Reply to Science channel's "Biblical Mysteries Explained"

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "Science channel's "Biblical Mysteries Explained""

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

Lustful descriptions of rampant fornication and adultery were examples of a hedonistic society of men taking treating women as sex objects. And this is indicative of the low status women were put in, yes. There is no nobility or dignity in disregarding the sanctity of marriage or engaging in acts that produce illegitimate children. [/quote]
As long as women were free to treat men as sex objects, it's not an indication of a low status of women.  Is there evidence lustful descriptions were limited to men?

As far as disregarding "the sanctity of marriage", most women will feel bringing women #2, #3 and #4 into the marriage without their consent violates its sanctity as much  - or more - as any lustful descriptions.  "Illegitimate children" is a social construct - a child is whatever society agrees to consider him or her.

[quote=Anonymous]
The vast majority of the most important scholars disagree with you. So please stop publishing false or misleading information about Islam. [/quote]
Leila Ahmed doesn't - is she not a scholar?

I"ll publish what I see fit, thanks. [/quote]

No where in the Quran does it permit a man to take additional wives against the wishes of his first wife. No where. This is a convenient lie you have made up just to put Islam down. In fact it says in the Quran that if a man can not treat them equally, he SHOULD NOT TAKE ON MORE THAN ONE WIFE. Read Islamic history and you will see under what circumstances the prophet took additional wives. Often it was because women were orphaned or their husbands killed in war with no resource to help care for their children. You are one woefully uneducated about islamic history.[/quote]

These are very different things.

1. True, there is no explicit permission for a man to take a second wife against the first wife's wishes.

But this is not the same thing as

2. An explicit requirement that the husband respect the first wife's wishes re a second wife.

And all of this is also different from

3. A guy asking himself if he can treat multiple wives equally wrt financial support, marital relations, and shelter, finding that he thinks he probably can, and then going ahead with a second wife.

In other words, the requirement is to treat all wives equally. That's a good requirement. But it is not a requirement to seek the first wife's OK.[/quote]

I'm going to quote to you from Dr. Badawi's web site regarding this question:

Host:  What about the first wife?  Is it necessary that she consent to the husband taking a second wife?  What options and protection are open to her as the first wife?

Jamal Badawi:

We can not say that the agreement of the first wife to her husband taking a second wife is an absolute prerequisite.  But we can say that within the spirit of Islam and the spirit of Islamic Law in general that it is only appropriate to have some discussion and consultation about the matter with the first wife.  A person who gets married to a second wife in secret, or to surprises the first wife after the decision is made is not regarded to have good character.  This is not a decent act on the behalf of a Muslim.  We are not talking strictly in terms of legality but appropriateness.  It is however, possible that the first wife has what amounts to a veto right on her husband taking a second wife.  In Islamic Law at the time of marriage if the first wife specified in the marriage contract that her husband should not take a second wife many jurists say that this condition is enforceable and would be binding on the husband.  Various schools differ in the explanation but not the principle.  In the Hanbali School of jurisprudence they say that marriage could be invalidated if he takes a second wife on the basis of violation or breaking of the marriage contract.  In other schools like the Maliki School of jurisprudence they said that she could ask for the nullification of the marriage because of harm was inflicted upon her because of his violation of the contractual commitment or agreement.  This would be a no fault type of divorce on her part.

There is also another for of protection for the first wife.  This can amount to a veto right on polygamy.  This is called ismah in Arabic which is translated in English delegated repudiation.  This simply mean that a woman at the time of marriage may specify in the contract that she would have the unilateral right to divorce her husband in this case.  In which case if her husband takes a second wife and she doest feel happy with it she has the right according to that clause to divorce her husband unilaterally.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics