Muslims - a question about the "wife beating" verse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the real world wives come in marriages with their own personal property that is protected by Shariah so that the husband has no right to it in case of a divorce AND in the real world, wives actually can be wealthier than their husbands which if it happened in the west, stated wives would lose some of their personal property to the poor husband they married.

It's not terribly special of Shariah to protect personal property brought into the marriage - most legal systems protect the assets parties acquired before marriage, you know. It's the treatment of assets acquired by either spouse IN THE COURSE of the marriage that's different. The West treats anything acquired during marriage as marital property regardless of who paid for it. Shariah doesn't. It wasn't smart of you to brag about protections Shariah affords to assets parties bring into the marriage as most legal systems act exactly the same. I can't think of a country that treats assets parties brought into the marriage that is, acquired before marriage - as joint property.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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).

Please quote where I said I never met anyone who made over $900k? This is exactly why I told you I don't have time to continue this debate because either you have reading comprehension difficulties or you are just plain dishonest.

Muslim Woman

I gave the cite as 19:19 so you could have verified yourself. But here's an exact quote from your own mouth:

Anonymous wrote: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 difference between an income statement and a balance sheet is maybe the first lesson you learn in finance. So maybe when you realize you should stop calling me dishonest, you should stop claiming you "work in finance" at the same time.

So how many people in the US make over $900k is equal to I have never met anyone who makes $900k? Yes, clearly you have reading comprehension problems, so I rest my case I will not comment on any of your previous posts. Again good luck, you know the difference between a balance sheet and an income statement, i will give you a cookie ( Note: sarcasm there, you don't know the difference) My daughter who is a toddler understands equity and revenues better than you do because if you did you would know that the income statement is linked to the balance sheet in the sense that net income flows into equity via retained earnings so your finance knowledge is basic at best ( meaning you know the definition of revenues and net worth yeyyy) since you have to say that you were referring to net worth, not an income concept lol . Newsflash, they are linked and related. I can't break this down for you, you can't afford my rates and I don't do this for free, go get a book on the concept at the library. Again, good luck!

That sound you hear is me banging my head against my computer screen. I'm guessing you're so silly and rude because you realize you goofed, and insults are the best comeback you can manage.

You're also confusing me with at least one other poster.

The issue here is that you refer to people *MAKING* $900K but PP had specifically mentioned an *ASSET* (pension) valued at $900K. SPECIFIC QUOTES FROM YOU HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED TWICE, BY DIFFERENT POSTERS, PROVING YOUR MISTAKE. As another PP has pointed out to you, these are very different concepts. YOU MIXED UP INCOME AND PENSIONS, AS SEVERAL OF US HAVE POINTED OUT TO YOU. Of course the rest of us understand these concepts and WE CAUGHT YOUR MISTAKE. No amount of patronizing and frankly stupid references to your toddler is going to change this. End of story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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).

Please quote where I said I never met anyone who made over $900k? This is exactly why I told you I don't have time to continue this debate because either you have reading comprehension difficulties or you are just plain dishonest.

Muslim Woman

I gave the cite as 19:19 so you could have verified yourself. But here's an exact quote from your own mouth:

Anonymous wrote: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 difference between an income statement and a balance sheet is maybe the first lesson you learn in finance. So maybe when you realize you should stop calling me dishonest, you should stop claiming you "work in finance" at the same time.

So how many people in the US make over $900k is equal to I have never met anyone who makes $900k? Yes, clearly you have reading comprehension problems, so I rest my case I will not comment on any of your previous posts. Again good luck, you know the difference between a balance sheet and an income statement, i will give you a cookie ( Note: sarcasm there, you don't know the difference) My daughter who is a toddler understands equity and revenues better than you do because if you did you would know that the income statement is linked to the balance sheet in the sense that net income flows into equity via retained earnings so your finance knowledge is basic at best ( meaning you know the definition of revenues and net worth yeyyy) since you have to say that you were referring to net worth, not an income concept lol . Newsflash, they are linked and related. I can't break this down for you, you can't afford my rates and I don't do this for free, go get a book on the concept at the library. Again, good luck!

That sound you hear is me banging my head against my computer screen. I'm guessing you're so silly and rude because you realize you goofed, and insults are the best comeback you can manage.

You're also confusing me with at least one other poster.

The issue here is that you refer to people *MAKING* $900K but PP had specifically mentioned an *ASSET* (pension) valued at $900K. SPECIFIC QUOTES FROM YOU HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED TWICE, BY DIFFERENT POSTERS, PROVING YOUR MISTAKE. As another PP has pointed out to you, these are very different concepts. YOU MIXED UP INCOME AND PENSIONS, AS SEVERAL OF US HAVE POINTED OUT TO YOU. Of course the rest of us understand these concepts and WE CAUGHT YOUR MISTAKE. No amount of patronizing and frankly stupid references to your toddler is going to change this. End of story.

Uhm.... Okay, this is what i read: blablabla now go calm down i really don't care and I don't have the time to repeat myself.

[Anonymous]

Recap -next time you see a claim that Islam granted women many rights, forget all the nonsense about clothes and remember this:

Women have significantly restricted rights to initiate divorce (vs. unrestricted right of divorce for men). One form of woman-initiated divorce requires her to repay the dowry she received before marriage. Most forms of woman-initiated divorces require consent of husband or consent of court. The only way for a woman to have an unrestricted right of divorce similar to what men enjoy by right is to provision for this in her marriage agreement.

Women automatically lose preferred rights to custody of children from their previous marriage when they remarry.

Islam has no concept of marital property. What each spouse makes during the course of marriage remains in exclusive ownership of that spouse - a provision severely disadvantaging homemaker spouses, which tend to be majority women.

Most schools of shariah, while granting ex-wives custody of minor children, require transfer of custody to the father when children reach a certain age (depending on the school, that can be 7, 10, 11, 14 or puberty).

Never-married women need consent of guardian to contract a valid marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was just reading this article about Islam written by a convert:

http://www.arabnews.com/news/460671

I heard about a great opportunity through Ohio State University. So I transferred, and enrolled in summer semester classes there. At that time I was required to take a foreign culture course. I could have chosen any geographical location; I chose the Middle East because I didn't know a lot about it. One day an American Muslim woman came in and did a lecture on Islam, the faith of most people in the Middle East. She highlighted some very interesting aspects of the religion and corrected many of our misconceptions. Her presentation was called 'The place of women in Islam.' She explained how Islam had safeguarded women's rights and privileges well before the Women's Rights movements of the previous century (in US). She explained the special position and role of women in Islam. Over 1400 years ago, Islam granted women novel powers and privileges, like the rights to buy and sell property, to work and make a living, to keep their names, save money, refuse a marriage proposal, inherit from deceased relatives, do business, get an education, express themselves, stand witness in trial, and even to make their own prenuptials! Islam put an end to the oppressions like wife-beating, female infanticide, and the custom of automatically inheriting a dead man's widow, which could have numbered in the hundreds. Islam limited the number of wives to four and even then with strict obligations. The vast majority of Muslim men marry only one anyway. She said Muslims also venerated Mary the mother of Jesus, calling her the most pious of women.

Considering the verse that give men permission to beat their disobedient wives, how did Islam put an end to wife-beating?

If Islam is what gave women the right to buy and sell property, work, do business, etc., how is it that Khadija was a rich business woman (who inherited the business) BEFORE Islam even came to be?

I don't understand how, if someone has studied Islam, can say that it's because of Islam that women have these rights...

This is a well-known condition called Convertitis Ordinaris. Women seem to manifest it in stronger forms than men.

Islam did grant women SOME rights but most certainly not on par with men, a distinction very well preserved in contemporary Islamic discourse. I can take apart any of the rights she said Islam gave women but don't have time right now.

I'll leave you with this morsel: Islam "allows" women to retain their maiden names because paternal links are viewed as permanent and marital links as temporary. A woman remains forever a daughter of her father; that she is her husband's wife is a temporary condition. A misbehaving woman is sent back to her "father's house", and a cheating wife is brought to her father to discipline her, not her husband.

Not because it's somehow repressive to take your husband's last name.

Actually that's not true. Retaining a woman's maiden name is an Arab practice that predates Islam. It has to do with focus on geneology in Arab culture. The concept of a women changing her name to her husbands family which she is genetically not related to, is simply a foreign idea. So no its not because she "belongs" to her father nor is it because it is "repressive" to take your husbands last name.