Muslims - a question about the "wife beating" verse

[Anonymous]

What's relevant in 2013 is, what do practitioners of any religion believe in 2013? We need to be upfront about these questions, and not shut down debate by attacking peoples' motives or, as PP said, accusing them of spewing and then walking away.

You have been told what practitioners of the religion believe in 2013, why is it so hard for you to comprehend/accept? You have been told that the example you cited happened centuries ago, not in 2013 and you have been told that this is not a mainstream practice in 2013, what more do you want?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
You seem to think that asking for a clear-cut answer is the same as trying to "make Islam look bad" and must be part of a broader agenda to "make Islam look bad." I disagree. If there's something controversial in any religion, it needs to be identified, not swept under the rug with nonsense about what Delaware did hundreds of years ago. What's relevant in 2013 is, what do practitioners of any religion believe in 2013? We need to be upfront about these questions, and not shut down debate by attacking peoples' motives or, as PP said, accusing them of spewing and then walking away.

On the one hand, you believe what is relevant is what practitioners today believe. On the other hand, you want to narrowly tailor a discussion so that it is not possible to discuss what practitioners today believe. Similarly, on the one hand, discussing practices in Delaware hundreds of years ago is "nonsense". But, on the other hand, discussing the practice of a single individual over 1300 years ago is okay. I'm not sure which hand I should address. But, yes, I definitely think that if you ignore several pages of discussion and then pose a "question" that has already been addressed multiple times while ruling out any responses that include nuance or context, you are pursuing an agenda.

Anonymous wrote:Going over the thread, I agree you have attacked other posters who raised questions about Islam. I have never, however, seen you defend Christianity, Judaism or Catholicism. I'm not Catholic and never have been, but there's a group that could use a moderator to shut down some of the bigotry. If I'm wrong about your role regarding any religion besides Islam, I'm happy to be corrected.

I have defended Judaism multiple times. I've also been called an anti-Semite multiple times. So, maybe you can call that a wash. Outside the discussion of schools, I can only remember defending Catholics one time. But generally Catholics do a much better job of defending themselves than I can do. Within the discussion of schools, however, I am constantly removing messages that unfairly attack Catholic schools (as well as other schools with ties to religions). But, more broadly, I tend to stand up for the underdog. I am not Muslim and probably have more criticisms of the religion than you do. But, the religion doesn't have many defenders here. In contrast, there are plenty of Christians here to stand up for that religion. Also, because I have lived in and studied the Arab world, I simply know more about that region than others and, therefore, am more apt to discuss it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Ok, and your point is? because KSA i guess is the Muslim epitome?

My point is that you said you never met a Muslim woman who needed her husband's permission to get a job, and I told you where you can find them. The fact you never met someone is not proof they don't exist.

I think I have responded to that on my earlier post, please refer to that- We do not believe on alimony i have already discussed that. I am a woman and i don't believe a man should take care of me for the rest of my life because we were married, now shoot me! Oh and no he can't send her out of the door, the rule says the wife stays in the house after the divorce for 3 months ( I guess to figure out what she is going to do next). Trust me in practical terms, this doesn't happen, I left the day i wanted a divorce ( my choice) and I never asked for 3 months alimony (my choice)

You didn't respond to that - you keep interchanging dividing assets with alimony, I guess in hopes of confusing people? In that case, let me do what IRS does - make up little stories.

John and Janice decide to marry. They also decide that Janice will stay home to take care of the home and raise their children, while John will be a breadwinner. John does well in his job and twenty years later they have a nice house in McLean, an apartment in downtown Washington, and $900,000 in pension funds. The next day, John decides he no longer wants to be married.

What happens to Janice? She gets a broken heart, half the house, half the apartment and half the pension.

A street over on the same day, Yusef and Asmaa decide to marry. They agree Asmaa will stay home to take care of the home and raise their children, while Yusef will be a breadwinner. Yusef does well in his job, and twenty years later they have a nice house in McLean, an apartment in downtown Washington, and $900,000 in pension funds. The next day, Yusef decides he no longer wants to be married.

What happens to Asmaa? She gets a broken heart, she gets to live in Yusef's house for three more months, and then she has to leave. Yusef keeps the house, the apartment, and the pension. And there's a lady on DCUM who says that's exactly how it should be. And no, she doesn't get to stay there for three more months to figure out what to do next. She gets to stay there for three more months so that Yusef can decide if he *really* wants to divorce her. Asmaa's feelings? They aren't really a part of this conversation.

Again, refer to my previous post about this- Yes, the woman is required to return the dowry if she wants a divorce and the husband refuses the divorce, he is entitled to get the dowry back if he ASKS for it. Which in practical terms again never happens, I did not return my dowry and was never asked to and I initiated my divorce

There you are with the "never" thing again, I guess you have knowledge of every thing that ever passed on the face of the Earth? Oh, and of course you didn't get alimony. Duh. It's not your choice. Alimony - the whole supergenerous 3 months of it - is not due to women who initiate divorces. It's touching your husband didn't ask for his dowry back, but what individual Muslims do is not the point, what shariah dictates is the point, and shariah says if he wants his dowry back, he can have it, and he also doesn't have to agree to release you - his consent is required if you want to divorce him, but he doesn't need your consent to divorce you.

And dial it down with the exclamation marks, your passion is not an argument.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:
You seem to think that asking for a clear-cut answer is the same as trying to "make Islam look bad" and must be part of a broader agenda to "make Islam look bad." I disagree. If there's something controversial in any religion, it needs to be identified, not swept under the rug with nonsense about what Delaware did hundreds of years ago. What's relevant in 2013 is, what do practitioners of any religion believe in 2013? We need to be upfront about these questions, and not shut down debate by attacking peoples' motives or, as PP said, accusing them of spewing and then walking away.

What I object to is precisely the Delaware/Richard II analogy. I agree that Muslims today take different views on child marriage and have never said otherwise.

Let me try again to explain what's wrong with the analogy. For people who live in Delaware in 2013, the child marriage laws of several centuries ago have absolutely zero relevance and have been 100% repudiated. For *some* but not all Muslims today, what happened 1300 years ago is still relevant, because it was how Mohammad lived. There is a big difference in how history is relevant to the first group but not the second group.

[Anonymous]

My point is that you said you never met a Muslim woman who needed her husband's permission to get a job, and I told you where you can find them. The fact you never met someone is not proof they don't exist.

And again, your point is? There are American Jewish, Christian, Atheist women who ask for their husband's permission to get a job, to buy a watch, to buy food, so what does that tell you? I will repeat it once again, KSA is not the epitome of Islam, and you using that to prove a point that muslim women need permission to work is a weak argument because guess what, there are other Hundreds of MILLIONS of Muslim women who do not need their husband's permission to go to work and they are not the NORM not the exception

You didn't respond to that - you keep interchanging dividing assets with alimony, I guess in hopes of confusing people? In that case, let me do what IRS does - make up little stories.

John and Janice decide to marry. They also decide that Janice will stay home to take care of the home and raise their children, while John will be a breadwinner. John does well in his job and twenty years later they have a nice house in McLean, an apartment in downtown Washington, and $900,000 in pension funds. The next day, John decides he no longer wants to be married.

What happens to Janice? She gets a broken heart, half the house, half the apartment and half the pension.

A street over on the same day, Yusef and Asmaa decide to marry. They agree Asmaa will stay home to take care of the home and raise their children, while Yusef will be a breadwinner. Yusef does well in his job, and twenty years later they have a nice house in McLean, an apartment in downtown Washington, and $900,000 in pension funds. The next day, Yusef decides he no longer wants to be married.

What happens to Asmaa? She gets a broken heart, she gets to live in Yusef's house for three more months, and then she has to leave. Yusef keeps the house, the apartment, and the pension. And there's a lady on DCUM who says that's exactly how it should be. And no, she doesn't get to stay there for three more months to figure out what to do next. She gets to stay there for three more months so that Yusef can decide if he *really* wants to divorce her. Asmaa's feelings? They aren't really a part of this conversation.

Again, tjhis probably happens in the life you created in your head, in real life again how many people in the US make over $900k? You can't make sense with nonsense. The example you've cited only applies if and only if in a Non-muslim society the husband is filthy rich and the wife super poor and for some reason she gets a lot of money after the divorce. How many times does this happen in real life? one in a blue moon. As part of my divorce i went to a family workshop mandated by the laws of the state I live in, you know what was happening at the workshop? A bunch of women crying about how their husbands left them with nothing and how they had to sign papers from the husband's lawyer to give them a certain amount of money for a certain amount of time and they agreed because they had no choice, or they didnt wanna deal with it, or the husband is just a loser and has zero money. Yeh, that's divorce in the US for ya and then these women go and file child support and spend the next 18 years researching the dead beat dads, following them, filing one child support order after another to get some sort of "help" from their ex-husband/ex-boyfriend. Uhm, okay I guess you have not spent a day in a family court in the US to see what really goes on! Muslim women don't have to fight for child support, the father is Obligated to support the children irregardless of how much the mother makes! But yeh continue living in Utopia!

Again, refer to my previous post about this- Yes, the woman is required to return the dowry if she wants a divorce and the husband refuses the divorce, he is entitled to get the dowry back if he ASKS for it. Which in practical terms again never happens, I did not return my dowry and was never asked to and I initiated my divorce

There you are with the "never" thing again, I guess you have knowledge of every thing that ever passed on the face of the Earth? Oh, and of course you didn't get alimony. Duh. It's not your choice. Alimony - the whole supergenerous 3 months of it - is not due to women who initiate divorces. It's touching your husband didn't ask for his dowry back, but what individual Muslims do is not the point, what shariah dictates is the point, and shariah says if he wants his dowry back, he can have it, and he also doesn't have to agree to release you - his consent is required if you want to divorce him, but he doesn't need your consent to divorce you.

And dial it down with the exclamation marks, your passion is not an argument.



Uhm, it is my choice not to get alimony, my divorce was pronounced in the US by an american court, I could have asked for alimony IF i wanted to, get the facts straight! No, his consent is not needed if you want the divorce, that is the whole point of giving your dowry back And as in my previous post, i told you I did not believe in Alimony, so I don't understand why you went rambling paragraph after paragraph about alimony, again I don't consider not having alimony a loss as I have no interest in it and don't believe in the alimony system that ends up creating lazy women/men who sit on their behind all day depending on their ex-spouses for no other reason that he/she married them years ago, it is a complete scam in my eyes. And it tears families down more than build them up as had you spent a day of your life in family court, you'd see women and men who spend years not moving on with their lives but pursuing their ex spouses, one suit after another just for money,... uhm okay this is the perfect life we should all abide to So you can't sell it to me , maybe had you actually read what I wrote you would have understood my stance on the topic. Nothing you have said makes any sense and unfortunately your ignorance is simultaneously common, sickening, and sad and I do not have the time to educate you ! You're not the first and won't be the last I meet with the same diatribe, so good luck

[Anonymous]

Again, tjhis probably happens in the life you created in your head, in real life again how many people in the US make over $900k? You can't make sense with nonsense. The example you've cited only applies if and only if in a Non-muslim society the husband is filthy rich and the wife super poor and for some reason she gets a lot of money after the divorce. How many times does this happen in real life? one in a blue moon. As part of my divorce i went to a family workshop mandated by the laws of the state I live in, you know what was happening at the workshop? A bunch of women crying about how their husbands left them with nothing and how they had to sign papers from the husband's lawyer to give them a certain amount of money for a certain amount of time and they agreed because they had no choice, or they didnt wanna deal with it, or the husband is just a loser and has zero money. Yeh, that's divorce in the US for ya and then these women go and file child support and spend the next 18 years researching the dead beat dads, following them, filing one child support order after another to get some sort of "help" from their ex-husband/ex-boyfriend. Uhm, okay I guess you have not spent a day in a family court in the US to see what really goes on! Muslim women don't have to fight for child support, the father is Obligated to support the children irregardless of how much the mother makes! But yeh continue living in Utopia!

I am sorry you choose to spend your life around poor people, but in this area having a house worth $900K is not uncommon. Take a look at the Real Estate forum if you like.

It happens quite frequently in real life that marital assets post-divorce are divided between wife and husband regardless of who paid for them originally. Note: "irregardless" is not a word. A divorce is not "some reason", it's a perfectly good reason to split assets down the middle.

I believe you that if you went to family court, you'd find lots of unhappy people. If you go to the intensive care unit, you'd meet lots of sick people, too. You were just never exposed to a population of women who got their share without resorting to the courts.

The world in which Muslim women don't have to chase their men for child support is just as much of an utopia. If you have statistics on child support compliance broken down by religion, please cite. And don't forget that Muslim women lose preferred rights to custody (if they had them to begin with) if they remarry.

But I get it. You think it's good to be poor. You think homemaker women don't deserve anything of their husband's assets, even after years of cleaning, cooking and raising his children. If that's your position, you're welcome to it.

Uhm, it is my choice not to get alimony.

No it wasn't, not in shariah system, again, women who initiate divorces are not eligible for maintenance, if you have proof of otherwise, cite. What the American court offers you is a moot point; under shariah, women who initiate divorces are not eligible for maintenance. Why do you bring up American court?

If you went to the shariah judge with a request for separation (mind you, it's only you who would have to go, your husband doesn't) and he ruled for you, would you have been eligible for the 3 months of maintenance? No. So let's not drone on how it was your choice not to get it, under shariah you were never eligible for it as a woman who initiated the divorce in the first place.

i told you I did not believe in Alimony, so I don't understand why you went rambling paragraph after paragraph about alimony.

Again - it's not alimony. It's division of assets. I am not quite certain why you keep confusing the two - perhaps you don't understand the difference between the two?

Perhaps your educating efforts would have been more effective had you learned how to write properly.

[Anonymous]

I understand assets very well ( I actually work in Finance and I analyze assets for a living lol ) . And yes i probably have very poor friends and live with poor people lol. ( please get the sarcasm). In your Utopian world, assets get divided the way you think they do. Really? Yeh that's why i meet again and again Non Muslim women whose husbands put them on the street and moved their mistresses/girlfriends in and changed the locks before even filing for divorce! You've got to be kidding me! I don't know if you are really this ignorant or if you are just repeating the same thing over and over because you want to win a debate, I really hope it's the latter. ( Since you referred the real estate forum to my poor self, maybe you should stop by the relationship forum and learn about people fighting for financial support there ) I don't debate ignorance so please refer back to this...> Nothing you have said makes any sense and unfortunately your ignorance is simultaneously common, sickening, and sad and I do not have the time to educate you ! ( Really, good luck, I just don't have the time or effort to engage in uneducated debates and just an FYI , i have never been close to poverty, I can still live off of my grandparents money if I CHOOSE to without working a single day in my life, but you go ahead . Actually that's probably why i don't need a man's money in the form of alimony to survive, I am doing great )

[Anonymous]

Um, in the US under civil -- not religious law -- child support is also mandatory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Um, in the US under civil -- not religious law -- child support is also mandatory.

It is income based under civil law, and some women do pay child support to their ex husbands. Under shariah law, the father is financially responsible for the children even if the mother is wealthy and a woman never pays child support to an ex husband, her money is hers to do as she pleases ....

[Anonymous]

And to the poster saying that dowries are returned and women can not get a divorce under Shariah law unless the husband agrees, I guess this Shariah court was not shariah compliant according to YOU:

The Dubai Sharia Court has granted divorce to a woman because her husband did not want to have children.

The court ruled that AA, an Emirati policeman, must divorce his Emirati wife AK and pay alimony of Dh10,000.
The two were married for a year and the husband was ordered to repay her Dh20,000 dowry.
A few months after the wedding, he said marrying her was a mistake. He said he did not love her and would remarry, she told the court.
The court ordered alimony be paid from April 14, 2010, and ruled the husband pay Dh30,000 as deferred dowry.
[e-mail]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um, in the US under civil -- not religious law -- child support is also mandatory.

It is income based under civil law, and some women do pay child support to their ex husbands. Under shariah law, the father is financially responsible for the children even if the mother is wealthy and a woman never pays child support to an ex husband, her money is hers to do as she pleases ....

Women would pay child support to their ex husbands if the children stay with ex-husbands. I am very certain that under shariah, if the children stay with the husband, he doesn't have to pay the *mother" either.

I also feel compelled to remind you that Muslim women lose the preferred right to custody of children if they remarry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And to the poster saying that dowries are returned and women can not get a divorce under Shariah law unless the husband agrees, I guess this Shariah court was not shariah compliant according to YOU:

The Dubai Sharia Court has granted divorce to a woman because her husband did not want to have children.

The court ruled that AA, an Emirati policeman, must divorce his Emirati wife AK and pay alimony of Dh10,000.
The two were married for a year and the husband was ordered to repay her Dh20,000 dowry.
A few months after the wedding, he said marrying her was a mistake. He said he did not love her and would remarry, she told the court.
The court ordered alimony be paid from April 14, 2010, and ruled the husband pay Dh30,000 as deferred dowry.
[e-mail]

I think you've been nodding off in your halaqas, next time pay attention to the worksheets. The woman, like a little child, had to go to court to get a divorce. Her husband, if he wanted to, could have divorced her on the street, no court necessary. I wouldn't cite that case as proof of enlightenment, dear.

And why was the husband ordered to REPAY the dowry? he was supposed to pay up before marriage, was he not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I understand assets very well ( I actually work in Finance and I analyze assets for a living lol ) . And yes i probably have very poor friends and live with poor people lol. ( please get the sarcasm). In your Utopian world, assets get divided the way you think they do. Really? Yeh that's why i meet again and again Non Muslim women whose husbands put them on the street and moved their mistresses/girlfriends in and changed the locks before even filing for divorce! You've got to be kidding me! I don't know if you are really this ignorant or if you are just repeating the same thing over and over because you want to win a debate, I really hope it's the latter. ( Since you referred the real estate forum to my poor self, maybe you should stop by the relationship forum and learn about people fighting for financial support there ) I don't debate ignorance so please refer back to this...> Nothing you have said makes any sense and unfortunately your ignorance is simultaneously common, sickening, and sad and I do not have the time to educate you ! ( Really, good luck, I just don't have the time or effort to engage in uneducated debates and just an FYI , i have never been close to poverty, I can still live off of my grandparents money if I CHOOSE to without working a single day in my life, but you go ahead . Actually that's probably why i don't need a man's money in the form of alimony to survive, I am doing great )

I love how you said you don't have time to debate yet you keep coming back.

You work in finance and you never met people worth $900K? what kind of finance is that?

You can deal with your little stories all you want. The facts remain as they are: in Islam, there is no marital property. The wife does not accrue the rights to her husband's assets accumulated during the time of marriage. And since you didn't provide any evidence to contradict that, then I have already won that debate. You didn't refute that. You just kept repeating that actually, it's a good thing that she doesn't. Otherwise she may, I dunno, get a big head or something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I understand assets very well ( I actually work in Finance and I analyze assets for a living lol ) . And yes i probably have very poor friends and live with poor people lol. ( please get the sarcasm). In your Utopian world, assets get divided the way you think they do. Really? Yeh that's why i meet again and again Non Muslim women whose husbands put them on the street and moved their mistresses/girlfriends in and changed the locks before even filing for divorce! You've got to be kidding me! I don't know if you are really this ignorant or if you are just repeating the same thing over and over because you want to win a debate, I really hope it's the latter. ( Since you referred the real estate forum to my poor self, maybe you should stop by the relationship forum and learn about people fighting for financial support there ) I don't debate ignorance so please refer back to this...> Nothing you have said makes any sense and unfortunately your ignorance is simultaneously common, sickening, and sad and I do not have the time to educate you ! ( Really, good luck, I just don't have the time or effort to engage in uneducated debates and just an FYI , i have never been close to poverty, I can still live off of my grandparents money if I CHOOSE to without working a single day in my life, but you go ahead . Actually that's probably why i don't need a man's money in the form of alimony to survive, I am doing great )

This argument has nothing to do with you and your personal situation. It also has nothing to do with people moving girlfriends in or out.

This argument is about the law, and what the law provides for partners in case of divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I understand assets very well ( I actually work in Finance and I analyze assets for a living lol ) . And yes i probably have very poor friends and live with poor people lol. ( please get the sarcasm). In your Utopian world, assets get divided the way you think they do. Really? Yeh that's why i meet again and again Non Muslim women whose husbands put them on the street and moved their mistresses/girlfriends in and changed the locks before even filing for divorce! You've got to be kidding me! I don't know if you are really this ignorant or if you are just repeating the same thing over and over because you want to win a debate, I really hope it's the latter. ( Since you referred the real estate forum to my poor self, maybe you should stop by the relationship forum and learn about people fighting for financial support there ) I don't debate ignorance so please refer back to this...> Nothing you have said makes any sense and unfortunately your ignorance is simultaneously common, sickening, and sad and I do not have the time to educate you ! ( Really, good luck, I just don't have the time or effort to engage in uneducated debates and just an FYI , i have never been close to poverty, I can still live off of my grandparents money if I CHOOSE to without working a single day in my life, but you go ahead . Actually that's probably why i don't need a man's money in the form of alimony to survive, I am doing great )

I love how you said you don't have time to debate yet you keep coming back.

You work in finance and you never met people worth $900K? what kind of finance is that?

You can deal with your little stories all you want. The facts remain as they are: in Islam, there is no marital property. The wife does not accrue the rights to her husband's assets accumulated during the time of marriage. And since you didn't provide any evidence to contradict that, then I have already won that debate. You didn't refute that. You just kept repeating that actually, it's a good thing that she doesn't. Otherwise she may, I dunno, get a big head or something.

She said in 19:19 that she never met anybody who "made over $900K," which is an income concept. You were referring to net worth/assets in your original example. It's the same issue of distinguishing between income flows (income/alimony) and the balance sheet (net worth/assets).