Pakistani men can beat wives 'lightly,' Islamic council says

[Holly3278]

The leader of a Pakistani Islamic council has proposed a bill that allows husbands to “lightly beat” their wives as a form of discipline.

cnn.com/2016/05/28/asia/pakistan-women-light-beating/

This is so wrong! And the fact is, the Quran allows wife beating too. Various Muslim groups have different views on that passage of the Quran though. But anyway, it’s downright sickening that this powerful Islamic group would endorse spousal abuse!

 

[anon67074017]

This again shows that Christianity shows more respect for women than Islam. Christianity gets all the flak though.

 

[JimmyDFG]

cnn.com/2016/05/28/asia/pakistan-women-light-beating/

This is so wrong! And the fact is, the Quran allows wife beating too. Various Muslim groups have different views on that passage of the Quran though. But anyway, it’s downright sickening that this powerful Islamic group would endorse spousal abuse!

The only time a man should lay a hand on a woman is to hold her hand

 

[ComplineSanFran]

This again shows that Christianity shows more respect for women than Islam. Christianity gets all the flak though.

Yet the Bible tells parents to physically discipline their children. Many evangelical movements have clear instructions on how to beat one’s child.

I find that equally abhorrent.

 

[Little_Sheep]

Yet the Bible tells parents to physically discipline their children. Many evangelical movements have clear instructions on how to beat one’s child.

I find that equally abhorrent.

All patriarchal religions are able to scrounge up this sort of nonsense by tying it to their holy texts. None of them have fully shed themselves of it yet, as we all well know. Repugnant.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

All patriarchal religions are able to scrounge up this sort of nonsense by tying it to their holy texts. None of them have fully shed themselves of it yet, as we all well know. Repugnant.

There is also a sub-culture within Christian evangelicals called Christian Domestic Discipline. It involves husbands disciplining their wives primarily through spanking. It’s probably very parallel to the Islamic version of ‘light’ beatings. It’s scriptural and practiced through an understanding that the husband, as head of the house, needs to keep his wife disciplined in a physical way. I would imagine that they would carry that over to the children.

Anyway, it’s all part of the same dynamic, regardless of belief system, and it is, as you say, ‘repugnant,’

christiandomesticdiscipline.com/home.html

 

[Darryl1958]

Yet the Bible tells parents to physically discipline their children. Many evangelical movements have clear instructions on how to beat one’s child.

I find that equally abhorrent.

I don’t find it equally abhorrent.

If women were the equivalents of children, and not fully adult members of society, then I would find it equally abhorrent though.

 

[RPRPsych]

cnn.com/2016/05/28/asia/pakistan-women-light-beating/

This is so wrong! And the fact is, the Quran allows wife beating too. Various Muslim groups have different views on that passage of the Quran though. But anyway, it’s downright sickening that this powerful Islamic group would endorse spousal abuse!

Pakistan is the epitome of a failed state. When the system fails, people take out their frustrations on the most vulnerable and defenceless. (Didn’t we have a Pakistani poster here, not too long ago, who got banned for extolling the virtues of “domestic discipline”?)

However, it’s important to note that there are Hindu texts which also permit this loathsome practice. There are Hindu conservative groups (such as the buffoonish “Save the Indian Family Foundation”) which want domestic violence laws repealed. The difference is that the Indian government hasn’t (yet) caved in to them.

 

[RPRPsych]

I don’t find it equally abhorrent.

If women were the equivalents of children, and not fully adult members of society, then I would find it equally abhorrent though.

We must draw a line here between corporal punishment (which even Pope Francis has nothing against!) and physical abuse.

Every parent has the right to discipline their child and set limits as long as the line into abuse is not crossed.

While there are some truly evil, nominally Evangelical writers who condone extreme and abusive practices, such as Michael / Debi Pearl and Jack van Impe, they are certainly not the norm. In fact, parents following such practices have been prosecuted for causing death or serious injury to their children. Mainstream Evangelical writers such as James Dobson have more enlightened views on discipline.

If you ask me, living in a broken home, being deprived of either a paternal or maternal figure, or being raised by gay “parents” are far more deleterious to a child than the occasional, judicious use of physical punishments.

 

[RPRPsych]

 

[Darryl1958]

We must draw a line here between corporal punishment (which even Pope Francis has nothing against!) and physical abuse.

Every parent has the right to discipline their child and set limits as long as the line into abuse is not crossed.

While there are some truly evil, nominally Evangelical writers who condone extreme and abusive practices, such as Michael / Debi Pearl and Jack van Impe, they are certainly not the norm. In fact, parents following such practices have been prosecuted for causing death or serious injury to their children. Mainstream Evangelical writers such as James Dobson have more enlightened views on discipline.

If you ask me, living in a broken home, being deprived of either a paternal or maternal figure, or being raised by gay “parents” are far more deleterious to a child than the occasional, judicious use of physical punishments.

I think that a good case can be made against the need or utility of corporal abuse against children, while at the same time understanding that discipline and guidance are necessary to protect and form children into beings capable of making adult decisions.

Even so, corporal punishment may be a part of that guidance and protection without in any way being abusive.

Either way, women are not children, but are as mature and as wise and as capable of adult decisions as men are. It is a false equivalence to pretend that corporal punishment against an unformed child and corporal punishment against one’s life partner are the same thing.

The infantalization of women through corporal is an odious and repugnant practice. It is not worthy of any religion attributable to the Most High.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Either way, women are not children, but are as mature and as wise and as capable of adult decisions as men are. It is a false equivalence to pretend that corporal punishment against an unformed child and corporal punishment against one’s life partner are the same thing.
.

Not according to Christian Scriptures. And for those who believe in such a way will practice headship and submission accordingly.

 

[Darryl1958]

Not according to Christian Scriptures. And for those who believe in such a way will practice headship and submission accordingly.

Jesus did not treat women as children.
Maybe your Christian scriptures are different than that.

 

[Petaro]

A man’s role as a husband is to protect his wife at all times. He has failed as a man if she ever fears him. To hit her is to hit himself. If a wife cannot go to her husband, whatever her failures, without fear but in the secure knowledge of his continued love and protection, then again he has failed.
I have never hit my son ever. But then my wife tells me he is perfect so I am obviously blessed. LOL. A small child will not come readily to his father knowing he may be harmed. That goes against our nature. Rather, my son knew he could come to me for advice and reassurance. He also knew that there was a reason if I was angry with him, which normally ended in a cuddle. Little b… knew how to get around me from an early age.

 

[RPRPsych]

I think that a good case can be made against the need or utility of corporal abuse against children, while at the same time understanding that discipline and guidance are necessary to protect and form children into beings capable of making adult decisions.

Even so, corporal punishment may be a part of that guidance and protection without in any way being abusive.

Either way, women are not children, but are as mature and as wise and as capable of adult decisions as men are. It is a false equivalence to pretend that corporal punishment against an unformed child and corporal punishment against one’s life partner are the same thing.

The infantalization of women through corporal is an odious and repugnant practice.** It is not worthy of any religion attributable to the Most High.**

Fully agreed. This is why it is not a part of the authentic Judeo-Christian tradition; neither the Old Testament nor the New Testament condone this vile practice. (Hilaire Belloc had a good point when he described Islam as a “heresy” from the Christian tree.)

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Jesus did not treat women as children.
Maybe your Christian scriptures are different than that.

It’s St Paul who is clear on the subject, and those who hold to the standards of headship/submission refer to his teachings. Do you not know that much of evangelical Christianity practices what Paul preaches?

 

[twf]

It’s St Paul who is clear on the subject, and those who hold to the standards of headship/submission refer to his teachings. Do you not know that much of evangelical Christianity practices what Paul preaches?

Yet St Paul never condones nor even mentions the discipline of wives… Certainly not corporal violence against them. There’s really only a couple verses that these Evangelical groups have abused. St Paul is also the one who said “there is neither… Male nor female in Christ Jesus.”

 

[otjm]

And getting back to the topic…

One would do well to get a more complete understanding of how conservative to ultra conservative Muslim men view women. Physical correction of them is a key, if one starts paying attention. Go look up what “rights” women have, say, in Saudi Arabia - all done in the name of “protecting” women.

It would be of the greatest kindness to describe their attitudes, reactions, and laws as treating women as second class citizens.

 

[aicirt]

Anglo-Saxon law allow a man to hit his wife with a stick no bigger around than his thumb. Let’s recall that Christ stopped a group of men from stoning an adulteress so this was allowed in the Old Testament.

It wasn’t until the late 19th century that there were laws against child abuse. These came about because a nurse in Hell’s Kitchen, NYC, took issue after finding a girl beaten and tied up by her father sitting on a porch. The nurse used the new laws against animal abuse to gain the same rights for children.

Up until the very late 20th century did the US have safe homes for abused women. You were to submit to your husband and the courts took this literally.

Check out the movie SUFFERGETTS.

 

[didymus]

From the world of country & Western, “Someday When You Swing that Skillet My Face Won’t Be There.”