Saudi gang rape victim sentenced to lashes and prison

[nino_savatte]

never have women been regarded inferior in Islam, this is a christian concept, based on Eve leading Adam astray, absolutely no basis 4 it in Islam whatsoever.

Vraiment? I think not...iirc, the Adam & Eve story exists in Islam too.

 

[fattboy]

Vraiment? I think not...iirc, the Adam & Eve story exists in Islam too.

of course it does nino, but this is a christian interpolation that Eve led Adam astray.
our belief is that Adam was led astray by following the suggestion(s) of satan, not Eve.
the christian versions been used by the church 2 oppress women for centuries, but this is not from Islam at all, every one is accountable 4 themselves and the concept of original sin or Eve leading Adam stray has no basis in Islam.

 

[CyberRose]

Have you read this? http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/09/0080197

That economic policy is hardly unique to neoconservatives is it?

It's also not proof that that was the primary aim of the neoconservatives, because they would want to implement their preferred economic model anywhere they were involved in. Just like anyone with a preferred economic model would like to see that implemented in the aftermath of a war (none of us are any different I guess)

However, the reason the neoconservatives wanted to remove Saddam from power was not to implement a specific economic model, it was purely for security reasons (well, what they considered security issues to American interests as well as Israeli interests)

 

[nino_savatte]

of course it does nino, but this is a christian interpolation that Eve led Adam astray.
our belief is that Adam was led astray by following the suggestion(s) of satan, not Eve.
the christian versions been used by the church 2 oppress women for centuries, but this is not from Islam at all, every one is accountable 4 themselves and the concept of original sin or Eve leading Adam stray has no basis in Islam.

As has been indicated above by myself and other posters, the Orthodoxy of all the main religions regard women as second class. Whatever the interpolation or extrapolation, the fact remains that within the patriarchy of organised (surely a contradiction in terms) religion, women are seen as the bearers of children and homemakers. Whereas machismo is celebrated, even revered, female qualities are not held in the same high regard. This is a serious problem, since we tend to celebrate destruction and savagery but not nuturing and care for others (those qualities traditionally associated with females). Islam is no exception in this regard.

 

[MikeMcc]

never have women been regarded inferior in Islam, this is a christian concept, based on Eve leading Adam astray, absolutely no basis 4 it in Islam whatsoever.

Is that why it needs twice as many female witnesses as male ones?

 

[CyberRose]

of course it does nino, but this is a christian interpolation that Eve led Adam astray.
our belief is that Adam was led astray by following the suggestion(s) of satan, not Eve.
the christian versions been used by the church 2 oppress women for centuries, but this is not from Islam at all, every one is accountable 4 themselves and the concept of original sin or Eve leading Adam stray has no basis in Islam.

What has basis in Islam according to you or whoever is irrelevant. What is relevant is what is in Saudi Arabian law. That is what the thread is about, not whether the Saudis have it correct as according to the Koran. The Saudi legal system is disgraceful in its attitude to women, and should be opposed as vehemently as other international issues

 

[aylee]

of course it does nino, but this is a christian interpolation that Eve led Adam astray.
our belief is that Adam was led astray by following the suggestion(s) of satan, not Eve.
the christian versions been used by the church 2 oppress women for centuries, but this is not from Islam at all, every one is accountable 4 themselves and the concept of original sin or Eve leading Adam stray has no basis in Islam.

Sweet mother nature, how can someone engaged in a serious debate use "2" instead of "to" and "4" rather than "for"?

Really, really irritating.

 

[Spion]

That economic policy is hardly unique to neoconservatives is it?

Errr, I would say that extreme free market economics is unique to extreme free marketeers

However, the reason the neoconservatives wanted to remove Saddam from power was not to implement a specific economic model, it was purely for security reasons (well, what they considered security issues to American interests as well as Israeli interests)

I think it's really difficult to say it was purely for security reasons unless by that you mean regional strategic considerations and economic drivers - in short, oil and regional balance of power - which were very much entwined in the motivation of those who went to war, although of course we know that not all in the higher echelons of US govt agreed fully with the details of how it was carried out, militarily or economically

 

[barney_pig]

Islam the religion of female liberation?
http://yementimes.com/article.shtml?i=1117&p=community&a=6

 

[CyberRose]

Errr, I would say that extreme free market economics is unique to extreme free marketeers

Again, that's not an economic policy unique to neoconservatives is it? My point is that whoever orchestrated the invasion (or any invasion) would have implemented their preferred economic model. That's what happens when another country invades and replaces the political and economic system of a particular country, whatever the primary reasons for invading in the first place.

I think it's really difficult to say it was purely for security reasons. What's the proof of that?

Everything they ever wrote about Saddam between 1992 and 2003?

In reality I would think that regional strategic considerations and economic drivers are/were very much entwined in the motivation of those who went to war, although of course we know that not all in the higher echelons of US govt agreed fully with the way it was carried out, militarily or economically

I agree completely that economics, politics and security are inevitably linked these days. It's especially the case for neoconservatives where democracy = liberal democracy = peace. Their belief is that if the whole world followed the American political and economic model we'd live in some kind of utopia (similar to the "unrealistic" accusations made against Communists). It could very well be argued that this policy is designed to make money (and is probably why it appears attractive to traditional Republicans like Bush, who are more than happy to go on the adventure where multinational corps get to make a shit load of money), but for the neoconservative idealists, this was always about protecting America from the threats that a lack of global democracy produced (such as the Soviet Union, then later North Korea and Saddam and now Iran)

 

[Spion]

It could very well be argued that this policy is designed to make money (and is probably why it appears attractive to traditional Republicans like Bush, who are more than happy to go on the adventure where multinational corps get to make a shit load of money)

That's exactly it for me. You can't separate the neocon desire for democracy from their economic vision - a sort of free trade of the 21st C

 

[CyberRose]

That's exactly it for me. You can't separate the neocon desire for democracy from their economic vision - a sort of free trade of the 21st C

Yes but you can seperate their motivation for having such a policy...even if it leads to the same place

 

[fattboy]

As has been indicated above by myself and other posters, the Orthodoxy of all the main religions regard women as second class. Whatever the interpolation or extrapolation, the fact remains that within the patriarchy of organised (surely a contradiction in terms) religion, women are seen as the bearers of children and homemakers. Whereas machismo is celebrated, even revered, female qualities are not held in the same high regard. This is a serious problem, since we tend to celebrate destruction and savagery but not nuturing and care for others (those qualities traditionally associated with females). Islam is no exception in this regard.

nah nino, not at all.
im telling u, Islam recognises the obvious differences between men and women, physically and emotionally but absolutely does not make women second class.
women are homemakers and responsible 4 raising the children because this role is in harmony with their make up, this is without doubt the most important job in the world, its not an insult or relegating them 2 some kind of servant.
men on the other hand r responsible 4 providing 4 their women, be they wives, daughters or mothers, aunts etc.
in Islam men have a lot of responsibility, a lot more than women.
men have a role of mantaining women, responsible 4 their protection and maintenance because this is in harmony with our make up.
we dont believe in women going out 2 work 2 earn, this is a husband or fathers responsibility.
that dont mean a woman cant trade or work, especially if she is in a position where she needs 2, for example a reverted sister with no family, or a sister working in some beneficial organisation.Khadija, the first wife of the Prophet pbuh him was involved in commerce and trade and was very pious and successful.
men and women are absolutely equal, recognising certain obvious differences isnt saying men r better, but men have more responsibilities in this sense.

i like this quote, ive heard it quite a lot but i dunno where its from, but it sums up the relationship between men and women well in Islam

Woman was Created from the rib of a man
she was not made from part of his head to top him
nor was she made from his feet to be trampled on
she was Created out of his side to be equal to him,
under his arm to be protected by him,
and near his heart to be loved

our example is the Prophet pbuh, and he was the best of ppl 2 his wives.
he was gentle, romantic, generous, treated his wives with the utmost respect and honour, and his treatment of all ppl was impeccable.
when he'd pray he cut short the prayer if he heard a baby cry so not 2 upset the mother, this is our example, and what we try 2 emulate as muslims.

 

[nino_savatte]

nah nino, not at all.
im telling u, Islam recognises the obvious differences between men and women, physically and emotionally but absolutely does not make women second class.
women are homemakers and responsible 4 raising the children because this role is in harmony with their make up, this is without doubt the most important job in the world, its not an insult or relegating them 2 some kind of servant.
men on the other hand r responsible 4 providing 4 their women, be they wives, daughters or mothers, aunts etc.
in Islam men have a lot of responsibility, a lot more than women.
men have a role of mantaining women, responsible 4 their protection and maintenance because this is in harmony with our make up.
we dont believe in women going out 2 work 2 earn, this is a husband or fathers responsibility.
that dont mean a woman cant trade or work, especially if she is in a position where she needs 2, for example a reverted sister with no family, or a sister working in some beneficial organisation.Khadija, the first wife of the Prophet pbuh him was involved in commerce and trade and was very pious and successful.
men and women are absolutely equal, recognising certain obvious differences isnt saying men r better, but men have more responsibilities in this sense.

i like this quote, ive heard it quite a lot but i dunno where its from, but it sums up the relationship between men and women well in Islam

Woman was Created from the rib of a man
she was not made from part of his head to top him
nor was she made from his feet to be trampled on
she was Created out of his side to be equal to him,
under his arm to be protected by him,
and near his heart to be loved

Thanks for proving my point about patriarchy.

 

[invisibleplanet]

Aha!

Woman was Created from the rib of a man
she was not made from part of his head to top him
nor was she made from his feet to be trampled on
she was Created out of his side to be equal to him,
under his arm to be protected by him,
and near his heart to be loved

That is not what is written!

As it was written: G0D divided Adam IN TWO to create WOMAN, literally, he took one SIDE of him (half of him, from head to toe) then closed the FLESH to restore him to a whole being.

 

[nino_savatte]

You're not really a Muslim are you, fattboy?

 

[invisibleplanet]

Made as EQUALS, made to work together, to fit together as opposites in gender, but nevertheless, equals in every way, to help each other with each one acting as complement to the other.

 

[fattboy]

Islam the religion of female liberation?
http://yementimes.com/article.shtml?i=1117&p=community&a=6

yeah and u know what were supposed 2 use 2 'beat' them with?

a cane?

a whip?

our hands?

no, a miswaak, a little twig used for cleaning our teeth with, no bigger than a toothbrush.
how much pain and injury can u cause with a toothbrush?
and again, violence is the very last resort, not the first, and first u advise them and then if that hasnt worked u dont sleep with them and only then can u resort 2 this.
durban doesnt equate with 'beat' in the english sense of the word either.
divorce in Islam is the very last option and this as avoided at all costs unless its really necessary, because breaking up of families causes lots of problems and hardship, and even then ppl meet from her family and his 2 try and rectify the situation.
also, the Prophet pbuh never raised his hand 2 any of his wives.

 

[fattboy]

Aha!


That is not what is written!

As it was written: G0D divided Adam IN TWO to create WOMAN, literally, he took one SIDE of him (half of him, from head to toe) then closed the FLESH to restore him to a whole being.

i dunno if this is from any scripture, it might have been written by a poet, google it.

 

[fattboy]

You're not really a Muslim are you, fattboy?

ah man...

 

[fattboy]

Made as EQUALS, made to work together, to fit together as opposites in gender, but nevertheless, equals in every way, to help each other with each one acting as complement to the other.

'They are your garments, and ye are their garments...'

(translation of) Qur'an Chapter 2 verse 187

 

[invisibleplanet]

i dunno if this is from any scripture, it might have been written by a poet, google it.

No. It's written in the Torah. Bereshit 2:20-24

 

[fattboy]

Aha!


That is not what is written!

As it was written: G0D divided Adam IN TWO to create WOMAN, literally, he took one SIDE of him (half of him, from head to toe) then closed the FLESH to restore him to a whole being.

im sure all the ppl of the book believe Eve was Created from a rib bone.

 

[CyberRose]

You're not really a Muslim are you, fattboy?

You cotton on to things quick!!!

 

[fattboy]

No. It's written in the Torah. Bereshit 2:20-24

is that Genesis in the bible?

 

[invisibleplanet]

im sure all the ppl of the book believe Eve was Created from a rib bone.

You might prefer to think that, but I don't because that's not what is written.
This was certainly was not how it was understood 2000 years ago by Jews (we have proof). It is not what is written today, so no, that is not the truth.

The 'rib' thing must have snuck in after the Romans destroyed the Temple prior to their seizing control of Christianity.

 

[invisibleplanet]

is that Genesis in the bible?

Jup. That's Genesis in your Old Testament.

 

[fattboy]

well it could have been written by a muslim, in fact, in the sharia sense of the word, no doubt it was.

its not my old testament, Torah, Injeel, Qur'an.

 

[fattboy]

You might prefer to think that, but I don't because that's not what is written.
This was certainly was not how it was understood 2000 years ago by Jews (we have proof). It is not what is written today, so no, that is not the truth.

The 'rib' thing must have snuck in after the Romans destroyed the Temple prior to their seizing control of Christianity.

well that was quite fortuitous then because they got it right.

 

[invisibleplanet]

well it could have been written by a muslim, in fact, in the sharia sense of the word, no doubt it was.

its not my old testament, Torah, Injeel, Qur'an.

Then why ask me if it's Genesis when I told you it's Bereshit.
Perhaps you'd better go and read the Taurat again, heh?