Tell me about Islam

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And I will add, I make no apologies for Muhammad. If you study his life (read Karen Armstrong's books), you will have profound respect for the way he lived his life. His first wife was 40 yrs old. He wanted to show his community that it was permissible and encouraged to marry widows. Many in his time would not. His youngest wife was 14 and that was Aisha. Aisha's father was the one who approached Muhammad to ask that he marry her. Aisha herself wrote of her love and admiration for Muhammad.

His first wife was an extremely wealthy widow and Mohammed's status increased commensurately when he married her. His youngest wife was engaged to him at age nine and the marriage took place a few years later - many think when she was 12 (menstruating) and 14 is an outside estimate.

This is an example of why "sitting down with an imam" is not going to provide an unbiased perspective. Instead you will get selective spin.

PS. I'm not the previous poster. But the facts that I've cited are well known, they are consistent with the previous poster's facts, and they have been accepted history in the Muslim world for centuries.

I used to write for a Muslim paper and had to interview different scholars for articles. I assure you, the marriage at age 9 assertion is not universally accepted as fact.

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:Ok, for some perspective, the minimum age for marriage in the US-State of Delaware in year 1880 was 7 and 10 in most of the other states.

Now, authentic Hadith reports do show us that the prophet Muhammad saw did marry Aisha at the age of 6, but they also show the consummation of the marriage was completed when she was 9 years old. As a Muslim, I have no shame in sharing this. The West says, he married a child, don't they? And some Muslims when they are told this get embarrassed, their faces become red, and they don't know how to answer, they start stuttering. Did you know that American reformers were shocked to discover that the laws of most states set the age of consent at the age of ten or twelve, and in Delaware, the age of consent was only seven? Now during the Prophet saw's time it was a NORM to be married at a young age. This is why the people of Quraish and other Arabian tribes at Prophet's time found absolutely no fault in their marriage. They detested Islam, they did everything to belittle the Prophet, tried to prevent Islam from spreading and even attempted to kill the Prophet saw ! However, they raised no objection to the marriage of the Prophet saw to Aisha since at those times such a thing was not considered 'immoral'. It ought also be noted that Aisha was engaged to Jubayr before Prophet Muhammed saw. This indicates the age of marriage and engagement in Prophet' saw's time. However, the engagement was later nullified by Jubayr's parents due to Abu Bakr (Aisha's dad) embracing Islam.Thus the history demonstrates that the age of the marriage was lower and relative to olden times, the marriage of the Prophet was not abnormal and there was nothing immoral about it. It was a norm at biblical times to be wedded at puberty or earlier, the age of consent one century ago in a 'modern country' was as low as 10 or 12, even 7 in Delaware! Even in our times, in certain societies, the age of consent is as low as 12 or 13. In the light of historical evidences, the marriage cannot be criticized.

ALSO it is important to know:

Aisha's parents were the ones who married her to our Prophet saw , and that no Muslim or even pagan objected to the marriage because it was widely practiced. It is important to know that girls during the Biblical and Islamic days used to be married off at young ages when they either had their first periods, or their breasts start showing off. In other words, when they turn into "women", then they get married off. Prophet Muhammad's saw marriage with Aisha was 100% legal and acceptable by all laws and Divine Religions!So to call Prophet Muhammad saw a pedophile for marrying a girl that was OFFERED TO HIM by her parents and was accepted by all of the people back then including the enemies of Islam, the pagans, is quite absurd.

A lot of the things we do today are not right in the eyes of many. Our "standards" today mean nothing to what took place 1400 years ago. Today, anyone under 18 years old is considered a "child", a baby still under his mommy's and daddy's care. Back then on the other hand, people who reached the age of 18 were considered wise and very mature.

An English Historian stated, "At that age 'A'ishah was fully developed, through fast development which was present amongst the Arab women of the time and where they would start to age during the late twenties. But this marriage has troubled many people about Muhammad. This is because they look upon the marriage as if it is in the present day, not taking into account the context of this marriage and that it was an accepted event. They do not consider that this trend is still present in Europe and Asia, until this very day. This was common in Spain and Portugal until recent years. Even in these times it is not uncommon. In some mountainous areas in the United States of America, it still exists.

I think you may be mistaken about this, Sister. The hadith are not always reliable. Check out www.supremeislamiccouncil.com

I know that some Muslims do say that Aisha was older and there is a difference of opinion about this Allahu Ahlam! I go by the Bukhari hadith where she states that the marriage was consummated when she was 9 years old. Subhanallah, as Muslims we have nothing to be ashamed of, whether Aisha R.A was 9 years old, 14, or 16 shouldn't make a difference to us. In seventh-century Arabia, adulthood was defined as the onset of puberty. (This much is true, and was also the case in Europe). What's more, Aisha r.A had already been engaged to someone else before she married our Rassul saw suggesting she had already been mature enough by the standards of her society to consider marriage for a while. A stateswoman, scholar, mufti, and judge, Aisha combined spirituality, activism and knowledge and remains a role model for many Muslim women today. The gulf between her true legacy and her depiction in Islamophobic materials is not merely historically inaccurate, it is an insult to the memory of a pioneering woman.

Yes Sister, but I am not disagreeing with you because I feel ashamed if Aisha was in fact married at age 9. I am disagreeing with you because even Bukhari may be inaccurate also. Call Dr. Ahmad Sakr in California as he used to be on the World Muslim Council and stated that the only place where true hadith has been sorted from inaccurate ones is in a large text in Saudi Arabia. He said it has yet to be translated from Arabic to other languages. Thus, it remains only in Saudi Arabia.

[Muslima]

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:Ok, for some perspective, the minimum age for marriage in the US-State of Delaware in year 1880 was 7 and 10 in most of the other states.

Now, authentic Hadith reports do show us that the prophet Muhammad saw did marry Aisha at the age of 6, but they also show the consummation of the marriage was completed when she was 9 years old. As a Muslim, I have no shame in sharing this. The West says, he married a child, don't they? And some Muslims when they are told this get embarrassed, their faces become red, and they don't know how to answer, they start stuttering. Did you know that American reformers were shocked to discover that the laws of most states set the age of consent at the age of ten or twelve, and in Delaware, the age of consent was only seven? Now during the Prophet saw's time it was a NORM to be married at a young age. This is why the people of Quraish and other Arabian tribes at Prophet's time found absolutely no fault in their marriage. They detested Islam, they did everything to belittle the Prophet, tried to prevent Islam from spreading and even attempted to kill the Prophet saw ! However, they raised no objection to the marriage of the Prophet saw to Aisha since at those times such a thing was not considered 'immoral'. It ought also be noted that Aisha was engaged to Jubayr before Prophet Muhammed saw. This indicates the age of marriage and engagement in Prophet' saw's time. However, the engagement was later nullified by Jubayr's parents due to Abu Bakr (Aisha's dad) embracing Islam.Thus the history demonstrates that the age of the marriage was lower and relative to olden times, the marriage of the Prophet was not abnormal and there was nothing immoral about it. It was a norm at biblical times to be wedded at puberty or earlier, the age of consent one century ago in a 'modern country' was as low as 10 or 12, even 7 in Delaware! Even in our times, in certain societies, the age of consent is as low as 12 or 13. In the light of historical evidences, the marriage cannot be criticized.

ALSO it is important to know:

Aisha's parents were the ones who married her to our Prophet saw , and that no Muslim or even pagan objected to the marriage because it was widely practiced. It is important to know that girls during the Biblical and Islamic days used to be married off at young ages when they either had their first periods, or their breasts start showing off. In other words, when they turn into "women", then they get married off. Prophet Muhammad's saw marriage with Aisha was 100% legal and acceptable by all laws and Divine Religions!So to call Prophet Muhammad saw a pedophile for marrying a girl that was OFFERED TO HIM by her parents and was accepted by all of the people back then including the enemies of Islam, the pagans, is quite absurd.

A lot of the things we do today are not right in the eyes of many. Our "standards" today mean nothing to what took place 1400 years ago. Today, anyone under 18 years old is considered a "child", a baby still under his mommy's and daddy's care. Back then on the other hand, people who reached the age of 18 were considered wise and very mature.

An English Historian stated, "At that age 'A'ishah was fully developed, through fast development which was present amongst the Arab women of the time and where they would start to age during the late twenties. But this marriage has troubled many people about Muhammad. This is because they look upon the marriage as if it is in the present day, not taking into account the context of this marriage and that it was an accepted event. They do not consider that this trend is still present in Europe and Asia, until this very day. This was common in Spain and Portugal until recent years. Even in these times it is not uncommon. In some mountainous areas in the United States of America, it still exists.

I think you may be mistaken about this, Sister. The hadith are not always reliable. Check out www.supremeislamiccouncil.com

I know that some Muslims do say that Aisha was older and there is a difference of opinion about this Allahu Ahlam! I go by the Bukhari hadith where she states that the marriage was consummated when she was 9 years old. Subhanallah, as Muslims we have nothing to be ashamed of, whether Aisha R.A was 9 years old, 14, or 16 shouldn't make a difference to us. In seventh-century Arabia, adulthood was defined as the onset of puberty. (This much is true, and was also the case in Europe). What's more, Aisha r.A had already been engaged to someone else before she married our Rassul saw suggesting she had already been mature enough by the standards of her society to consider marriage for a while. A stateswoman, scholar, mufti, and judge, Aisha combined spirituality, activism and knowledge and remains a role model for many Muslim women today. The gulf between her true legacy and her depiction in Islamophobic materials is not merely historically inaccurate, it is an insult to the memory of a pioneering woman.

Yes Sister, but I am not disagreeing with you because I feel ashamed if Aisha was in fact married at age 9. I am disagreeing with you because even Bukhari may be inaccurate also. Call Dr. Ahmad Sakr in California as he used to be on the World Muslim Council and stated that the only place where true hadith has been sorted from inaccurate ones is in a large text in Saudi Arabia. He said it has yet to be translated from Arabic to other languages. Thus, it remains only in Saudi Arabia.

Allhahu Ahlam! I agree that even Iman Bukhari rahimahullah was just a human being and as such not a perfect being. Only the Quran is perfect and error free, so I will research that more but to be honest, I have never focused too much on the age of Aisha r.a! Jazakallahu Khair

[Anonymous]

Mary Hathaway was only 9 when she was married to William Williams in Virginia, 1689
Im just saying.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mohammed was a pedophile and murderer. He was violent and barbaric.

Islam is a cult of pedophiles and murderers that follow Mohammed's example.

Jesus was peaceful and never led an army of murderers.

The difference is night and day and we are experiencing this horror of Islam over and over and over.

Jesus was peaceful and never led an army. Yes. And for that he was crucified.

C'mon. Stop this. Publishing this kind of trash is completely irresponsible of you. I am a Muslim. I am no violent or barbaric. I do not murder people and am not a pedophile. Of all the Muslims I know, none are. I spent a great deal of my life doing charitable work, helping both nonMuslims and Muslims. I supported refugees from other countries, taught a Chinese man to speak English, and volunteered at public schools. If you don't understand Islam, then find a really qualified Imam and ask him to sit down with you while you ask him questions. Bring a Quran with you. Most Imams would be happy to explain anything to you. In Virginia, the most knowledgeable Imam is Imam Magid at the ADAMS group. But to make such erroneous sweeping judgments about the entire religion is so completely unfair and false.

please clarify what is the trash and what is the erroneous judgement? I think these are facts not judgements.

Was Mohammed a pedophile - yes

Was Mohammed a murderer, excuse me, a warrior - yes

And yet you don't understand why people that follow this type of example, think they can kill non-muslims? political correctness to the extreme. but this is reality today, and what your children and grandchildren will be fighting. - judgement

In the medieval ages the average girl from a dignified family gave birth to her first child around the age of 16-17. Since the average life expectancy was 35 at the time, you can see why. It was deemed that when a girl began menstruation, she was ready to be married. Aisha was Muhammad's youngest wife, married by age 14. Muhammad was born around 570 AD. Are you judging his life according to today's definition of pedophilia? That wouldn't make much sense now, would it?

Was Muhammad a murderer? Of course not. He only fought those who threatened to kill Muslims or prevent Muslims from practicing their faith.

You clearly have no knowledge of history.

Some Muslim apologists have recently claimed that Aisha was actually older than nine lunar years at time of the consummation of her marriage to Prophet Muhammad. They have attempted to explain that Aisha was in fact not nine-years-old as the Sahih hadiths of her own testimony claim, but some other ages derived from misquotations, indirect sources, fuzzy dating techniques and slander. These dubious research techniques have led to several conflicting ages to be proposed for Aisha at the time of consummation, including 12, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 21 years.

This article analyzes every single argument put forward by these apologists, and provides additional information on the origins and history of the "Aisha was older" apologetic arguments, and the only logical purpose behind making them.

On closer inspection of these polemics you will discover that the various claims can be broadly categorized into these categories; unjustified slanders against Hisham ibn Urwah and the Iraqi narrators, the use of non-sahih information to refute otherwise sahih hadiths, the use of secondary and indirect sources in preference of direct testimonies, the use of ‘imprecise’ dating in preference to specific dates and statements of age, the use of misquoted references and erroneous information, the use of incorrect logic, and personal opinion.

Aisha was nine lunar years old at the time her marriage to the Islamic prophet was consummated and there is simply no valid evidence that suggests otherwise. The majority of Muslims today, including both scholars and the general Muslim population, agree. This has been the mainstream Muslim understanding throughout Islam's 1,400 year history, and many of these honest Muslims take offense to these lies propagated by Muslim apologists who are embarrassed by their own prophet's actions.

Are you Muslim? Your information is incorrect. If you doubt my information, I encourage you to sit down with an Imam and ask him your questions. Its terribly irresponsible of you to keep publishing false information about our beloved Prophet. Read books written by Karen Armstrong, an author who wrote correctly about Islam even though she herself never converted to Islam. I don't know if your purpose is to exploit information or if you are simply misinformed.

Aisha was engaged earlier but the marriage was not consummated until age 14. Engagements at this age was perfectly normal in 600 AD.

If people can accept and even deem holy an out of wedlock birth, which in Mary's time was disgraceful and quite scandalous, surely they can accept that girls in 600 AD were married at age 14.

Ahh, so we are past the first muslim defense that she really wasn't that old. sorry, that it historical fact.

Now to the second muslim defense, that everyone did it.

SECOND MUSLIM DEFENSE: Morality is relative to one’s culture.

Another method of defending Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha is the Muslim appeal to moral relativism. According to this view, since different cultures have different standards of morality, it is wrong to criticize the standards of others based on one’s own ethical system. Consider the following responses by Maqsood Jafri and Abdur Rahman Squires:

The Arabs practiced polygamy. In the wake of custom the Prophet Muhammad married some ladies. Hazrat Khadijah was fifteen years older [than] him at the time of marriage. Most of them were his age sake. In his fifties he married Hazrat Aiysha, the daughter of Hazrat Abu Bakr when she was just bloomed to youth. Hinting this marriage some of the orientalists charge Prophet Muhammad as a "pedophile". It was not only the Prophet Muhammad who had married a young girl [but] even the father of Hazrat Aiysha, Hazrat Abu Bakr had also married a young girl in his sixties. It was . . . part of the prevalent Arab culture and custom. Hence not to be taken seriously.[15]

The large majority of Islamic jurists say that the earliest time which a marriage can be consummated is at the onset of sexual maturity (bulugh), meaning puberty. Since this was the norm of all Semitic cultures and it still is the norm of many cultures today—it is certainly not something that Islam invented.[16]

Thus, since the practice of marrying young girls was "part of the prevalent Arab culture and custom," it is "not to be taken seriously" as a criticism of Islam.

RESPONSE: Islam is utterly inconsistent with moral relativism.

This defense is truly amazing, for, when defending Muhammad’s moral perfection, Muslims often maintain that Muhammad condemned the Arab culture for the prevalent immorality:

After spending his life in such chaste, pure and civilized manner, there comes a revolution in [Muhammad’s] being. He wearies of the darkness and ignorance, corruption, immorality, idolatry, and disorder which surround him on all sides. . . . He wants to get hold of that power with which he might bring about the downfall of the corrupt and disorderly world and lay the foundations of a new and better one. . . . He wanted to change the whole structure of society which had been handed down to them from time immemorial.[17]

Muslims are quick to point out immorality around the world, especially in the West. It seems, then, that they are suggesting a very inconsistent message. When confronted with an immoral practice in another culture, Muslims cry out in one accord, "We condemn these practices, for they are against the eternal, perfect, and unalterable Law of God!" Yet, whenever the moral character of Muhammad is being scrutinized, Muslims suddenly say, "Don’t judge Muhammad! You should remember that he was from a different culture! Marrying young girls was common in Arabia, and it still is, thanks to Muhammad’s precedent. Different people have different moral standards, so no one should worry about Muhammad’s sexual relationship with a nine-year-old girl."

This convenient switch from moral absolutism to moral relativism is logically unacceptable. If it is wrong to judge the practices of another culture, then both Muhammad and the Qur’an were wrong for condemning immoral practices in Arabia. But if condemning immoral practices is acceptable, then Muslim apologists need a better response to criticisms of Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha.

I think I understand your confusion. Islamic principles are a careful balancing act protecting the right of the individual but also considering what is best for society as a whole. Islamic principles are deemed timeless. Any girl over the age of puberty may marry with the consent of her father or guardian. This was true in 600 AD and holds true in Islam today. It is not subject to the culture or morality of society of the time.

That Aisha got engaged at 9 and married at age 14 is defensible to Muslims simply because Islam permits it. However, this defense is not acceptable to you since you clearly reject Islam. As such I tried to show you that Aisha's marriage was really not unusual at all in those times. Many girls from well to do families, important families, or from royalty married that early.

Muhammad condemned people in his society at the time because their actions, such as burying female children alive, committing usury, depriving women of rights, etc..were not simply a reflection of those times, but instead acts that were abominable because they impinged on the rights of individuals and were very harmful to society.

Muhammad forbade the killing of female children, made it acceptable to marry widows, prohibited usury, gave women inheritance rights, etc...and these rulings hold today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mary Hathaway was only 9 when she was married to William Williams in Virginia, 1689
Im just saying.....

This doesn't make it OK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think I understand your confusion. Islamic principles are a careful balancing act protecting the right of the individual but also considering what is best for society as a whole. Islamic principles are deemed timeless. Any girl over the age of puberty may marry with the consent of her father or guardian. This was true in 600 AD and holds true in Islam today. It is not subject to the culture or morality of society of the time.

That Aisha got engaged at 9 and married at age 14 is defensible to Muslims simply because Islam permits it. However, this defense is not acceptable to you since you clearly reject Islam. As such I tried to show you that Aisha's marriage was really not unusual at all in those times. Many girls from well to do families, important families, or from royalty married that early.

Muhammad condemned people in his society at the time because their actions, such as burying female children alive, committing usury, depriving women of rights, etc..were not simply a reflection of those times, but instead acts that were abominable because they impinged on the rights of individuals and were very harmful to society.

Muhammad forbade the killing of female children, made it acceptable to marry widows, prohibited usury, gave women inheritance rights, etc...and these rulings hold today.

Different PP here from the one you're talking to.

I'm so tired of hearing that ending female infanticide (burial) is why Islam is so wonderful. To non-Muslims, there's a sharp incongruity between patting ourselves on the back for ending a barbarous practice 1400 years ago, and the inequalities that continue to apply to women today: lesser value of a woman's testimony, women's restricted ability to divorce, women's lesser inheritance rights, custody rights, and let's not even go into the relative roles of men and women in a marriage.

BTW, you also mention inheritance rights but, typically, you don't bother to explain this. To be clear for those who don't already know: Mohammed/Quran gives female heirs 1/2 the inheritance portion received by male heirs.

I'm sorry, but every time you represent things like "inheritance rights for women!" in a way that implies actual equality, other posters and I will feel compelled to come on and set the record straight.

[Muslima]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think I understand your confusion. Islamic principles are a careful balancing act protecting the right of the individual but also considering what is best for society as a whole. Islamic principles are deemed timeless. Any girl over the age of puberty may marry with the consent of her father or guardian. This was true in 600 AD and holds true in Islam today. It is not subject to the culture or morality of society of the time.

That Aisha got engaged at 9 and married at age 14 is defensible to Muslims simply because Islam permits it. However, this defense is not acceptable to you since you clearly reject Islam. As such I tried to show you that Aisha's marriage was really not unusual at all in those times. Many girls from well to do families, important families, or from royalty married that early.

Muhammad condemned people in his society at the time because their actions, such as burying female children alive, committing usury, depriving women of rights, etc..were not simply a reflection of those times, but instead acts that were abominable because they impinged on the rights of individuals and were very harmful to society.

Muhammad forbade the killing of female children, made it acceptable to marry widows, prohibited usury, gave women inheritance rights, etc...and these rulings hold today.

Different PP here from the one you're talking to.

I'm so tired of hearing that ending female infanticide (burial) is why Islam is so wonderful. To non-Muslims, there's a sharp incongruity between patting ourselves on the back for ending a barbarous practice 1400 years ago, and the inequalities that continue to apply to women today: lesser value of a woman's testimony, women's restricted ability to divorce, women's lesser inheritance rights, custody rights, and let's not even go into the relative roles of men and women in a marriage.

BTW, you also mention inheritance rights but, typically, you don't bother to explain this. To be clear for those who don't already know: Mohammed/Quran gives female heirs 1/2 the inheritance portion received by male heirs.

I'm sorry, but every time you represent things like "inheritance rights for women!" in a way that implies actual equality, other posters and I will feel compelled to come on and set the record straight.

And I, as a Muslim woman feel compelled to come and tell you stop speaking for me. You really think that you as an outsider care more about my rights than I do? You really think you can defend my rights better than I do? Who made you the voice of records for Muslim women? In Islam, the male inherits double the female(this is in the case of brothers & sisters), because the man is legally responsible for financially 100% taking care of his parents, wife, children, divorcee (for a period of time), sisters (single or widowed), and his aunts. He can be sued in court by any of these people if he neglects them, and the court would enforce payments upon him to them. As women in Islamic law are not required to maintain themselves or others, they are given half of what men receive in inheritance in observation that they are not responsible for the maintenance of anyone and to replenish men’s wealth who alone are responsible to work and provide maintenance. In this, Islam opposed the ignorant un-Islamic practice that forbade women to inherit under any circumstance because she does not maintain anyone Muslim women are free to do whatever they please with their money, while the men are NOT, they are obligated to fully maintain the women. Without doubt those who claim that Islam is unjust toward women because it gives her half of what men receive in inheritance are ignorant of the distribution of rights and obligations in the pure, just Islamic law.

Being a Muslim woman is a joyful thing, really we enjoy it and we love our rights and can not think of anything that honors women the way Islam has honored us. Of course you will never comprehend this... Muslim women have been heads of state more than 5 times in Muslim-majority countries, elected democratically by popular vote , how many times has a woman been president of the United States? But hey, we need to be liberated, talk about messed up priorities

[Anonymous]

Bhutto was elected because she came from a dynasty, one of the wealthiest, most powerful families in Pakistan.

[Anonymous]

20:44 here. I seem to have offended you, and for that I'm sorry.

However, you repeatedly make glowing claims without providing the full picture. On this thread, you've made claims such as, "Islam offers asylum to prisoners of war" or "Islam offers inheritance rights to women."

I think it's important that people have full information so they can make informed decisions. Readers need to understand that "asylum" can mean "slavery for non-Muslims" and "rape for non-Muslim women." They also need to understand that "giving women inheritance rights" means "women get 1/2 the share that men get." And that these are rules are in the Quran, so they are for all time.

Perhaps we can agree for future discourse:
1. When you make a statement like "Islam gives asylum" you will provide a full and honest picture.
2. I will try to be more neutral in my explanations. If you provide a full and honest picture, I won't need to say anything!
That way, readers can make up their own minds based on full information. Which, if I read your post of 1:38 correctly, you also want.

[Anonymous]

20:44 again. Also, it's fair if you decide you don't want to bring up the subjects of prisoners of war or inheritance at all. In your post of 1:38 you described quite well how Muslim women view inheritance laws. So do that for veils, or whatever else.

But if you do bring these subjects up, you need to bring them up honestly. I hope you can understand how "Islam offers asylum!" drives several of us nuts, because it's so misleading.

[Anonymous]

Perhaps what was meant is that Islam is an Insane Asylum and all are welcome in the Looney Bin.

[Anonymous]

20:44 here. I am not the same person as 13:54. Nor am I the person who cuts and pastes long passages against Islam.

I think respect is key. But I also think honesty is key. Proselytizing that takes the form of half-truths is something that needs answering.

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think I understand your confusion. Islamic principles are a careful balancing act protecting the right of the individual but also considering what is best for society as a whole. Islamic principles are deemed timeless. Any girl over the age of puberty may marry with the consent of her father or guardian. This was true in 600 AD and holds true in Islam today. It is not subject to the culture or morality of society of the time.

That Aisha got engaged at 9 and married at age 14 is defensible to Muslims simply because Islam permits it. However, this defense is not acceptable to you since you clearly reject Islam. As such I tried to show you that Aisha's marriage was really not unusual at all in those times. Many girls from well to do families, important families, or from royalty married that early.

Muhammad condemned people in his society at the time because their actions, such as burying female children alive, committing usury, depriving women of rights, etc..were not simply a reflection of those times, but instead acts that were abominable because they impinged on the rights of individuals and were very harmful to society.

Muhammad forbade the killing of female children, made it acceptable to marry widows, prohibited usury, gave women inheritance rights, etc...and these rulings hold today.

Different PP here from the one you're talking to.

I'm so tired of hearing that ending female infanticide (burial) is why Islam is so wonderful. To non-Muslims, there's a sharp incongruity between patting ourselves on the back for ending a barbarous practice 1400 years ago, and the inequalities that continue to apply to women today: lesser value of a woman's testimony, women's restricted ability to divorce, women's lesser inheritance rights, custody rights, and let's not even go into the relative roles of men and women in a marriage.

BTW, you also mention inheritance rights but, typically, you don't bother to explain this. To be clear for those who don't already know: Mohammed/Quran gives female heirs 1/2 the inheritance portion received by male heirs.

I'm sorry, but every time you represent things like "inheritance rights for women!" in a way that implies actual equality, other posters and I will feel compelled to come on and set the record straight.

And I, as a Muslim woman feel compelled to come and tell you stop speaking for me. You really think that you as an outsider care more about my rights than I do? You really think you can defend my rights better than I do? Who made you the voice of records for Muslim women? In Islam, the male inherits double the female(this is in the case of brothers & sisters), because the man is legally responsible for financially 100% taking care of his parents, wife, children, divorcee (for a period of time), sisters (single or widowed), and his aunts. He can be sued in court by any of these people if he neglects them, and the court would enforce payments upon him to them. As women in Islamic law are not required to maintain themselves or others, they are given half of what men receive in inheritance in observation that they are not responsible for the maintenance of anyone and to replenish men’s wealth who alone are responsible to work and provide maintenance. In this, Islam opposed the ignorant un-Islamic practice that forbade women to inherit under any circumstance because she does not maintain anyone Muslim women are free to do whatever they please with their money, while the men are NOT, they are obligated to fully maintain the women. Without doubt those who claim that Islam is unjust toward women because it gives her half of what men receive in inheritance are ignorant of the distribution of rights and obligations in the pure, just Islamic law.

Being a Muslim woman is a joyful thing, really we enjoy it and we love our rights and can not think of anything that honors women the way Islam has honored us. Of course you will never comprehend this... Muslim women have been heads of state more than 5 times in Muslim-majority countries, elected democratically by popular vote , how many times has a woman been president of the United States? But hey, we need to be liberated, talk about messed up priorities

I am not the "Muslima" pp. However, she is correct here. The reason women get half the inheritance of men is because of the requirement (legal requirement) of men to financially support women. Thus, brothers must financially support unmarried sisters.

The rule for requiring two female witnesses for testimony when for a male only one is required is only with regard to financial transactions.

The divorce rate in Islam is close to the divorce rate in America, and often times the woman wants the divorce. I have not heard that a divorce is any harder for women to get than men.

[Anonymous]

One thing pp's need to understand that Islam does not promote equality. It promotes justice. Big difference. There is too much engrained or institutional prejudice against women, the scale needs to be adjusted. Married women in Islam are not compelled to work. Women are not required to financially support themselves. Here in the U.S. Where women make less than what men make for the same jobs, perhaps equality is not truly achievable. And even if it could be achievable in the future, perhaps women need safeguards because of their historical subjugation.

So..while Islam on the outside may look like a religion that oppresses womens rights, in fact it really does the opposite. It protects them from institutional mistreatment. And those who deny women their rights in an Islamic system are never acting in accordance with Islam.