Muslim Marriage Contract
- Thread starter Myles
- Start date
well then it would be ok if your wife had three or four husbands.
so because i dont want to jump out of a plane people shouldnt be alowed to skydive?
because i want a redhead blonds shouldnt be alowed to marry?
i dont get your point, why should what i want to do personally effect what my brother can do or my sisters? or my children?
or the wider community?
UNLESS there is significant scientific evidence that it causes harm to people who dont concent OR to people who are unable to concent?
is there any evidence (SCIENTIFIC evidence) that children raised in these sorts of relationships at any greater risk of harm or finantial hardship than those raised in mangomomuse ones?
because i want a redhead blonds shouldnt be alowed to marry?
i dont get your point, why should what i want to do personally effect what my brother can do or my sisters? or my children?
or the wider community?
UNLESS there is significant scientific evidence that it causes harm to people who dont concent OR to people who are unable to concent?
is there any evidence (SCIENTIFIC evidence) that children raised in these sorts of relationships at any greater risk of harm or finantial hardship than those raised in mangomomuse ones?
you said "what is so bad about poligamy?"
i am not judging the practice and i am happy that you agree with the Muslims and Christians (though there are not many Christians who practice it) who are polygamists.
i am simply stating that if it were a womans world then women would be able to have multiple husbands. since you agree with it for men then perhaps you would agree with it for women?
then when you are married your wife can make the decision for herself to take another husband.
i am not judging the practice and i am happy that you agree with the Muslims and Christians (though there are not many Christians who practice it) who are polygamists.
i am simply stating that if it were a womans world then women would be able to have multiple husbands. since you agree with it for men then perhaps you would agree with it for women?
then when you are married your wife can make the decision for herself to take another husband.
as i said it should be a group decision between the existing partners as well as the new partner.
in general no i dont object at all, in the case of PB she and i have chosen to have a monomgiomous relationship and so no i wouldnt accept it of her any more than she would of me, that is our personal choices.
other members have said they are happy to live the swingers life, i have no problem with that either. its not what i would chose but its there choice
in general no i dont object at all, in the case of PB she and i have chosen to have a monomgiomous relationship and so no i wouldnt accept it of her any more than she would of me, that is our personal choices.
other members have said they are happy to live the swingers life, i have no problem with that either. its not what i would chose but its there choice
If Muslims don't like it in their adopted homeland, why don't they return to their Islamic paradise? If Western countries such as the U.K are indeed so bigoted, why would Muslims flock there?
That is about the most stupid thing I have heard you say. Britain is a secular democracy and advantage is taken of our liberal attitude by members of minority religious groups to accomodate what, to our eyes. appear to be backward behaviour.I could quote many examples to support what I am saying.
Democracy is not a failed system or we would not tolerate the antics of people such as those referred to in the BBC programme. We do our best to help young women escape from what they regard as the prison of their communities. I have mentioned our safe houses on more than one occasion. Muslims show no sign of wanting to integrate, in fact I can not see it happening until a generation comes along which is prepared to drop its backward ways in favour of fitting in with the majority.
We do not persecute people who make fun of religion or criticize it. We leave that to Muslims , who take umbrage at the slightest criticism of their prophet.
I shall say no more about all this but would ask you a straight question. Why don't you listen to the BBC programme and then give us your opinion, not on British democracy but on Muslim therocracy.
You seem reluctant to do this and I can't help wondering why. Perhaps you prefer to indulge in generalisations rather than deal with specific issues which will deny you the opportunity to indulge in your usual evasive behaviour.
Please note that this thread is not about Pakistan, Saudi, Iraq or any Muslim country. It is about the behaviour of Muslims in Britain, primitive behaviour which is sanctioned by the Muslim Council of Britain.
So put up or shut up. Listen to the programme and comment on it or hold your peace
Here is the link again:
Marriage contract issue on BBC's Sunday.
The programme deals with religious affairs and the part you need to hear is about ten minutes long. It is towards the end of a half-hour slot but you can speed things up by shunting the indicator along to the part you need to hear. So why not give ten minutes of your time and let us have your views on the specific issue in question.
There is nothing wrong with polygamy per se but there is a lot wrong with it if all parties do not consent. I am not talking about polygamy but of the subjugation of women. There is a lot wrong with that. Perhaps you would care to listen to the BBC programme and then make your mind up
Because they want it both ways.
I wish to place on record that I believe SAM is untrustworthy. She will say anything to defend Islam against any form of criticism, without regard for the truth.
In the present instance I drew attention to the Muslim Council of Britain's refusal to ratify a marriage contract which had taken four years to complete and of which they had previously approved. The details are as set out above.
SAMs response was disingenuous. She showed us a picture of a young couple in Pakistan who are holding hands while on a shopping spree. She woulds have us believe this is standard muslim practice. She omitted to say that in Pakistan there is an ongoing conflict between the religious and secular authorities. If the religious authorities win the day, the behaviour shown in SAM's picture will not be allowed. The couple will not be allowed to be alone together, let alone hold hands in public.
I provided a link to the BBC programme covering the rejection of the Muslim marriage contract in Britain and invited SAM to listen and then comment. Despite repeated requests from me. she has refused t0 do so.
The inevitable conclusion is that SAM knows very well that Muslim women are oppressed and that she has refused to comment open the programme because she cannot defend the Muslim behaviour it describes.
I do not think it unfair to regard her as disingenous and to treat whatever she says on religious matters with suspicion. Her chance to prove me wrong remains open.
In the present instance I drew attention to the Muslim Council of Britain's refusal to ratify a marriage contract which had taken four years to complete and of which they had previously approved. The details are as set out above.
SAMs response was disingenuous. She showed us a picture of a young couple in Pakistan who are holding hands while on a shopping spree. She woulds have us believe this is standard muslim practice. She omitted to say that in Pakistan there is an ongoing conflict between the religious and secular authorities. If the religious authorities win the day, the behaviour shown in SAM's picture will not be allowed. The couple will not be allowed to be alone together, let alone hold hands in public.
I provided a link to the BBC programme covering the rejection of the Muslim marriage contract in Britain and invited SAM to listen and then comment. Despite repeated requests from me. she has refused t0 do so.
The inevitable conclusion is that SAM knows very well that Muslim women are oppressed and that she has refused to comment open the programme because she cannot defend the Muslim behaviour it describes.
I do not think it unfair to regard her as disingenous and to treat whatever she says on religious matters with suspicion. Her chance to prove me wrong remains open.
So you think I am oppressed? I gave clear details on the Muslim marriage laws. If you think they are in error, you are welcome to check them out. We usually associate the kind of oppression you are talking about with poor or uneducated elements in society, which stems from their exploitation due to lack of awareness. So I am interested in knowing what is wrong with British society that such oppression occurs in the not-poor [at least not Third world poor] and educated classes. I mean really, does the BBC tell you why its happening in Britain?
I did not say that you are personally oppressed. What is wrong with British society is that we are too tolerant.The Muslims get away with things a non-Muslim would not because we tolerate behaviour informed by religious belief, however stupid.
The question you should address is that of the behaviour of Muslims in Britain and the role of their council. Why will you not listen to the programme? You would then be able to give us an informed opinion.
Meanwhile you can show us a few pictures of young lovers in Saudi, Iraq and Iran, for example.
You seem to think the Muslim Council has any major role in Muslim society. You're too influenced by Christian religious structures. Any organisation in Muslims is only as important as they want it to be. There are thousands of such organisations floating around for every Ali, Ahmed and Majid. The question should be, why are there so many Muslims in Britain taking any of these councils seriously? I mean, why should they even care? They don't make any laws and nor are any Muslims bound by them. Wanna get married? Find yourself any imam to read the vows, get four witnesses and you're done. :shrug:
And that post on Pakistan was by redarmy11, who is British.
Here is a couple in Iran
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world...-dream-deferred/2008/03/14/1205472082068.html
And that post on Pakistan was by redarmy11, who is British.
Here is a couple in Iran
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world...-dream-deferred/2008/03/14/1205472082068.html
Last edited:
No of course not. You represent the elite, the ones who have the world on a string. You think that women (people) who are abused and repressed are stupid. You think that people going on shopping sprees with big f'ng smiles on their faces and carrying all those bags actually means something to people who cannot even afford to feed themselves.
People born with silver spoons in their mouths cannot see or understand peoples suffering. They are indifferent to it.
And people in Britain are suffering? They cannot afford to feed themselves?