What has religion done for women.

[Halibut]

it was no lie, as usual you're becoming offensive so the next we'll a warning due to your offensive bickering some people will do anything to get a topic closed when they're losing the debate.

 

Do you think words are important? Does the way we speak to people matter?

[Bassman62]

Do you think words are important? Does the way we speak to people matter?

According to moderators yes.

BTW have you contributed to the topic yet?

[Halibut]

Do you think words are important?

 

According to moderators yes.

 

I'm not asking the moderators, I'm asking you. Do you think words are important?

[Bassman62]

I'm not asking the moderators, I'm asking you. Do you think words are important?

Have you anything to contribute to the topic?

[Halibut]

Have you anything to contribute to the topic?

 

Obviously. Do you think words are important?

[Bassman62]

Obviously. Do you think words are important?

Don't you???????????????????

[mort]

Here are some words for you - back on topic - which for your information about religion in general - and when you get back on topic do so without bickering please.

[Suffragette1]

Protection.

An example. In a non-religious society, shagging around and having loads of kids to blokes a lass only met once while smashed is acceptable.

 

In most religions the family is important and that sort of stuff isn't on.

That leaves a stable family unit and that's generally better for the woman and any kids.

It's sometimes less than perfect but generally better.

 

That lack of mega bonking also limits STDs of whatever type so women (and men) are protected from them.

 

Really? Is that the case in the multiple of countries of a variety of different faiths in AIDS ridden Africa? I think not.

[peewee84]

Now, going to the verse you quoted and was quoted before, you have to realize which women these verses are talking about. These are 'nashez' women (actual word used is 'nushuz'). It does not have an exact English translation, but was basically translated as disloyalty and ill-conduct- which is not very accurate. One of the great commentators of the Quran, Ibn Kathir, said it was a grave thing-something that would lead to divorce.

 

But the Quran points out certain steps to deal with these type of situations. Hence :

1.admonish them

But if she didn't amend/repent herself

2.refuse to share their beds (i.e corporal separation)

If she didn't amend/repent herself,

3.(and last) beat them (lightly).

 

As far as I can read in the quote, it doesn't say "adulterous" women, it says "rebellious" women which is completely open to the man's interpretation for him to justify beating his wife.

 

Even if it does mean adulterous or disloyal women, your still basically agreeing that the Quran justifies one of the punishments as beating them.

That's wrong. Full stop. Divorce them yes, beat them no.

 

To me, the rest of the stuff you have written is irrelevant and a twist in words to try and make quotes such as this acceptable. If it was meant to mean what you say it means, it would be written as such. All it clearly says says to me is that you can beat your wife for being "rebllious"

[peewee84]

.Now, if I came across a situation that my wife was acting in dishonesty, ill conduct, I would work towards correcting things. But i know this would never happen as she is one who would not put herself in any situation to weaken herself- its why it is in the West (in general) you have high levels of adultery and divorce compared to Muslim countries. Again, this verse come to light as the man is the protector and guardian- he should ensure his wife does not mix in with the wrong people (as he himself should also be likewise). It is in the West where you have higher levels of violence against women as well as rape- you can check stats on amnesty/nationmaster....................

 

I very much doubt amnesty/mationmaster have the complete figures due to the fact that many beaten muslim keep quiet for fear of shame/worse consequences and conditioning....