she is covered by the burqa

 

I have no idea if it is required since I haven't come across any scholarly writings on the subject. I was discussing the issue hypothetically. But I'm pretty sure that the burqa itself wouldn't stop the attentions of the most perverse of individuals, judging from the stories that I've heard.

 

The burqa (as well as other forms of Hijab) is one of the steps a woman takes to protect her modesty. It is certainly not the last.

 

I would like to add that we as Muslims wear the Hijab, first and foremost, because Allah told us to. It helps when something makes sense, since it appeases our own human desire to understand everything, but the fact that it is a commandment from Allah is the most important reason to us as Muslims.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×