Cleric - its ok to beat woman and force them to have sex

[Linda_Marie]

At least some Muslims have spoken out and publicly condemned what Abu Hamza said.

Perth Muslims outraged by cleric

news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24952543-2761,00.html

LOCAL Muslim group Perth Lighthouse have condemned the views of Melbourne Islamic teacher Samir Abu Hamza on the violent treatment of women as outrageous.

Perth Lighthouse Chairperson, Mawlaanaa (a title for a religious scholar) Feizel Chothia said his group and the wider Muslim community vehemently opposed the assertions of Mr. Abu Hamza.

Perth Lighthouse has also stressed that the mainstream media has a responsibility to ensure that the perceived views of a misguided few are not represented as the general attitude and view of the Muslim community.
<…>

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

au.news.yahoo.com/a/-//5275032/cleric-preaches-beating-women-and-forcing-sex/

An Islamic cleric from Melbourne has told followers it is permitted to force their wives to have sex with them and to hit them.

The lecture, titled “The Keys to a Successful Marriage” was delivered a few years ago but had recently been placed on the internet.

Samir Abu Hamza, who runs the Islamic Information and Services Network of Australasia in Coburg, said Islamic law permitted men to hit their disobedient wives as a last resort.

“You’ll beat them… but this is the last resort after you have advised them for a long, long time, then you smack them, you beat them.”

For the rest of the article, refer to the link above

The Bible is worse - beating children is commanded in it. Does the Koran command wife-beating or child beating ? It is more authoritative than any Muslim “cleric” (the wrong word, surely ?) But when do Christians ever mention the Biblical texts that command beating of children ? The only ones who do are the Fundamentalists, many of whom won’t even pee sitting down because its forbidden in their holy book - see the link for proof:​

 

[dzheremi]

Err…why does your profile say “Catholic”, Gottle of Geer, when so many of your posts are about how horrible Christianity supposedly is?

 

[R_not]

The Bible is worse - beating children is commanded in it. Does the Koran command wife-beating or child beating ? It is more authoritative than any Muslim “cleric” (the wrong word, surely ?) But when do Christians ever mention the Biblical texts that command beating of children ? The only ones who do are the Fundamentalists, many of whom won’t even pee sitting down because its forbidden in their holy book - see the link for proof:​

Post the passages that show that there is a ‘command’ to beat children.

And as for this video about going to the bathroom against the wall - you take one nutcase and what are you trying to prove? Your post doesn’t really make any sense.

Are you able to tell the difference when the Bible talks about what happened in a historical sense and a ‘command’?

Anyway, you need to start backing up your assertions and not with something that doesn’t even apply to what you are trying to assert. If you want to talk about beating children then show us those passages, don’t divert into some other topic in your reference to us.

And by the way - those passages are also used in a historical sense. He was refering to a specific group of people AT THAT TIME. It isn’t something to be carried on for millenia.

And Jesus never told us how to go to the bathroom.

 

[Reuben_J]

Post the passages that show that there is a ‘command’ to beat children.

.

Maybe he has this in mind:

Proverbs 13:24
He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him.

There are Christians, me included, who believes in this in the area of parenting. But to equate wives with children is certainly off the mark. When Mohammad gave the command for men to beat their wives he was against the scaredness and sanctity of marriage. This would only open the floodgate to wives abuses.

In the case of children as in Pro 13:24 it is all about parenting, discipline and bringing up children.

You know what, I just have this idea - the reason Mohammad commanded husbands to treat their wives like children, well, wasn’t it because he had one who was a child?

 

[R_not]

Maybe he has this in mind:

Proverbs 13:24
He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him.

There are Christians, me included, who believes in this in the area of parenting. But to equate wives with children is certainly off the mark. When Mohammad gave the command for men to beat their wives he was against the scaredness and sanctity of marriage. This would only open the floodgate to wives abuses.

In the case of children as in Pro 13:24 it is all about parenting, discipline and bringing up children.

You know what, I just have this idea - the reason Mohammad commanded husbands to treat their wives like children, well, wasn’t it because he had one who was a child?

Yeah, but even that passage is not a command for anyone to do it. It is more along the lines of advice. There is no commandment to beat kids, grownups whether they be man or woman, or anyone.

mohammed wanted his followers to treat women badly because he was a Misogynist. It probably started when he was a very little guy. His father died before he was born and his mother gave him away to a wet nurse to be taken care of. The wet nurse didn’t want him either after a few years and gave him back to his mother because she said he had fits.

Who knows what life was like for his mother after the father died - it was probably harsh. But even at that the ultimate abandonment came when his mother died when he was about 4-6.

And who knows how life was for him before and after that. His uncle took him in and was said to have doted over him. How did the other women treat him? I have never found anything that said anything about his treatment by his aunt or any other woman. His first wife was a much older woman by 15 years. She was rich too and had other kids.

He was taken on caravans with his uncle where he learned from an early age what that was like which served him later in life because he knew that women and children were along in those caravans and not very heavily armed. His raids against them were so many that no one has a consistent number of how many raids he made against them after he started his islam. It is over 50 and less than 100 raids.

He enslaved untold numbers of woman and took some of them as his wives, after he killed their men relatives.

 

[Sister_Amy]

What sort of foolishness equates legitimate intimacy between a married couple with rape? It’s totally absurd.

Rape, it should be understood, is far more than a sexual crime. How on earth is anyone jumping to such a bizarre conclusion, that rape is allowed in Islam, when the cleric has only said that a woman isn’t supposed to refuse her husband? That if she does refuse he has the right to force himself?

Are you people crazy? I mean, you seriously think that?

There is absolutely no logic behind that statement, none whatsoever.

In Islam, both men and women have rights over their spouses. And when it comes to intimacy, there are equal rights. A man is not supposed to refuse intimacy with his wife without a valid reason either. (In all honesty, though, that’s not as often the problem as the reverse, is it?)

One of the rights of spouses is the right to intimacy. Not forcing it.

To the poster who was on about “no means no.” In fact, if a husband (or a wife) is not receiving intimacy from his/her spouse, despite making requests for it, it’s quite likely that that person will look elsewhere for the fulfillment of that need. And that is much, much worse than the partner stopping what they’re doing for a little while to be intimate with their spouse.

There is absolutely no reason a man should force his wife into intimacy.

Seriously, anyone who reached that conclusion is in my opinion, at present, certifiably nuts. Haven’t you got any sense? Ugh!

 

[rtconstant]

Err…why does your profile say “Catholic”, Gottle of Geer, when so many of your posts are about how horrible Christianity supposedly is?

I don’t think Gottle is saying Christianity is horrible. What he’s saying is that while there are verses in the Bible that could be read to encourage beating children, most Christians don’t use them to justify child abuse.

In other words, Christians are less likely to try and make excuses for savage behavior by using our Holy Text as a proof text.

At least that’s how I took it.

 

[rtconstant]

What sort of foolishness equates legitimate intimacy between a married couple with rape? It’s totally absurd.

Rape, it should be understood, is far more than a sexual crime. How on earth is anyone jumping to such a bizarre conclusion, that rape is allowed in Islam, when the cleric has only said that a woman isn’t supposed to refuse her husband? That if she does refuse he has the right to force himself?

That conclusion is easily reached when the husband is the one who is the arbiter of what is a “good reason.”

Are you people crazy? I mean, you seriously think that?

There is absolutely no logic behind that statement, none whatsoever.

In Islam, both men and women have rights over their spouses. And when it comes to intimacy, there are equal rights. A man is not supposed to refuse intimacy with his wife without a valid reason either. (In all honesty, though, that’s not as often the problem as the reverse, is it?)

In theory it may be equally wrong for a man to refuse his wife, but the reality is that she does not have the right to arbitrate that opinion on him, and she has no recourse if he decides to not have sex with her.

What is crazy is this strange idea in Muslim culture that a man cannot control his sexual desires and so if there is an issue with intimacy with his wife he really has no choice but to have an affair. It is the same mentality that says that women have to hide themselves behind, veils, burqas or the hijab because obviously a man can not be expected to restrain his sexual appetites if he looks at a woman. This sort of thinking is an insult to both men and women. It reduces a woman to nothing more than an object desire, and man as nothing more than animal.

One of the rights of spouses is the right to intimacy. Not forcing it.

To the poster who was on about “no means no.” In fact, if a husband (or a wife) is not receiving intimacy from his/her spouse, despite making requests for it, it’s quite likely that that person will look elsewhere for the fulfillment of that need. And that is much, much worse than the partner stopping what they’re doing for a little while to be intimate with their spouse.

Or the partner could work on the issues within the marriage that is causing the issues within the marriage. Its strange that often Muslims condemn the West for its sexual failings (an argument with some validity), and yet often it seems westerners have more sexual discipline than their accusers.

There is absolutely no reason a man should force his wife into intimacy.

Now on that we agree.

 

[inJESUS]

:juggle: :bowdown:

Of course, the valid reason could be that she’s wife #3 and it’s wife #2’s night.

Islamic “marriage” is nothing more than a allah’s law that a muslim man can have his own personal bordello, including the right to change “wives” as he pleases, or on his own judgement, his displeasure.

Disgusting.

i wonder as well about a man who has 4 wives which means he cannot “be” with his wife whenever she wants because he is simply with other women until her “turn” comes.

 

[Prime]

The Bible is worse - beating children is commanded in it. Does the Koran command wife-beating or child beating ? It is more authoritative than any Muslim “cleric” (the wrong word, surely ?) But when do Christians ever mention the Biblical texts that command beating of children ? The only ones who do are the Fundamentalists, many of whom won’t even pee sitting down because its forbidden in their holy book - see the link for proof:​

There is a whale of a difference between disciplining a wayward child and beating a wife to obtain sex.

 

[Prime]

In Islam, both men and women have rights over their spouses. And when it comes to intimacy, there are equal rights.
Ugh!

In Islam men can have 4 wives but not the other way around.
You call that equal?

 

[chrisse]

At least some Muslims have spoken out and publicly condemned what Abu Hamza said.

Perth Muslims outraged by cleric

news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24952543-2761,00.html

There is just one little problem - it is shariah law: allah’s divine law that cannot be changed.

The muslim community must do more than issuing press statements and start a real campaign of reform for there to be any meaning. I’m over the multitude of press statements, and nothing else, at the exposure of the horrors of Islam; ignorance is no longer an excuse in 2009, especially in Western countries.

Their first task is to admit the problem, then start on the reform. I’m not confident it can be done, but it will have to be done by muslims themselves if it can.

 

[R_not]

There is just one little problem - it is shariah law: allah’s divine law that cannot be changed.

The muslim community must do more than issuing press statements and start a real campaign of reform for there to be any meaning. I’m over the multitude of press statements, and nothing else, at the exposure of the horrors of Islam; ignorance is no longer an excuse in 2009, especially in Western countries.

Their first task is to admit the problem, then start on the reform. I’m not confident it can be done, but it will have to be done by muslims themselves if it can.

And there are at least two reasons why the muslim community needs to do something other than these press releases.

1. How do we know this just isn’t more taqiyya? Sanctioned deception.
2. attacks are speeding up and are in more and more countries. Press releases are rather useless pieces of paper when all we are reading about, experiencing, and hearing is that the violence is increasing.

 

[chrisse]

That may be her choice to make; however I would like, in fact, demand a choice on whether such a civil/legal/cultural code should be allowed to exist in my country where it is diametrically opposed to our way of life : our way of life that is our absolute right.

There are also the financial consequences of her choice on the rest of us. The Islamic civilisational ideology just has no place within Western civilisation - the two cannot co-exist in harmony or peacefully or equitably.

 

[kellie]

I do agree with that cleric and so you call me brainwashed.

But really, I think it is you who have been brainwashed by your society.

Adultery is an abhorrent sin, and so are the things which lead towards adultery–Muslims are supposed to abstain from both.

What is a man to do, if his wife refuses him sex? Intercourse with his wife is lawful, but intercourse, even intimacy with any other woman is forbidden. So what if his wife is constantly refusing because she just doesn’t feel like it? In that case, his marriage would not be protecting him from adultery.

What the cleric didn’t say is that this actually goes both ways. A man isn’t supposed to refuse his wife either, without a valid reason.

Being ill of course is a valid reason–if intercourse would cause her pain or undue stress or whatever. But the point that’s being made that if a woman just doesn’t feel like it, that’s not a good enough excuse. And the reason it’s worthwhile to point that out is because the man has certain needs in the relationship, and the woman has certain needs in the relationship, and they both have an obligation to the other to fulfill those needs and rights.

It’s my opinion then that women who refuse intercourse with their husbands without a valid reason (like being sick or something) are really hurting their relationship. It has become acceptable in this society for women to deprive their husbands of intimacy–but in Islam, intimacy is not supposed to be used as a tool by one to manipulate the other.

Amy, u make it sound like sex is a pleasure a husband should have fulfilled whenever he wants

That isnt the reason for sex at all

It is to reproduce, through marriage

It isnt to be a self-gratifying experience

 

[dzheremi]

To the poster who was on about “no means no.” In fact, if a husband (or a wife) is not receiving intimacy from his/her spouse, despite making requests for it, it’s quite likely that that person will look elsewhere for the fulfillment of that need. And that is much, much worse than the partner stopping what they’re doing for a little while to be intimate with their spouse.

Er…okay. I was responding to post #37 in which you asked the following:

What is a man to do, if his wife refuses him sex? Intercourse with his wife is lawful, but intercourse, even intimacy with any other woman is forbidden. So what if his wife is constantly refusing because she just doesn’t feel like it? In that case, his marriage would not be protecting him from adultery.

The problem with this sort of reasoning is that it assumes that the husband’s need for sex should invalidate the wife’s feelings, just because sex is legal within marriage and the husband wants it. Unfortunately for those who think this way, in the USA, “I don’t feel like it” is a valid reason for refusing sex. There are many cases in which rape is charged against a husband for forcing sex on his wife when she didn’t want it for whatever reason. So what is a couple in that situation to do? Go to counseling, surely. Maybe this will help them and they will discover why they are having intimacy problems. This will most certainly not happen if the husband is allowed to discard the wife’s feelings by brutalizing her, raping her when she does not want to have sex with him. In fact, logically, you would think that this would increase the problems between the couple, even if the wife does not consider it rape (it was until relatively recently not considered possible for a husband to rape his wife).

So while I understand that in your mind you are not in any way excusing rape, I do not see how this sort of thinking does not at least point in that direction. And “protecting him against adultery”? That is the responsibility of every man, regardless of how he and his wife get along. Certainly a couple can be physically intimate on a regular basis and still have the sort of emotional distance problems that can lead to one or both parties having affairs. Sex is not some magical glue that keeps a couple together regardless of how they feel about each other, and if it is they probably shouldn’t be married in the first place.

 

[R_not]

How many psychiatrists, counselors, or psychologists are there in islam? How many graduate out of schools in muslim countries?

(my guess = zero, or pretty close to that)

What they do have are clerics - too many to count that are not only pulling double duty as officers in a religious war against so many nations (pushing jihad - that violent kind), but also as counselors which basically is to regurgitate the koran, or sunnah, back at a person. Which is basically - the woman has no rights and is to submit and the man has all the rights.

 

[Jay53]

How many psychiatrists, counselors, or psychologists are there in islam? How many graduate out of schools in muslim countries?

(my guess = zero, or pretty close to that)

What they do have are clerics - too many to count that are not only pulling double duty as officers in a religious war against so many nations (pushing jihad - that violent kind), but also as counselors which basically is to regurgitate the koran, or sunnah, back at a person. Which is basically - the woman has no rights and is to submit and the man has all the rights.

Not sure - I only know of Dr. Homa Darabi (because I read her sister’s book about her. ) She became a child psychiatrist but was fired from her position and harassed because she refused to wear the hijab. She ended up setting herself on fire in protest of the oppression of women and the guilt she felt for having originally supported the Iranian Revolution which didn’t turn out the way the people actually wanted.

Here’s an excerpt from the biography on the Dr. Homa Darabi Foundation website:

When a 16 year old girl was shot to death in Northern Tehran for wearing lipstick about a month prior to her death, Dr. Darabi could no longer handle the guilt she felt about her favorable involvement in the Iranian Revolution, and the way women were being treated in Iran, she finally decided to protest the oppression of women by setting herself on fire in a crowded square in northern Tehran, on February 21, 1994. Her last cry was Death to Tyranny Long Live Liberty

homa.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=65&Itemid=54

 

[R_not]

Not sure - I only know of Dr. Homa Darabi (because I read her sister’s book about her. ) She became a child psychiatrist but was fired from her position and harassed because she refused to wear the hijab. She ended up setting herself on fire in protest of the oppression of women and the guilt she felt for having originally supported the Iranian Revolution which didn’t turn out the way the people actually wanted.

Here’s an excerpt from the biography on the Dr. Homa Darabi Foundation website:

homa.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=65&Itemid=54

Too bad she killed herself. It would have been better if she became more of an activist concerning woman’s rights. I can’t believe how many muslim women in our own lands do absolutely nothing about the plight of women in muslim lands. they just parrot back the usual dribble.