If they know they will be killed then they should try to kill all those who would kill before they get the chance , but then they wont , so be it.
Islam Good for Women?
- Thread starter IceAgeCivilizations
- Start date
If they know they will be killed then they should try to kill all those who would kill before they get the chance , but then they wont , so be it.
In the U.S domestic abuse is taken very serious, the days of "just an argument" etc. are long long gone. Just like DWI, making you walk home is not going to happen anymore.
As far as in Islamic countries, not referring to physical abuse, many of these women want to live that way or at least dont really have a problem with it. I guess we are in agreement there.
Personally i dont mind having a woman being the breadwinner, i would encourage it
- go ahead take that test, wake up every morning go to work, etc. etc. and give me money when i ask for it.
...hmm...yes. The spirit of the law is an error area, to be sure, but the existence of those same laws have helped women.
From the way women were treated in Roman times, he interacted and gave credit to women like no other ancient figure, right?
Compare what Jesus said about women to what Muhammed said about them.
That is a bit wierd, yeah. One of the things that keeps me from being religious.
History has been a progression, wouldn't you say?
if not us then who? i don't see any other country with the balls to take the initiative.
try telling them that.
how, in the name of god, is the west oppressing the women of islam?
didn't you just say change should be brought in with a sledgehammer?
more precisely the common woman, the woman in the streets
the only reason these islamic women wrap themselves up in burlap is because of arranged marriages. if the men had to choose a mate that tradition would bite the dust.
ever hear of propaganda bells? if the women of islam hears it over and over that islamic women are supposed to be a certain way, what's going to happen?
well see that's the problem, how do you, or anybody, know that what you hear is actually what the woman in the street wants.
Bells
Staff member
Interesting. So because they are oppressed, you are again denying them the right to choose their own future and way of life? So you free them from Islamic oppression and force them to endure your own and what YOU think their way of life should be?
Do you have any idea how hypocritical that is?
Refer to above.
You are basing what their lives should be like by comparing to a Western view point. When they way they see things might be in complete opposition to how we see it. At least have the god damn decency to respect their wishes and decisions. You dare say they need to be freed from their oppressors, but you refuse to respect what it is they might want. In short, you also become their oppressors.
By trying to force our way of life down their throats and denying them the right to choose what it is THEY want. They have a right to a voice as well you know. Your disrespect of their religion is a form of oppression. Your disrespect of their choice and voice is a form of oppression. The constant pressure you put on them to want or demand change is a form of oppression. Instead of allowing them to decide for themselves, you are making the decision for them. Your arrogance with your 'if we don't who will' is a form of oppression. You have a complete lack of understanding of their culture and their religion and that too is oppressive. Akin to how you claim their religion is denying them their rights, you deny them their rights as well.
Why don't you go to Iraq, for example, and ask a woman there whether she thinks the West is oppressing her.
Do you think Nadia is going to say 'no, the West has liberated me'? Nadia had a great time when she was expecting her baby by the way. Because of the situation and the curfew in Iraq, her husband had to drive her to stay at a friend's house who had a midwife in the home just in case she went into labour in the night. Why? Because the curfew meant she could not go to the hospital at night to have her child and her husband was terrified she and/or the baby would die if a professional was not there when she did give birth. Yes, how liberated do you think Nadia feels right now?
Do you think his wife would say that the US has broght her freedom from oppression? Or would she view the US patrols as oppressors if she can't even drive to the hospital to give birth because she might get shot at?
I said I wish it could be. But I also have the realisation that the sledgehammer can only be wielded by the women in Islam and not by the men and women in the West. For us to demand changes of and for these women, we are not only disrespecting them, but we are also oppressing them ourselves because we are demanding they now adopt a Western viewpoint to freedom and equal rights.
Yes and? Do you think the common woman in Islam should be asked what it is she wants? Don't you think she has a right to decide? After all, we are talking about women having rights aren't we? We are talking about freeing women so they have a right to decide and to choose what it is they want, aren't we?
Don't you think every woman in Islam, be she common on the streets or not, should have a right to choose for herself? Answer yes and you get it. Answer no and you are no better then their current oppressors. That's basically what it comes down to in the end.
Again, a complete lack of understanding of their culture and their religion. What of the woman who WANTS to wear the hijab? Don't you think a woman should have the right to choose what she bloody wears? Who the hell are you, a Western man, to demand what an Islamic woman wears? Don't you think an Islamic woman should have the right to choose for herself what she deems appropriate to wear? Or are you going to further oppress them by not only denying them the right to choose their own freedom and rights, but also deny them how they dress and how they practice their religion?
What of the women who like to have arranged marriages because they think their parents know them well enough to choose someone who will make them happy, and said marriage works? Are you going to deny these women that as well? Who are YOU to tell them what is right or wrong? Don't you think they have the ability and capacity to determine their own wants and desires? God if I were an oppressed woman and I saw you coming across the horizon to supposedly free me, I'd run in the opposite direction because your so called freedom comes with further oppression because you are demanding they curb to YOUR ways when they simply might not want to. Women in Islam might just want to have freedom within their culture and religion that has nothing to do with Western notions of freedom.
So now you think the women in Islam are stupid and mindless drones?
So instead, you wish to drone into their heads what they really should be? Ermm ok. Yeah, you really want their freedom and give them rights alright.
How do you know it is not? If you listen to them and actually hear what it is they are saying and what they want, you might get it through your thick skull that they don't want to be like the West. And whether you are able to understand and respect their decision will mean the difference between you then becoming their oppressors or their freedom fighters. After all, if you refuse them their voice and demand they be a certain way, you become exactly like the oppressors they now face.
Before rights comes respect. And before you can help them fight for their rights, you must respect them, their religion and their culture, because what they want will be based on that and not on what we in the West want or think they should have. And if you can't respect them enough to allow them a voice to tell you what it is they want, then you also become their oppressors.
we are talking HUMAN RIGHTS here bells, things like honor killings, arranged marriages,
i stand by my intentions. honor killings is wrong, period. arranged marriages is wrong, period.
can you spell indoctrination? what i've mentioned is wrong bells, no ifs, ands, or buts, about it.
i'll agree, as long as those decisions are rational.
what i said bells, was that they need to be treated like the rest of humanity. no woman in her right mind would want to be murdered because her choice of boyfriend doesn't fit with her parents choice.
name 5 women who want to be told at 13 they WILL marry a certain person no matter how much the female despises the idea.
i don't mean to be crass here bells but their religion can, uh, well nevermind.
i would LOVE to
wrong.
islam is so thoroughly intgrated into their government that any objectiveness is impossible. this is exactly what we are trying to accomplish in iraq. we have completely dismantled the previous government and replaced it with members of the civilian population. idealy there will be NO islam in iraqs government.
yes to all of tyhe above, under one condition, and that is she is truely free to make her decision. that means free from any religious influence.
there are differences between rich and poor bells in case you missed my meaning.
religion has no, none, nada, business in government, zero.
then let her. she does or doesn't on her own free will.
islamic woman? whats an islamic woman? islam is a religion bells.
in my mind an islamic woman is the equivilent of a nun.
because women are not peices of property to be bartered and traded thats why.
Saddam was secular, not religious.
And a lot of women have no problem with arranged marriages, neither do a lot of men.
A Muslim woman, if not an Islamic one. And many of them prefer their own culture and follow it even when in the West and given a choice.
And a lot of women have no problem with arranged marriages, neither do a lot of men.
A Muslim woman, if not an Islamic one. And many of them prefer their own culture and follow it even when in the West and given a choice.
I know Bells was dying for me to interject here, and she shall not be disappointed.
I would put it this way: I would like to see them empowered enough to be able to have their rights. Presently, they don't have much power; I don't think I need point out that I saw a show on Syrian TV about the size of the rod you can whack your wife with to imply any more strongly that they don't have much in the way of political protection. Obviously that varies place to place, and it may be that islamic women WILL empower themselves yet; I can't imagine the likes of that particular showdown, of course. And yet, many desire equality that they are unable to get. The women of Afghanistan were unable to work or go to school - they might have fought for their rights, but when one is locked up in the home (when not escorted about by male relatives, who might be less sympathetic to the plight of their female kin than would be expected elsewhere) it becomes difficult to form a popular front for one's own liberation. So...I think part of this movement should, by rights, come from those who claim a great desire for human rights and equality - Western nations, socialist or otherwise, but more than that: I think in many places it cannot come without external pressure. No one was going to release the women of Afghanistan from subjugation, and even now it isn't all that great. I think the examples illustrate the point.
So: does that settle the Bells-Leo combattre or should I fetch the bazookas?
Very best to both of you,
Geoff
I would put it this way: I would like to see them empowered enough to be able to have their rights. Presently, they don't have much power; I don't think I need point out that I saw a show on Syrian TV about the size of the rod you can whack your wife with to imply any more strongly that they don't have much in the way of political protection. Obviously that varies place to place, and it may be that islamic women WILL empower themselves yet; I can't imagine the likes of that particular showdown, of course. And yet, many desire equality that they are unable to get. The women of Afghanistan were unable to work or go to school - they might have fought for their rights, but when one is locked up in the home (when not escorted about by male relatives, who might be less sympathetic to the plight of their female kin than would be expected elsewhere) it becomes difficult to form a popular front for one's own liberation. So...I think part of this movement should, by rights, come from those who claim a great desire for human rights and equality - Western nations, socialist or otherwise, but more than that: I think in many places it cannot come without external pressure. No one was going to release the women of Afghanistan from subjugation, and even now it isn't all that great. I think the examples illustrate the point.
So: does that settle the Bells-Leo combattre or should I fetch the bazookas?
Very best to both of you,
Geoff
I know Bells was dying for me to interject here, and she shall not be disappointed.
I would put it this way: I would like to see them empowered enough to be able to have their rights. Presently, they don't have much power; I don't think I need point out that I saw a show on Syrian TV about the size of the rod you can whack your wife with to imply any more strongly that they don't have much in the way of political protection. Obviously that varies place to place, and it may be that islamic women WILL empower themselves yet; I can't imagine the likes of that particular showdown, of course. And yet, many desire equality that they are unable to get. The women of Afghanistan were unable to work or go to school - they might have fought for their rights, but when one is locked up in the home (when not escorted about by male relatives, who might be less sympathetic to the plight of their female kin than would be expected elsewhere) it becomes difficult to form a popular front for one's own liberation. So...I think part of this movement should, by rights, come from those who claim a great desire for human rights and equality - Western nations, socialist or otherwise, but more than that: I think in many places it cannot come without external pressure. No one was going to release the women of Afghanistan from subjugation, and even now it isn't all that great. I think the examples illustrate the point.
So: does that settle the Bells-Leo combattre or should I fetch the bazookas?
Very best to both of you,
Geoff
Women were working in Afghanistan before the Taliban came to power, women were working in Iran before the democratic government was toppled, women were working in Iraq when Saddam was in power.
First off, men are lazy.
Secondly: arranged marriages are not for everyone. In fact, when you think about it, the matter is really predicated on force: all has been "arranged". No take-backs. It's like a business arrangement for families. This is fine for some, but not for others and the entire issue of arranged marriage is the firm lockstep march to the altar (or what have you). For those comfortable with it: fine. But those that aren't - in the present, and prior to it - are pressured to conform to it, and sometimes punished if they refuse it, which is wrong.
And not thereafter; yes, I know.
The culture is different, the idea of family and marriage is not a Western one. Marriage is about children, community and a stable mutual relationship based on trust and shared expectations.
In Islam marriage is a contract, conducted like a business, with all clauses related to the marriage, and all monetary arrangements clearly laid out before marriage and in the event of a divorce (which is permitted). A woman can remarry within 90 days of a divorce or widowhood, has the option of maintaining complete sole control of her finances and has her children provided for.
Exactly. Before they were liberated from communists, democrats and WMDs.
doesn't women in the middle east have any brains? aren't they intelligent enough to choose for themselves? do they really feel like pieces of prperty?
this was the exact same conditions in japan before the americans took over.
no america has left japan, do you see them going back to where they were?
they are women, no islam, christianity, hinduism, buddhism, no religious connotations at all.