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

[R_not]

I wonder what will happen to the same guy if he was a Catholic doing the same thing in a Muslim country?
How fast will they kill him?
But that’s another story because ‘fair’ is not an option here.

They have killed many just in 2008 just because they were priests! They even killed some in Western countries. If I remember correctly a couple of priests in the UK were killed by muslims. A nun was killed over the cartoons - she was an old nun and didn’t even have anything to do with them! but, the big, brave muslim males like to aim for children and old people - any unarmed person. That is emulating their prophet who did the same.

He carried out more raids and battles against unarmed caravans with women and children, and also poorly armed cities (cities known for trade, etc) for the loot and slaves, and eventually subjugation - that they don’t really know the exact number. Some say over 80 of which 30-35 he partook in himself. (source: The Life and Religion of mohammed)

 

[swariffin]

http://theislampath.com/smf/Smileys/default/salam.gif

Salaam/peace

O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, ( Chapter Women/ An-Nisa 4:19)

“Treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers.”
From the last sermon of Prophet Mohammed (pbuh)

Women in Islam Versus Women in the Judaeo-Christian Tradition
**

The Myth and The Reality **

By: Sherif Abdel Azim, Ph.D.-

Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

islamicity.com/mosque/w_islam/

Are you saying that you disagree with that Melbourne Muslim Cleric?

 

[swariffin]

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

I wonder why the cleric teach that a Muslim man can hit his wife if she refuses to have sex? Does in Islam a man can have 4 wives?
Perhaps that situation applied only when a man had already met that quota of 4, and in a certain circumstance, all 4 of his wives refuse to have sex with him, and the volcano within him was almost erupted.

 

[Sister_Amy]

I actually read something in the BBC today about this–the PM (I think?) of Australia was apparently offended and wanted the person to recant.

But I looked over his claims, and frankly I–as a woman, and as a Muslim–do not see the problem with what he said. I think his remarks were taken to deliberately smear Islam, or to turn Muslims against him (and against Islam.)

He didn’t say anything other than what I’ve said here about the same verses in the Qur’an and ahadith from the lips of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh.)

He did not say it was okay to “beat” women–in fact, he said that the man is not allowed to leave a bruise or a mark on his wife. Would you call that beating? I wouldn’t! Is that based on Islam? Absolutely–there is a hadith stating pretty much the same thing.

He also didn’t say men should force their wives to have sex–what he said was that women should not refuse their husbands without a valid reason. Is that promoting rape? I don’t think so! Is that based on Islam? Yep! There’s a hadith which says that as well.

And I stand by both statements.

 

[chrisse]

It never ceases to amaze me at the ability of the human mind to be completely indoctrinated into irrationality.

The qur’an gives permission of a man (the husband) to beat a woman for whatever he, I repeat he, thinks is wrong. This alone is wrong on so many levels; essentially treating a muslimah as nothing more than a man’s beast to be controlled. Further, there is no definition of what would constitute an offence to the man to draw such a response. This ruling is open to abuse, which we see is the case from stories and videos coming out of Islamic majority countries where shariah (allah’s) law has influence.

The woman further has no recourse for abuse of this. Oh I’m sure she can go to an iman, her parents. But there is, in reality, no support for her. Her witness, as a female, is less than the man’s.

He did say that the woman must go and satisfy her husband when he demands it - he quoted the example of even if she is cooking at the stove, she must stop and go to him. Hmmm, one can only imagine what would then happen to her when the food burns

And yes, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd called for an apology from this barbaric missing link to neanderthal man.

The Aunt Gemina’s on our board haven’t let me down.

 

[chrisse]

I might be mistaken, but I think this is the same moron who challenged Cardinel George Pell to a debate on Christianity vs Islam. Certainly it was in the same mosque. Two years ago now.

Cardinel Pell had released an article where he commented on the amount of violence in the qur’an. This got up this person’s nostrils and he had a real rant. Calling him Bishop Pell, lol. Making all the usual references to the Old Testament.

Cardinel Pell’s only response was that we follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Imagine this primary school drop out debating with Cardinel Pell

 

[R_not]

I might be mistaken, but I think this is the same moron who challenged Cardinel George Pell to a debate on Christianity vs Islam. Certainly it was in the same mosque. Two years ago now.

Cardinel Pell had released an article where he commented on the amount of violence in the qur’an. This got up this person’s nostrils and he had a real rant. Calling him Bishop Pell, lol. Making all the usual references to the Old Testament.

Cardinel Pell’s only response was that we follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Imagine this primary school drop out debating with Cardinel Pell

When I listen to these types of interviews it just amazes me how anyone can follow the ones trying to defend islam.

And you are right - the usual ones came right out and defended the indefensible. No wonder muslim women have to wear scarves and tents - to hide the bruises.

I am not saying they all get beat up, but there is a great many who do. In the UK now they are handing the muslim women back to their owner/abusers since they have given the muslims the right to practice sharia laws. I would think twice about defending this if I were in a country where it is still not ok to do such a thing.

Under sharia laws the women have no voting rights to change them, and non-muslims have even less rights under them.

 

[inJESUS]

It never ceases to amaze me at the ability of the human mind to be completely indoctrinated into irrationality.

i agree, after all, beating her is ok, leaving marks is not ok… only indoctrinated people will believe this 7th century desert mentality is from God.

The qur’an gives permission of a man (the husband) to beat a woman for whatever he, I repeat he, thinks is wrong. This alone is wrong on so many levels; essentially treating a muslimah as nothing more than a man’s beast to be controlled. Further, there is no definition of what would constitute an offence to the man to draw such a response.

 

[kellie]

He also didn’t say men should force their wives to have sex–what he said was that women should not refuse their husbands without a valid reason. Is that promoting rape? I don’t think so! Is that based on Islam? Yep! There’s a hadith which says that as well.

And I stand by both statements.

Do you consider the reason “I’m tired” to be a valid reason for a woman to use when refusing her husband sex?

 

[Prime]

He did not say it was okay to “beat” women–in fact, he said that the man is not allowed to leave a bruise or a mark on his wife.

Ha ha ha!
That’s how covert operations guys are instructed when they conduct tactical interrogations on target individuals:
‘Whatever you do, no bruises!’.
Now I know where these ideas came from!

 

[Sam_777]

According to this Islamic cleric, there are three types of women with whom a man cannot live:

youtube.com/watch?v=iWGA8i6scYY
**
**

 

[Sam_777]

(Matthew 7:16):
“By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?”

 

[dolphinlove]

I actually read something in the BBC today about this–the PM (I think?) of Australia was apparently offended and wanted the person to recant.

But I looked over his claims, and frankly I–as a woman, and as a Muslim–do not see the problem with what he said. I think his remarks were taken to deliberately smear Islam, or to turn Muslims against him (and against Islam.)

He didn’t say anything other than what I’ve said here about the same verses in the Qur’an and ahadith from the lips of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh.)

He did not say it was okay to “beat” women–in fact, he said that the man is not allowed to leave a bruise or a mark on his wife. Would you call that beating? I wouldn’t! Is that based on Islam? Absolutely–there is a hadith stating pretty much the same thing.

He also didn’t say men should force their wives to have sex–what he said was that women should not refuse their husbands without a valid reason. Is that promoting rape? I don’t think so! Is that based on Islam? Yep! There’s a hadith which says that as well.

And I stand by both statements.

i dont know whether to laugh or cry at you amy, but in this case, its laugh out loud.
What if a woman doesnt feel like having sex, this is a valid reason for the woman, but a man is going to say that is not, so what does this conclusion lead to, he can force her to have sex, which is RAPE!
Good luck defending your religion amy, i feel your brainwashing is now complete if you agree with this cleric.
i think bozo the clown makes more sense than him!

 

[R_not]

i dont know whether to laugh or cry at you amy, but in this case, its laugh out loud.
What if a woman doesnt feel like having sex, this is a valid reason for the woman, but a man is going to say that is not, so what does this conclusion lead to, he can force her to have sex, which is RAPE!
Good luck defending your religion amy, i feel your brainwashing is now complete if you agree with this cleric.
i think bozo the clown makes more sense than him!

Well, sometimes to me it is like this…:hypno:

The hypno icon is them and the laughing icon is me.

 

[Sister_Amy]

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.

 

[empurpledsoul]

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.

Yeah, because self discipline, love and tenderness are not possible. When you support the teaching that leads to psychological abuse to “protect the MAN from adultery” you sufficiently negate his duty to be in control of his desires, blame the woman for his failings and justify abuse and harm as a method of controlling a human being.

What about the woman who has sex refused to her? By your logic it is just as right for her to beat the man to get it or else she might wander into adultery.

Plus, Islam allows another wife, effectively making refusal of sex by one a non excuse for adultery, they just need make another woman (up to 4) their wife and they will not be committing adultery.

 

[chrisse]

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.

: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.

 

[dzheremi]

I find it odd that Sister Amy argues that R_not has been brainwashed by “(her) society” when they both belong to the same society, that is, to American society. And in American society, “I don’t want to” is a valid reason. You know, “no means no” and all that.

 

[Prime]

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.

Oh the effects of brainwashing!
There is a big difference between:
Refusal to have sex = reason to be beaten
and
Refusal to have sex = not reason to be beaten

I’m a man but I cannot have sex with my wife thinking that she is just going along because she has no other choice between having sex or getting beaten.
Maybe men in your society have a different sexual orientation. - The orientation of a property owner - which is just like purchasing a sex doll.
I’m just assuming that not all women in your society want to be treated like a sex doll.

 

[ferdie]

Oh the effects of brainwashing!
There is a big difference between:
Refusal to have sex = reason to be beaten
and
Refusal to have sex = not reason to be beaten

I’m a man but I cannot have sex with my wife thinking that she is just going along because she has no other choice between having sex or getting beaten.
Maybe men in your society have a different sexual orientation. - The orientation of a property owner - which is just like purchasing a sex doll.
I’m just assuming that not all women in your society want to be treated like a sex doll.

Sex maniacs!!! That’s why they are willng to die, so they can have 72 virgins!!!