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

Anonymous wrote: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 wrote:

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

Lets not use Bhutto as any kind of a positive example. One of the most corrupt families that ever ruled over Pakistan.

Anonymous wrote: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.

Anonymous wrote:


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.

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.

Whoever among you cannot find the means to marry free, believing women, then he may marry from those whom your right hands possess of believing slave girls, and Allah is most knowing about your faith. You believers are of one another. So marry them with the permission of their people and give them their due compensation according to what is acceptable. They should be chaste, neither of those who commit unlawful intercourse randomly nor those who take secret lovers - Surah An-Nisa 4:25

let those who do not find the means to marry keep chaste until Allah makes them free from want out of His grace. And (as for) those who ask for a writing from among those whom your right hands possess, give them the writing if you know any good in them, and give them of the wealth of Allah which He has given you; and do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, when they desire to keep chaste, in order to seek the frail good of this world's life; and whoever compels them, then surely after their compulsion Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (The Noble Quran, 24:33)"

Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah: "Musaykah, a slave-girl of some Ansari, came and said: My master forces me to commit fornication. Thereupon the following verse was revealed: "But force not your slaves to prostitution (when they desire chastity). (24:33)" (Translation of Sunan Abu Dawud, Divorce (Kitab Al-Talaq), Book 12, Number 2304)"

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

A few crucial points:
(1) a woman whose husband is dead or disabled is indeed "compelled" to work. This is true in many Muslim countries that have been plagued by war, where women and mothers with no other sources of family support, are indeed "compelled to work" and would, in fact, benefit from laws promoting equality.

(2) what you call being "compelled" to work is a source of great happiness for many women.
(3) one of the reasons US women earn less than men is they work in different jobs. Women are much more likely to go into teaching and nursing, for example.

But surely you know all these things.... Since you claim you live in the US, it would be pretty much impossible to be oblivious to points #1-3. I don't understand a mindset that argues by denying the the obvious and expects that nobody will see through it. Do you cross your fingers and hope that nobody will challenge your statements?

Muslima wrote:
But as it aimed at putting an end to such issue, Islam laid down rules which would eventually lead to eradicating the practice. So it allowed Muslims to have intercourse with slave women taken as captives of just and legitimate wars. In so doing, the woman would automatically become free if she got pregnant. What's more, her child would also become free. Not only that, Islam also ordered a Muslim to treat the slave woman in every respect as if she were his wife. She should be well fed, clothed and given due protection. In the family environment, she had the opportunity to learn about Islam and was free to accept it or reject it. She also had the opportunity to earn her freedom for she could be ransomed.

Muslima wrote:

A few crucial points:
(1) a woman whose husband is dead or disabled is indeed "compelled" to work. This is true in many Muslim countries that have been plagued by war, where women and mothers with no other sources of family support, are indeed "compelled to work" and would, in fact, benefit from laws promoting equality.

Not in an islamic society. In an islamic state, the divorced/widowed woman is the responsibility of her father. If the father can't take care of her, then her brothers, or other relatives ect. So no in a pure shariah state unless the woman has no male relatives, she is never compelled to work, and of course if she doesn't have male relatives then the inheritance is hers....

(2) what you call being "compelled" to work is a source of great happiness for many women.
(3) one of the reasons US women earn less than men is they work in different jobs. Women are much more likely to go into teaching and nursing, for example.

Ugh.... You understand the meaning of "Compelled" right? Most Muslim women do CHOOSE to work freely but their money is 100% theirs to keep, they do not have to participate financially and can not be compelled to do so. Husbands on the other hand are obligated to support 100% their wives regardless of whether they work or not. Fathers are obligated to take care of their daughters 100% till they get married.

But surely you know all these things.... Since you claim you live in the US, it would be pretty much impossible to be oblivious to points #1-3. I don't understand a mindset that argues by denying the the obvious and expects that nobody will see through it. Do you cross your fingers and hope that nobody will challenge your statements?

You seem pretty confused.....

Anonymous wrote:Are you still claiming to live in the District of Columbia?

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

A few crucial points:
(1) a woman whose husband is dead or disabled is indeed "compelled" to work. This is true in many Muslim countries that have been plagued by war, where women and mothers with no other sources of family support, are indeed "compelled to work" and would, in fact, benefit from laws promoting equality.

Not in an islamic society. In an islamic state, the divorced/widowed woman is the responsibility of her father. If the father can't take care of her, then her brothers, or other relatives ect. So no in a pure shariah state unless the woman has no male relatives, she is never compelled to work, and of course if she doesn't have male relatives then the inheritance is hers....

(2) what you call being "compelled" to work is a source of great happiness for many women.
(3) one of the reasons US women earn less than men is they work in different jobs. Women are much more likely to go into teaching and nursing, for example.

Ugh.... You understand the meaning of "Compelled" right? Most Muslim women do CHOOSE to work freely but their money is 100% theirs to keep, they do not have to participate financially and can not be compelled to do so. Husbands on the other hand are obligated to support 100% their wives regardless of whether they work or not. Fathers are obligated to take care of their daughters 100% till they get married.

But surely you know all these things.... Since you claim you live in the US, it would be pretty much impossible to be oblivious to points #1-3. I don't understand a mindset that argues by denying the the obvious and expects that nobody will see through it. Do you cross your fingers and hope that nobody will challenge your statements?

You seem pretty confused.....

I think many of us are frustrated with your deliberately slippery, shallow arguing style. You pretend not to see obvious points and you provide shallow answers to reasonable questions. There's a lot to take on in your snide post above, but let's focus on the following:
1. Your response that a widow with no male family members to support her "gets the full inheritance" is not only glib and disrespectful to the people you're talking to on DCUM, it's incredibly cavalier about the plight of impoverished widows. Their situation is very common in wartime. So, what happens to the woman with NO male relatives and NO inheritance of any substance?
2. We all know that being dependent on someone else can be OK, or it can be fraught with emotional and financial difficulties.
3. Many of us disagree that discrimination against women is so ingrained that we should stop trying to seek change, and that instead we should ingrain patriarchal family and institutional structures.

Finally, your gratuitous insults are not welcome. Argue like an honest, mature adult. Thank you.

1. Your response that a widow with no male family members to support her "gets the full inheritance" is not only glib and disrespectful to the people you're talking to on DCUM, it's incredibly cavalier about the plight of impoverished widows. Their situation is very common in wartime. So, what happens to the woman with NO male relatives and NO inheritance of any substance?

3. Many of us disagree that discrimination against women is so ingrained that we should stop trying to seek change, and that instead we should ingrain patriarchal family and institutional structures.

Muslima wrote: So, what happens to the woman with NO male relatives and NO inheritance of any substance?

Muslima wrote:Yeh, discrimination that exists in your head, so pointless! I will repeat it over and over again. Islam doesn't discriminate against women. I am a Muslim woman and will choose the rules of Islam over any other rules, now you dont have to accept that because obviously you are not Muslim. But to tell me that I am being discriminated against by my Religion while I perfectly know I am not is kinda insulting. To think you care more about my situation and plight as a muslim woman is actually very odd! Whenever Women are being discriminated against in the muslim world, it has been because of action of Men not the religion, so get off of your high horses. Hundreds of Thousands of women are being discriminated against in the United States every single day, so have at it!