Freethought Nation

In my experience with UK muslims, I find that they were trained to read the Quran in Arabic, but with no comprehension of what they were reading.

Generally speaking, they only seem to get their knowledge of their own scripture from others--usually from the imam and somewhat domineering parents. For instance, one 30 year old Muslim of my acquantance didn't dare eat duck eggs because he didn't know if they were haram or halal, despite the fact that he ate chicken eggs. On being asked, his dad informed him--with a whack--that were were haram, though they in fact are not. I could recount more, but you get the idea.

Ironically, I lent a copy of Dawood's Quran to my brother. The subsequent surprise amongst his Muslim friends when they found him reading it was (apparently) similar to meeting a pig talking. None of them had read it, and one of them even borrowed it, much to his mum's delight. His mum even unbent enough to teach the gorah (meaning "whitey", i.e. anybody not as well tanned as themselves) traditional pakistani cooking.

Suffice it to say, if translations of the Quran in their native languages could be encouraged, perhaps Islam might go through its own Reformation. That's a thought, it might be better sending them Qurans rather than Bibles . . .

As for "women's matters", the Quran offers much material for self-appointed interpreters to press their iniquitous views on others. This has to be intelligently opposed.

The various aspects of the life of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) are all so sublime, that in the matter of choice, a writer on the subject soon finds himself baffled and selection becomes very nearly impossible. In consideration of present day needs, however, I wish to take up that side of the Holy Prophet’s life which concerns the way in which he purged the world of that form of utter slavery which had been for all time the curse of humanity. I mean the slavery of women.

Before the advent of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) women in all countries were in the position of slaves and chattels, and their slavery could not but have reacted adversely even on men; for sons of slaves cannot assimilate the spirit of freedom.

There is no doubt woman, either because of her beauty or because of her sterling character, has always been able, in individual cases, to dominate over men, but freedom thus obtained could not be termed true freedom, for the simple reason that it was not hers by way of right. It was only a matter of exception to the general rule, and freedom which is exceptional, can hardly lead to the culture of true aspirations.

The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had his advent about 1,350 years ago. Before his time, no religion or nation afforded to woman such freedom as she could use by way of right. Of course in countries where no law prevailed, she was free from all disabilities. Yet even this kind of freedom cannot be called true freedom. It is rather described as license. True freedom is that which is reaped out of a state of civilization and conformity to law. The sort of freedom we get when we break the bounds of the law is not freedom at all because such freedom does not generate any strength of character.


II

At the time of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and before, woman was placed in a condition in which she was not the owner of her property; her husband was regarded as the owner of her property. She did not have a share in the property of her father. Nor could she inherit the property of her husband, though in some cases she had the right of managing it during the husband’s lifetime. When married, she was either assigned to her husband for good as his property, and in no circumstances could she be separated from him; or in the alternative, it was given to the husband to divorce her but not given to her to separate herself from the husband, however afflicted she might have been.

Should the husband desert her, cease to discharge his obligations towards her or run away from her, there was no law to protect her. It was obligatory on her to be resigned to her lot, and work for a living both for herself and her children. The husband was entitled, out of bad temper, to beat his wife; she was not to raise a voice against it. Should the husband die, the wife, in some countries, fell into the hands of her husband’s relatives, who could then marry her to whomsoever they liked, either in charity or in return of some benefits received. In some places, on the other hand, she was merely the property of her husband. Some husbands would sell their wives or lose them in gambling and betting, and when they did so, they were all considered to be within their rights.

A woman had no right over her children whether in her position of dependence as wife, or in a position of independence of her husband. In domestic affairs she had no privilege. Even in religion she had no status. Of the abiding spiritual blessings, she was to have no share. In consequence, husbands used to squander the property of their wives and abandon them without providing for their subsistence. She could not, even out of her own property, give away, in charity, or help her relatives except with the consent of her husband, and a husband who looked with greed on the property of his wife could hardly give his consent in such a matter.

Of the property of her parents, to whom children are bound by a most deep and affectionate tie, woman was deprived of all share. And yet daughters have as much claim on their parents as have the sons. Parents who out of a sense of justice, would give away during their lifetime some of their property to their daughters, prepared only for strife in their families. It would not occur to the sons that after the parent’s death they (the sons) would inherit the whole of their property (and therefore should not grudge their sisters receiving occasional gifts from their parents); all they considered was that their sisters, for the time being were having more than they.

Of the property, similarly, of her husband -- with whom a wife has the relation of complete union -- woman was again, deprived altogether. Distant relatives of the husband could each claim a share, but not the wife -- one, indeed, who was the possessor of his confidence, a life-long partner of his and whose labour and care must have so largely contributed to his income. On the other hand, when she managed all her husband’s property, she did not have any genuine right over any portion of it. While she could spend out of the income of that property she could not dispose any part of it. In acts of charity, therefore, she was prevented from taking part in the manner she liked.

When the husband oppressed his wife, she could not be separated from him. In communities in which separation was at all possible, it was on conditions under which self-respecting women preferred death to separation. For instance, a condition of separation was that proof should be furnished establishing the misconduct of either party, as well as ill treatment on the part of the husband. What was still worse was that in cases in which it was impossible for a woman to live with her husband instead of complete separation, she was only allowed to live apart, a state of living which itself is a form of torture, for in this way she was compelled to lead an empty, purposeless life.

In some cases it happened that while the husband could divorce his wife whenever he liked, the wife in no case could demand a divorce. If the husband deserted her, or abandoned the country without providing for her, she was obliged to linger through life without the right to devote herself usefully to her country or community. Married life, instead of being a life of happiness, became for her a life of misery. Her obligation it was, not only to undertake the duties of her husband and of herself but also to wait for her husband. The duty of the husband, namely to find a living for the household, became hers, as also her own duty, the care and upbringing of her children?mental discomfort on the one hand, and material responsibilities on the other.

All this, in short, was tolerated in the case of this poor, unprotected creature. Women were beaten and considered the property of their husbands. When the husbands died, widows were forcefully married to the relatives of their husbands, or else sold for money. In fact, husbands themselves sold away their wives. Indian princes like the Panawas lost their wife (there was one for many) in gambling, and against the law of the land, a noble princess like Dropadi could not raise the slightest voice.

In the education or upbringing of their children, the mothers were not consulted and they had no rights over their children. If the father and mother separated, the children were handed over to the father. Woman had nothing to do with the household. Whenever the husband liked, he could drive her out of the house, and she was condemned to wander about homelessly.


III

By the advent of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) all these iniquities were wiped away, as it were, with one stroke. He declared that God had particularly entrusted to him the task of safeguarding the rights of women.

He proclaimed in the name of God that man and woman by virtue of their humanity, were the equal of each other, and when they lived together, just as man had certain rights over woman, so had woman certain rights over man. Women could own property in the same way as men. A husband had no right to use the property of his wife, as long as the wife, of her own free will, did not let him have some of it. To seize her property by force, or in a manner which made it doubtful whether her natural shyness had not stood in the way of her refusal, was wrong. Whatever the husband of his own free will should give away to the wife, would be the property of the wife and the husband would not be able to take it back from her. She was to inherit the property of her parents just as well as her brothers. Only considering that all the family responsibilities fall on man, and woman’s concern is her own self alone, her share was to be one half of the share of man, that is, out of the property of their (deceased) parents.

Similarly a mother was to have a share in the property of her (deceased) son as well as the father. Only according to differing circumstances and the nature of her responsibilities in particular cases, she was to have a share at times equal to, and at times less than that of the father. On the death also of her husband she was to inherit, whether or not there were any children, because she was not to be condemned to a state of dependence on others.

Her marriage (it was granted) is, without doubt, a holy alliance, which, after man and woman have cultivated mutual intimacy to the extreme, it is very detestable to break. However, it cannot be that, even after a frightful divergence of nature has been found between the parties, or in spite of a religious, physical, economic, social or mental discrepancy between them, they should be compelled, in the interest of sheer alliance, to ruin their lives and kill the purpose of their existence.

When differences of this kind appear, and man and woman agree that they cannot live together, they can (it was taught), by mutual consent, revoke the alliance. If, however, only the husband should take this view, but not the wife, and if they fail to adjust themselves to each other, their affairs should be considered by a committee of two members, one representing the husband and the other the wife. If the committee should decide that the parties should yet make an effort to live together, it would be worthwhile on their part to try to settle their differences in the way recommended by the committee. Then if the understanding along this line should prove impossible, the husband could divorce the wife, but in such a case he would have no right to the return of whatever he might have (before divorce) given away to her, including the full value of mahr (marriage settlement).

If, on the other hand, the wife should seek separation, and not the husband, she should apply to the Qazi (Judge), and if the Qazi is satisfied that there is no unfair motive behind her application, he should order her separation. Only in such a case she will make over to the husband such of his property as had been entrusted to her, as also the value of mahr (marriage settlement). Should the husband fail to fulfil his marital obligations or cease to speak to her, or should ask her to sleep apart, he should not be able to go beyond a certain limit of time. If he persists for four months in this kind of treatment, he should be compelled either to reform himself or to divorce her.

Should he stop the allowances due to the wife or go away from her and no longer take care of her, their marriage should be regarded as null and void. (Three years have been assigned as the limit of the period of abandonment by Muslim jurists). The wife would now be free to marry again.

The husband was always to be responsible for the maintenance of his wife and children. He was to exercise only appropriate discipline, but should this discipline ever take the form of punishment, he should have proper witnesses and declare her guilt and base his judgment on evidence. Punishment should not leave any permanent ill effects behind.

A husband does not own his wife. He cannot sell her, nor reduce her to the office of domestic drudge. His wife shares with him the amenities of the household, and his treatment of her will have to correspond to the position to which he himself belongs. A treatment which is below that which should belong to the status of the husband would be wrong.

On the death of her husband, his people were to have no right over her. She would be free, and a suitable opportunity occurring, she would have the right to marry again. Nobody can stop her from doing so. Nor can a widow be compelled to live in a particular place. Only for about four months and ten days, she would live in her husband’s house, so that all those conditions which can have a bearing on her rights and on those of her husband’s people, should have time to manifest themselves.

For a year after the death of her husband a widow, whatever else is due to her, is to have in addition, the use of her husband's house, so that she should be able, out of what has been left to her, to make arrangements for her residence.

Should the husband find himself not on good terms with his wife, he himself is to keep out of the house, not ask his wife to go out of it, because the household is supposed to be the possession of the wife. In the upbringing of the children, woman has her part. She is to be consulted.

In the matter of children, her interest is not to be ignored in any way. Wet nursing, general caretaking, are to depend on her advice. If husband and wife, finding it impossible any more to live together, should want to separate from each other, the care of the small children should be entrusted to the mother. When they grow up, they should for purpose of education, come back to the father. As long as the children live with their mother, maintenance would be provided for by the father. The father would also pay for the time and labour the mother would have to spend on account of the children.

Woman, in short, was to have an independent status. All the spiritual rewards were to be open to her. She was to command the highest excellences of life after death and even in this life she could take part in the different departments of civil administration. In this regard she was to have the same consideration paid to her claims as that accorded to man.


IV

This is the teaching which the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) promulgated at a time when the standards of the world were altogether opposed to it. Through these injunctions, he reclaimed women from the slavery which had been their lot for thousands of years, to which they were forced in every land, and the yoke of which every religion had put on their neck. One man, in one time, cut asunder all these chains of serfdom! Bringing freedom to mothers, he at the same time saved their children from slavish sentiments, and provided for the germination and nourishment of great ambition and high resolve!

However, the world did not value the teachings. What was indeed a boon, it branded as tyranny. Divorce and separation it regarded as strife, inheritance as ruining the family, independence of woman as means of the disruption of domestic life. For thirteen hundred years, it went on ridiculing, in its blindness, the things which this one man who could see, had communicated to mankind for their good. It went on condemning his teachings as against human nature. Then came the time when the exquisiteness of the word of God (transmitted through the Holy Prophet) should reveal itself. The very peoples who looked upon themselves as the bearers of civilization, began to obey the civilizing injunctions of the Holy Prophet. Everyone of these peoples in turn, changed their laws in increasing conformity to the principles preached by the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace).

The English Law which required misconduct, ill treatment and beating on the part of either party as essential conditions of divorce, was changed in 1923. Misconduct by itself was accepted by the new law as a sufficient excuse for divorce.

New Zealand decided, in 1912, that a wife who has been insane for seven years, should have her marriage dissolved. In 1925, it further ruled that if either husband or wife should not discharge his or her marital obligations, they could be allowed a divorce or separation. If three years elapse without one caring for the other, divorce was in order. A good imitation of Muslim jurists, of course, but made after 1,300 years of attacks on Islam!

In the Australian State of Queensland, insanity of five years’ duration was regarded as a sufficient reason for divorce. In Tasmania, a law was passed in 1919 that misconduct, desertion for four years, drunkenness, indifference for three years, imprisonment, beating, insanity, should, one and all, be sufficient conditions of divorce. In Victoria, law was passed in 1923 that should a husband fail to look after his wife for three years, be guilty of misconduct, refuse allowances, or ill-treat his wife, divorce would be possible. Further, it was granted that imprisonment, beating, misconduct on the part of the wife, insanity, unfair treatment and constant strife shall be sufficient excuses for divorce or separation.

In Western Australia, besides the laws outlined above, the marriage of a pregnant woman has been declared to be void. (Islam, too, holds the same view).

In the island of Cuba it was decided in 1918 that forcing into misconduct, beating, using foul language, undergoing conviction, drunkenness, gambling habit, failure to discharge obligations, refusing allowances, infectious disease, or mutual agreement, shall be accepted as sufficient conditions for divorce or separation.

Italy enacted in 1919 that a woman shall have rights over her property. She can spend out of it in charity or sell it as she likes (Up to this time, in Europe, she was not recognized as the owner of her own property).

In Mexico, too, the above conditions have been accepted as being sufficient for divorce. Besides, mutual agreement has also been accepted as sufficient. This law has been passed in 1917. Portugal in 1915, Norway in 1909, Sweden in 1920, and Switzerland in 1912, have passed laws by which divorce and separation have been made permissible. In Sweden, a father is compelled by law to provide, at least up to eighteen years, for the maintenance of every child of his.

In the United States of America although the law of the land continues to maintain the right of a father over his child, yet in practice the judges have begun to pay regard to the susceptibilities of mothers, and a father is now even compelled to pay for the children (living with their mother). There are, of course many drawbacks in their law. Even though, the man’s rights have been more strictly guarded, woman is being allowed to exercise right over the property. At the same time, in many States it has been passed that if the husband should become a permanent invalid, his wife will have to provide for him.

Women are now being granted the right to vote, and avenues are being opened by which they can come to have a voice in matters of national concern. Yet all these things are coming after full thirteen hundred years have passed since the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) promulgated his teachings. There are many things which yet await coming. In many countries a woman has still no share in the inheritance of either her parents or her husband. Similarly, in several other matters Islam continues to provide guidance to the world, though the world has not acknowledged such guidance. The time is not distant, however, when the world will accept the guidance coming from the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in these matters as it has already done in others, and which the Holy Prophet initiated on behalf of the freedom of women will bring forth its fruits to the full

Thanks for the drive-by spam full of utter nonsense.

There's next-to-nothing "subtle" about Islam. It's about as gritty as it gets.

Despite all the meaningless mumbo-jumbo and mindless apologizing, the fact will remain that Islam is highly misogynistic.

Thank you for such an eye opening article, Acharya. You have always been at the forefront of fight against discriminatory laws against women. Islam, by fiat, discriminates against women. Qur’an 4:11 “Allah directs you in regard of your Children’s (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females…. These are settled portions ordained by Allah.”

There are many more “directives” that for all intents and purposes make women chattel of men. Here are some of the shameful rules and practices of Islamic misogyny.

Women are inferior to men:
“Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is most high. Qur'an 4:34

Women are worth half of man:
“Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, "Isn't the witness of a women equal to half that of a man?" The women said "yes". He said "This is because of the deficiency of the women's mind." Sahih Bukhari 3:48:82

Women are sex slaves:
“And now, people, you acquire certain rights over your wives, and they do you. The right you acquire over them is that they should not let someone you hate sleep in your beds, and not to commit a manifest obscenity [or adultery]. If they do [commit it], then God has given you permission to leave them alone in their beds and give them a beating, though not too hard. If they give over, they get their provision and clothing with kindness; I command you good-will for your wives, for they are your captives that do not own anything of their own. You have taken them by the faithfulness of God, and made their sexual organs lawful for you by the words of God.” Ibn Hisham, al-Sira al-nabawiyya (Cairo, 1963), 4:251.

Women are Toys:
“Omar [one of the Khalifs] was once talking when his wife interjected, so he said to her: 'You are a toy, if you are needed we will call you.” Al-Musanaf Vol. 1 Part 2, p. 263

Women are Weak:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet had a Had (a camel driver) called Anjasha, and he had a nice voice. The Prophet said to him, "(Drive) slowly, O Anjasha! Do not break the glass vessels!" And Qatada said, "(By vessels') he meant the weak women." Sahih Bukhari 8:73:230, See also: Sahih Bukhari 8:73:228 & Sahih Bukhari 8:73:229
Women are a Tilth for Men to Cultivate:

“Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allah. And know that ye are to meet Him (in the Hereafter), and give (these) good tidings to those who believe.” Qur'an 2:223

Women are Like Devils
Jabir reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) saw a woman, and so he came to his wife, Zainab, as she was tanning a leather and had sexual intercourse with her. He then went to his Companions and told them: The woman advances and retires in the shape of a devil, so when one of you sees a woman, he should come to his wife, for that will repel what he feels in his heart. Sahih Muslim 8:3240

Woman are Evil Omen:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: I heard the Prophet saying. "Evil omen is in three things: The horse, the woman and the house." Sahih Bukhari 4:52:110

Men May Marry up to Four Women”
“If you fear you can not treat orphans (girls) with fairness, then you may marry other women who seem good to you: two, three or four of them. But if you fear that you can not maintain equality among them, marry only one or any slave girls you may own, that will be more suitable. And give the women their dower as a free gift; but if they, of their own good pleasure, remit any part of it to you, eat it with enjoyment, take it with right good cheer and absorb it (in your wealth).” Qur'an 4:3

Violence Against Women”
“Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.” Qur'an 4:34

The Afterlife of Women:
“Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." Sahih Bukhari 1:6:301

Women are relegated in Islam at best, to a second-class status, depriving them of many rights enjoyed by men. Thus, life goes on for the Muslim women with all the trappings of the Islamic misogyny. Such is the plight of women under Islam. There is hardly the need to provide an exhaustive list of Islamic misogyny to qualify it as a shameful, discriminatory and oppressive religious apartheid.

The muslim religion is a religion of violence and abuse to women. What do muslims think they are? Arent they born from a woman. When they treat women like this they are not even respecting the fact that they came from one woman. Sad things, sorry for the muslim women.ioigi

quran-respect the womb who bore u-this is verse of the quran

be kind to ur wife-verse of the quran

quran is msg to the whole of mankind

it says shun idol worship-man worship-grave worship and pray to the creator of the universe

it says shun shamelessness,evil behaviour

do the read the quran with open mind

None of that makes any differences whatsoever, when you know the quotes in this article. It's clear that you didn't even read the quotes from the Koran in this article, nor did you watch any of the videos from a plethora of Muslim authorities in different countries, all spewing misogyny and sexism.

Yes, read the Koran with an open mind - especially if you're a Muslim whose mind has been brainwashed, believing that the Koran is somehow good for women.

Sorry, but the Koran with its infidel-hatred and women abuse is NOT for all of mankind. It is absolutely NOT for me in any way, shape or form.

You are unfortunately brainwashed, but you can free yourself by reading studying the following sites:

Islam Reality Videos
Quotes from the Quran
The Religion of Peace
270 Million Murdered by Islam
Faith Freedom
Islam Watch
Jihad Watch
Amil Imani
Prophet of Doom
Islamic Crusades
Women's Rights in Islaml

Good luck.

It must be remembered that at the time Islam was revealed to the world infant girls were buried alive in Arabia and women had no rights at all .Islam gave women the right to inheritance and to divorce , women have a special place in Islam and are respected.

This post itself contradicts your claims. Islam treats women as second-class citizens, period, and no amount of fallacious apologizing will change that fact. This "special place" for women is at the back of the bus, so to speak.

Yes, we've heard the standard parroted apology about the baby girls being buried - this misogynistic "custom" of killing female infants has been practiced in many cultures over the millennia and continues in many places. Many Muslims continue to engage in killing off their females, in "honor killings," so this apology serves as a mere deflection off the blatant Islamic misogyny.

Moreover, in many ways the pre-Islamic "Arab" spiritual and religious traditions were far superior to what Islam has brought to the world, especially as concerns the fact that there were GODDESSES in the pre-Islamic religion of the region, rather than just one giant male god in the sky. The memory of these goddesses was wiped out, so that no woman would have a clue about the concept of the Divine Feminine. Islam represents an utter subjugation of women's spiritual traditions and is one of the WORST things ever to happen to females.

In North America it's a fact that most marriages end in divorce and it is a joke as to how unfair the settlements are. Honourable people do not expect more than half in such situations. Honourable people do not expect payments for 20 years. All men that I know are more than honourable. They give everything away freely but harbour a certain resentment towards paying the ex-wife's way for the next two decades. When I divorced I gave the house and furniture away without hiring my own lawyer but advised wife not to come after my paycheck or I would put up a legal fight and then leave the country to resettle somewhere Islamic where my paycheck would be my own.

I have travelled in many Arab countries and the men there are decent and honourable. With the legal power left in their hands marital disputes are much more likely to be resolved fairly. Religion aside and law aside men usually will not take more than their fair share in any situation even if their religion or legal system allows for it. The reason is that it would offend their sense of manhood. They would feel shame in the presence of other men.

Ah yes, the cultural relativity argument and "tu quoque" distraction fallacy. Newsflash: Two wrongs don't make a right.

First of all, the reason there are so many divorces in the West is because WOMEN HAVE THE RIGHT TO DIVORCE, as opposed to in the Muslim world, where women must once again submit to the men for that "right," whereas men can divorce at will. So, thanks for highlighting that inequality under Islamic law.

Secondly, who is the "we?" I speak for myself, and I am most certainly morally superior to a Stone Age sexist cult. I also don't particularly care about either marriage or divorce. Why get married in the first place? If you truly love someone, you can make your own vows without any kind of social sanction. You can then split apart if or when you no longer want to share your lives together.

"All men that I know are more than honourable." ALL men you know - really? You've never known a single man who has done anything wrong or dishonorable? Wow - that must be a world's record, or you only know a handful of men, which would hardly make you an expert on the subject.

"I have travelled in many Arab countries and the men there are decent and honourable."

And you are a MAN. I would wager that if a woman like me traveled through many Arab countries dressed as I prefer, I would be severely abused left and right by countless "decent and honourable" men. How soon we forget Laura Logan!

You also didn't watch the video by Dr. Wafa Sultan, nor are you aware, apparently, of the horrendous abuse of women and girls all over the Arab world at the hands of men. Your anecdotal dismissal does all these females a real disservice.

I read the Koran some years ago before all of the current Moslem bashing began. It was a small part of my efforts to educate myself. I do remember that Mohammad was big on seeing to it that women received their inheritance and that it was not to be taken from them. He felt the same way about orphans.

In the modern west, it is OK for a woman to be abused by her lesbian master, wasting her life in mental illness and without a family; or to be a heroin addict prostitute; or to be an insane homeless beggar on the streets, etc. etc.

What's this stuff that Jesus said about mote in eye and plank in eye? Or judge not...........

so acharya,

I have read many articles pertaining to the so called "ill treatment" of women in Islam. It is safe to say that your opinions are biased, for whatever reason.

And i find it funny that you only appear to focus your attentions in islam. You in my opinion, do not have a solid understanding of the religion and you choose to use certain versus, without understanding the context of such versus and their application. This is clearly an indicator of your lack of knowledge with regards to islam

Now, whatever abuses against women that are prevalent in so called "Islamic society" if you did your research you would find are culturally based on not religiously based. If you studied the life of the Prophet, you would clearly see how caring he was towards the women of his society, why do you not mention all the sayings of his that are promoting womens rights, why do you not take his life and interactions with women and talk about those. You clearly have an agenda, perhaps that is why.

And furthermore, why do you only talk about islam, when the following religions say the following about women:

Hindus

-still practices female infanticide, infact in the last 10 years, 20 million female babies were killed

-when a woman marries and her husband dies, she has 3 choices, to be burned alive with her husband, to marry his brother or in the case that their is no brother to live in a house for widows, who are considered the lowest of the caste system that india has in place. The movie Water, is evidence of such.

Judaism

-perhaps you have not read the talmud, where not only does it promote racist beliefs against non jews (gentiles) but also states the following, permitting intercourse with children as young as 3:

A Jew may do to a non-Jewess what he can do. He may treat her as he treats a piece of meat.

Hadarine, 20, B; Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348

A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl.

Gad. Shas. 2:2

A boy-goy after nine years and one day old, and a girl after three years and one day old, are considered filthy.

Pereferkowicz, Talmud t.v., p. 11

Extermination of the Christians is a necessary sacrifice.

Zohar, Shemoth


Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night.

Midrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L

A boy-goy after nine years and one day old, and a girl after three years and one day old, are considered filthy.

Pereferkowicz, Talmud t.v., p. 11

Yevamoth 98a
[Trans.: A non-Jew is "legally fatherless," regardless of whether or not the father is known. Gentile children are essentially asses and horses, i.e., animals.]

R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition [intercourse], and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; [if a niddah] she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon [a person afflicted with gonorrhoea].

Sanhedrin 55b

Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that.24 (24) I.e., Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.

Sanhedrin 54b

Raba said. It means this: When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this [three years old], it is as if one puts the finger into the eye; but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown-up woman he makes her as 'a girl who is injured by a piece of wood.'...

Why do you not comment on the above.

-Christianity

We all know about original sin and the view that men had towards women, and how they were treated as such as a result of that ideology.

I would advise you to stop your hate mongering and your agenda driven argument and focus on the truth. However, i do not see you doing that.

"And i find it funny that you only appear to focus your attentions in islam."

Since you basically begin your diatribe with a statement that demonstrates you know nothing about my work, one must approach the rest of what you have to say with caution. If you did know my work, instead of pretending to do so in order to spew hate speech at me - you would also know that I have spent considerable time criticizing Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism and all other ities and isms that have deleterious aspects. As but one example, I've had an article with pretty much the same Talmudic quotes on my website for well over a decade - nice of you to catch up. Thus, your remark here is utterly false.

You do not know my work, nor are you particularly scientific or rational in your defense of the indefensible. You have no concern for all the vicious defamation in these videos by your co-religionists - you are apparently only concerned about attacking me personally so that I will not bring this abuse to anyone else's attention.

You are also using a typical apologist tactic called "tu quoque," which is to deflect off the subject by pointing fingers elsewhere - we have seen this logical fallacy many times, and it remains fallacious.

"I would advise you to stop your hate mongering and your agenda driven argument and focus on the truth. However, i do not see you doing that."

The only "hate mongering" and "agenda" here are those on your part in spewing hate speech at me personally, when you do not know me at all, and in attempting to get a woman to stop exposing the WOMAN-HATRED of Islam.

It is time for religious fanatics of all stripe to stop trying to bludgeon and intimidate the rest of us into your manmade, misogynistic cults - we will not be bullied. Thank you.

In the meantime, if you would like to know more about what we all have lost because of the rise of these hateful and violent patriarchal and misogynistic cults, please read Man Made God by Barbara G. Walker. The destruction of beauty, innocence, peace and other aspects of human culture by these violent warrior cults is simply appalling, and the truth about it will not be swept under the carpet with hostile defenses of these very destructive cults.

I would advise you to study the origins of the religion you currently hold near and dear - especially as concerns how it was spread and how it destroyed your own ancestors' cultures. You can overcome this conditioning. Cheers.

Women are inferior to men: "A man is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man." (1 Cor. 11:7)

Women are weaker than men: "Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner" (1 Peter 3:7)

Women should be silent in church: "As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches." (1 Cor. 14:34)

Women must not have authority over men: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man." (1 Tim. 2:12-14)

Women are saved through bearing children: "But women will be saved through childbearing." (1 Tim. 2:15)

Women must cut their hair off if they don't cover it: "If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off." (1 Cor. 11:6)

That great mimi but the discussion here is about Islam not Christianity. At what point did it ever become some sort of prerequisite that any time Islam is the topic, Christianity must also be brought up? As Acharya just said above, it's a "tu quoque" distraction fallacy and "Two wrongs don't make a right. "

You'll get no sympathy for Christianity from me, but there are other blogs that discuss Christianity here and I can't help but notice that people are not tripping over themselves to post stuff about Islam in them. I just find it weird that people feel they must bring up Christianity in every thread about Islam but never the reverse.

Thank you for the perfect example of what Islamodefense does to a person's mind. Here I am exposing incredible abuse of women by a wide variety of Muslim authorities, from Saudi Arabia to Palestine to Pakistan to Iran and so on, and you come in and abuse me personally with your hate speech, entirely proving my point about Islamomisogyny.

Here's what we are up against, folks! Tell the truth about vicious bigotry and woman abuse, and you are:

A "disinfo agent"
A "lieing [sic] pig"
A "slanderer"
"Ignorant"
A "curse"
A "disgrace"

All that in a few paragraphs, simply because I dared to expose an ongoing example of appalling suffering that's happening in numerous places based on a particular ideology.

One of the main reasons I do what I do is because mentally disturbed and violent individuals over the past several thousands years have continually persecuted, abused, beaten, tortured and murdered living, breathing and feeling human beings over unfeeling and inanimate ideologies. To me, abusing someone you don't even know in order to defend an ideology, religion, cult, etc., is really quite evil.

So, thanks again for the perfect example of exactly what I'm trying to expose here. Much appreciated.

I am a science guy. Why does the male have less DNA than the female? Do the boys have refined superior firmware or do the gals have extra knowledge?

"Why does the male have less DNA than the female? Do the boys have refined superior firmware or do the gals have extra knowledge?"

Well, as I understand it:

The male has less DNA than the female because of an XY pair of chromosomes in the male as opposed to the corresponding XX pair in the female, and the Y is much smaller than the X. The function of the Y chromosome is to flip the developing embryo from its natural base state of female to that of male, with all the well known results. What differences there are are far outweighed by the similarities--or so experience of life has shown me!

The original Quran is written in classical arabic and any translation is actually an interpretation and carries with it the risk of the author's own bias and cultural stance. This excellent article below explains how the verse 4.34 is often construed as condoning wife beating but the actual meaning is far milder.Allah almighty knows best.
Hope you give it a read


http://irfi.org/articles/articles_251_300/does_the_quran_allow_beating _of.htm

May peace be upon you

The arrogance and justified cruelty of Muslim men, is created by their belief in the Quran.
If they would just stop for a moment and think - they would realize that in using cruelty and violence they perpetuate both.
Unfortunately, their belief system is such that all information is filtered through the belief that Mohammed's words were wise. Some of his words may have been wise - but certainly not all.
They need to give recognition to their own consciences, to their own innate abilities to think.
They are in fact suppressing their own minds in order to accommodate these beliefs.

Nice try. Once again, here I'm exposing horrible abuse against women, and you feel the need to abuse me, a woman. Thanks for demonstrating your misogynistic training - such demonstrations are very useful for the rest to see what we are up against.

You have demonstrated exactly why I do what I do - which is to criticize religious pathology and to expose atrocity and abuse wherever I encounter it.

As concerns solutions, it's quite simple: Instead of residing in utter caveman ignorance with intolerant and misogynistic manmade cults that are the basis of atrocities globally - and that cause people like you to write hate speech to others you don't even know - how about we all grow up, take responsibility for ourselves, and treat each other with respect and dignity, as divine beings of our own right? Ever think of that?

As I have stated repeatedly, I critique IDEOLOGIES THAT CAUSE PEOPLE TO MISTREAT OTHERS. These ideologies, including and especially the Abrahamic cults of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, dictate that humans beings are "born in sin" pieces of crap or otherwise wretches and that they must submit to a giant male overlord in the sky.

I reject this human abuse, as I reject your personal attacks on me for exposing the blatant woman abuse of this particular manmade cult, but, again, thanks for the example of how the defense of an unfeeling and inanimate ideology makes you derogate living breathing human beings whom you don't even know.

"Is it secularism where women are still treated as objects of mens desires, were prostitution is considered legal as a woman has the right to choose her path, were pornography is celebrated as a 'freedom', were so called average women are going under the knife in an attempt to beautify themselves according to the standards of their societies."

What utter nonsense you are learning from your anti-infidel programming. It's because of violent and sexually uncontrolled MEN that women suffer, including and especially those who have created male-dominant and misogynistic cults like the one exposed here, both from its "holy text" and from the mouths of its spokesmen.

Again, you show no concern whatsoever about the misogynistic koranic verses or the heinous sexism and perversion coming out of the mouths of these spokesmen - you are only interested in pointing fingers elsewhere, a fallacy called "tu quoque" widely used by Muslim apologists. As is the tactic of insulting others with personal and disrespectful remarks.

Here are the stages of Muslim apologetics:

1. Denial
2. Deflection
3. Insults
4. Violence

Here's a link on How to Debate a Muslim.

Cheers.

perhaps the reason why christianity is brought up, or any other religion for that matter, in these types of discussions, is that at the end of the day we are talking about the human condition, all humans are capable of the same highs and lows.

In the west, nakedness and other freedoms are celebrated, whereas a woman dressed conservatively is considered oppressive. In the east however, the opposite can be said to be true.

we are dealing with the human condition.......

such situations need to be looked at from a balanced point of view, introducing any type of extremism into such topics will only result in a solution which is just as extreme, but on the opposite side of the spectrum

"Even though I am Gnostic in my beliefs I would politically support Sharia because it would counterbalance the unjust laws of our society. "

A "Gnostic" means someone who knows, but anyone who would say such an asinine thing certainly does NOT know.

I don't give a fig for "feminism" or "socialism." THIS post is about institutionalized misogyny and sexism, based on the Islamic sacred text, the Koran.

You apparently have no concern whatsoever about all the heinous woman-abuse in Islam, as explicated upon by these Muslim spokesmen, but are instead interested in making repugnant remarks enabling the imposition of the most heinous religious system upon us against our will.

Sharia law includes the following, which you are so happily promoting. Anyone who knowingly promotes such heinous mistreatment of others is frankly grotesque.

Beheadings
Stonings
Hangings
Beatings
Bombings
Limb amputations
Slavery
Women enslavement
Sex slavery and rape
Misogyny and sexism
Segregation of the sexes
Child marriage and rape
Genital mutilation
Censorship
Etc., ad nauseam

Do not bother to post here again, as I am not interested in airing the views of someone who would support such evil for even one minute.

Dear Acharya 8

I am a 23 year old Muslim girl. If you pity me, kindly check these links below:

http://www.womeninislam.ws/en/women-right-islam_equality-men-women.asp x

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvi-g88d5XI

Feel free to ask anything.

Regards

I don't "pity" you, except that if you think Islam gives you "rights" as a woman, you are clearly lacking any perspective as to what "rights" really constitute.

You have also apparently not paid attention to anything in this blog post, which clearly demonstrates that, according to the Koran/Islam, women are inferior and need to be repressed. In fact, much of Islamic/sharia law seems to be based on oppressing women.

You are also evidently blinded to the world around, as one look at the status of women in many Muslim-dominant countries will show precisely this blatant oppression. It does these suffering women a tremendous disservice for anyone to be justifying, ignoring or enabling their abuse by misrepresenting Islam's patent misogyny.

Here's another link spelling out exactly what "rights" women have under Islamic law:

Women's Rights in Islam

All the apologizing, handwaving dismissals, distractions elsewhere, etc., will not change the fact that Islam is misogynistic to the nth degree and that the rise of patriarchal religion has been terrible for women, period.

If you knew what REAL RIGHTS you have lost with this rise of intolerant monotheistic male-dominant cults, you would be very angry and disgusted. Try reading this book:

Man Made God

Good luck.

>>A boy-goy after nine years and one day old, and a girl after three years and one day old, are considered filthy.