Saudi Marriage 'Expert' Advises Men in 'Right Way' to Beat Their Wives

[jerry_h_1700]

Getting rid of Islam. Eradicate it. Eye for an eye, hand for a hand, barbaric law should not be applied on modern society where much better ‘humane’ punishment can be given.

You sure are a fan of the sermon of the mount, aren’t you?

Good job, Thank you for proving my point in the thread " Tell me again how Islam is peaceful?" where I said:

“And I find it highly ironic that the same people who usually say how bad Muslims are treated under their religion are also the same people who say we should go out and kill and bomb those same Muslims they claim are being oppressed!”

 

[cyberjacques]

I hope you’re right, I hope Islam really is in a state of transition. I just don’t see anything that would support it. Islam has been this way for more than a thousand years, and the only thing that has changed are the weapons they use. The pattern so far has been that almost every country in the world that has become predominantly Muslim has become jihadist, or a supporter of jihad in word and deed. The only exception I can think of is Turkey, which gives me hope that other Muslims might follow their example.

As far as the Koran is concerned, I don’t understand this argument:

…I still think there are better ways to deal with the subject than to just blame the whole thing on their holy books, which they still believe to be truth though we as non-Muslims believe otherwise.

Their holy texts are what they base their entire religion on. They use them to support every terrible thing they do. They themselves treat that book as if it’s God in and of itself. So why is it inappropriate to point it out as the source and justification of their “objectively wrong” practices? They sure do.

And in regards to oppressing women, the solution is really quite simple, which is probably why it’s so easily missed when someone says it. STOP OPPRESSING WOMEN!!! Stop making them cover every inch of their bodies, stop preventing them from going to school, stop executing them for leaving the house unaccompanied by a male relative, stop beating them, stop gang-raping them for dishonoring the family, just STOP! It’s so simple it’s stupid! There is no plan, there is no support group, there is no U.N. resolution, simply stop doing it. And if they won’t stop, whether it’s abusing women, or blowing up innocent people, then WE will stop them.

I get the feeling that we disagree less than you think. Tell me, what is it about all this that you object to? Perhaps we can continue to clarify.

 

[jerry_h_1700]

And in regards to oppressing women, the solution is really quite simple, which is probably why it’s so easily missed when someone says it. STOP OPPRESSING WOMEN!!! Stop making them cover every inch of their bodies, stop preventing them from going to school, stop executing them for leaving the house unaccompanied by a male relative, stop beating them, stop gang-raping them for dishonoring the family, just STOP! It’s so simple it’s stupid! There is no plan, there is no support group, there is no U.N. resolution, simply stop doing it. And if they won’t stop, whether it’s abusing women, or blowing up innocent people, then WE will stop them.

The thing is, many Christian nations engaged in some of these practices commonly in the past, some still do today in other parts of the world, and even now we still hear opponents of the church say that the “Catholic church oppresses women!!”. Should we really attack others by using our enemies playbooks?

 

[cyberjacques]

The thing is, many Christian nations engaged in some of these practices commonly in the past, some still do today in other parts of the world, and even now we still hear opponents of the church say that the “Catholic church oppresses women!!”. Should we really attack others by using our enemies playbooks?

Okay, I think I’m starting to understand your concern. You’re worried that if Christians rally against abusing women, that it would make us hypocrites, thus invalidating our argument, correct? Well, not to worry, because we’re not hypocrites, and I’ll tell you why.

The Bible says to love and honor your wife, to seek her council and cherish her company. A man and his wife are supposed to become as one person. So any Christian who beats his wife is doing so in direct contradiction to the will of God. And other Christians will be the first to tell him this. And yes, there were many countries in the past that were predominantly Christian that even had laws on the books regarding how severely you could beat your wife. But those were secular laws, since the Church has never ruled those countries. Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but the Catholic Church has never allowed spousal abuse. So just because some misguided Christians beat their wives doesn’t make us hypocrites when the we condemn them for it.

Also, don’t make the mistake of using the liberal redefinition of the word “hypocrite”. They would like you to believe that if one Christian does something bad and other Christians get angry at them for it, then they are hypocrites, because one of their own screwed up. Its real meaning is someone who says that people should do one thing, but then believes that they can do something else. People who say we should give up our SUV’s, but then go around in their private jets and a fleet of limousines, THOSE people are hypocrites.

As for other people claiming that the Catholic Church oppresses women today, they’re full of it, and even the most cursory examination of the facts will prove it. Opponents of goodness and truth have no objection to lying through their teeth, and I would argue that it’s they who have taken our playbook, not the other way around. Enemies of Christianity have been trying to turn the truth around on us for 2000 years. So, to recap, Christian scripture tells us to love and honor our wives, while Muslim scripture tells us to beat our wives. Christians who beat their wives are violating our scripture, while Muslims who beat their wives are adhering to theirs. We are in no position to be called hypocrites by anyone on this issue.

 

[jerry_h_1700]

Anytime a group is demonized, their sins are either made up lies or extreme distortions. I would not be surprised if the amount of spousal abuse in the Muslim world was the same or less than in the USA.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

What gave you the idea that the Muslims are demonized? Please read the biography of Muhammad, that old genocidal, ethnic-cleansing, bandit warlord who enslaved women and children. He was and continue to be the example of the Perfect Muslim - according to the Muslims themselves - who hold him up to be their ideal human.

 

[jerry_h_1700]

What gave you the idea that the Muslims are demonized?

From people saying stuff…

old genocidal, ethnic-cleansing, bandit warlord who enslaved women and children.

…Such as the above.

 

[cyberjacques]

Anytime a group is demonized, their sins are either made up lies or extreme distortions. I would not be surprised if the amount of spousal abuse in the Muslim world was the same or less than in the USA.

Okay, now you’re just being inconsistent. Your original argument was that Christians are just as bad as Muslims, so we have no right to criticize them. But now that we’ve shown that argument to be false, you’re switching your argument to say that nobody is all that bad, it’s just exaggerations that make them look that way.

Sure, there have been plenty of exaggerations in the past, but every once in a while an ideology comes along that needs no exaggeration. In the not too distant past there was a group that followed just such an ideology, perhaps you’ve heard of them? They were called Nazis. And interestingly enough, guess where Hitler got many of his ideas regarding how to handle the “Jewish Question”? The imam and Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a man named Al-Hajj Amin al-Husseini, who spent the last few years of WWII in Berlin as Hitler’s special guest. Look him up, he was a horrifying individual, who was and still is held up as a hero of Arab nationalism and Palestinian resistance. And if you do look him up, please take note of who his nephew was, another hero among Muslims.

Not every group is the victim of distortions and exaggerations. Some are actually guilty of the atrocities attributed to them.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I think the most disturbing part of the interview is where the guy says, “He should not beat her like he would beat an animal or a child – slapping them right and left.” So you’re supposed to beat a child even worse than your wife? You’re supposed to beat a child like an animal?

Only Islam could come up with something this sick.

Christianity has traditionally been rather keen on beating children (as well as women); the usual justifications being: it’s good for them, they’re wicked, it’s to break their wills, “it never did me any harm”, it’s character-building - & most of all, “The Bible says so”.​

The capacity for violence within Christianity should not be underestimated; especially for the kind of violence that claims to be commanded by God. Children have have had a pretty rough time of it in Christianity. Christian doctrinal systems might be notably different if women, or even married men with children, had had a part in them. It may be significant that Luther, who *was *a family man, was not a system-builder. At least children are not usually treated like miniature hell-fodder these days.

 

[cyberjacques]

Christianity has traditionally been rather keen on beating children (as well as women); the usual justifications being: it’s good for them, they’re wicked, it’s to break their wills, “it never did me any harm”, it’s character-building - & most of all, “The Bible says so”.​

For crying out loud, read the rest of the thread, would you? Every assertion you just made has already been shot down.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Okay, I think I’m starting to understand your concern. You’re worried that if Christians rally against abusing women, that it would make us hypocrites, thus invalidating our argument, correct? Well, not to worry, because we’re not hypocrites, and I’ll tell you why.

The Bible says to love and honor your wife, to seek her council and cherish her company. A man and his wife are supposed to become as one person. So any Christian who beats his wife is doing so in direct contradiction to the will of God. And other Christians will be the first to tell him this. And yes, there were many countries in the past that were predominantly Christian that even had laws on the books regarding how severely you could beat your wife. But those were secular laws, since the Church has never ruled those countries.

If Catholics make that kind of argument to avoid having to take responsibility for bad stuff, then we can’t take any credit for good stuff. It’s funny that the Church is always absent when evil is done, & present only to do good. That is fantasy history. A Church that can’t shoulder the responsibility for the evil it it has done is not much of a Church. ​

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but the Catholic Church has never allowed spousal abuse. So just because some misguided Christians beat their wives doesn’t make us hypocrites when the we condemn them for it. Also, don’t make the mistake of using the liberal redefinition of the word “hypocrite”. They would like you to believe that if one Christian does something bad and other Christians get angry at them for it, then they are hypocrites, because one of their own screwed up. Its real meaning is someone who says that people should do one thing, but then believes that they can do something else. People who say we should give up our SUV’s, but then go around in their private jets and a fleet of limousines, THOSE people are hypocrites.

Not quite - a hypocrite is someone claims to be better than he is while hiding the fact that he is not. The people described are inconsistent, but not hypocritical, because they are not hiding the difference between their words & their deeds - rather the reverse, if anything. It’s the pretence of being better than one is, & the hiddenness of this, that is the problem. If someone had an undeserved reputation for generosity to the poor, & used that reputation - that would be hypocritical. Being thought to be better than one is, despite not seeking a good reputation, would not be.​

As for other people claiming that the Catholic Church oppresses women today, they’re full of it, and even the most cursory examination of the facts will prove it. Opponents of goodness and truth have no objection to lying through their teeth, and I would argue that it’s they who have taken our playbook, not the other way around.

May be so in particular cases, but that can’t be used as an argument, because it’s fallacious - it “poisons the wells”. It’s not logically different from saying (say) that “Catholics are lying scum, so anything they say in their behalf can be discounted”. Both uses of this fallacy make reasoned discussion impossible - neither is a refutation of what is said against the group employing the fallacy. Besides, “opponents of goodness and truth” may be “lying through their teeth”; that doesn’t mean they are mistaken - they could be right, even if they are lying.​

Enemies of Christianity have been trying to turn the truth around on us for 2000 years. So, to recap, Christian scripture tells us to love and honor our wives, while Muslim scripture tells us to beat our wives. Christians who beat their wives are violating our scripture, while Muslims who beat their wives are adhering to theirs. We are in no position to be called hypocrites by anyone on this issue.

OTOH, the Bible has a good deal to say about child-beating - & it could be argued that that is less defensible: wives have at least usually been grown-up; children are not. Have a look at Ecclesiasticus/Sirach 30 sometime.​

 

[jerry_h_1700]

Okay, now you’re just being inconsistent. Your original argument was that Christians are just as bad as Muslims

I never said that

Sure, there have been plenty of exaggerations in the past, but every once in a while an ideology comes along that needs no exaggeration. In the not too distant past there was a group that followed just such an ideology, perhaps you’ve heard of them? They were called Nazis. And interestingly enough, guess where Hitler got many of his ideas regarding how to handle the “Jewish Question”? The imam and Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a man named Al-Hajj Amin al-Husseini, who spent the last few years of WWII in Berlin as Hitler’s special guest. Look him up, he was a horrifying individual, who was and still is held up as a hero of Arab nationalism and Palestinian resistance. And if you do look him up, please take note of who his nephew was, another hero among Muslims.

Perhaps I should also point out the US connections with the Nazi party? Oh and perhaps you would like to justify FDR’s assistance to the Communists?

And if we are gonna bring Jews into this, then maybe you should see how Sephardic Jews were treated in the Muslim parts of Spain versus what the “Catholic” monarchs did to them afterwards. There is a good reason why the Jews fled to North Africa and the middle east during this time.

 

[cyberjacques]

If Catholics make that kind of argument to avoid having to take responsibility for bad stuff, then we can’t take any credit for good stuff. It’s funny that the Church is always absent when evil is done, & present only to do good. That is fantasy history. A Church that can’t shoulder the responsibility for the evil it it has done is not much of a Church. ​

Okay, then show me something evil that the Church has done, or commanded its followers to do. You’re missing the point. Regardless of the evil a few Christians have done in the past, the Catholic Church has never advocated or commanded it. Those Christians were in breach of their faith.

Not quite - a hypocrite is someone claims to be better than he is while hiding the fact that he is not. The people described are inconsistent, but not hypocritical, because they are not hiding the difference between their words & their deeds - rather the reverse, if anything. It’s the pretence of being better than one is, & the hiddenness of this, that is the problem. If someone had an undeserved reputation for generosity to the poor, & used that reputation - that would be hypocritical. Being thought to be better than one is, despite not seeking a good reputation, would not be.​

Your definition and mine are not mutually exclusive. If you want an actual dictionary definition, here’s one that supports us both:

hyp-o-crite
–noun

1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

OTOH, the Bible has a good deal to say about child-beating - & it could be argued that that is less defensible: wives have at least usually been grown-up; children are not. Have a look at Ecclesiasticus/Sirach 30 sometime.​

I see a recommendation to spank your kid if he misbehaves. Oh, and just so you know, I’m not opposed to spanking, but I am opposed to actual beating.

May be so in particular cases, but that can’t be used as an argument, because it’s fallacious - it “poisons the wells”.​

It’s only fallacious if it’s untrue or you can’t back it up with evidence. And challenging those who slander you does not poison the wells, but letting those lies go unchallenged does.

Besides, “opponents of goodness and truth” may be “lying through their teeth”; that doesn’t mean they are mistaken - they could be right, even if they are lying.

Um, it’s possible that I have completely lost my mind, but the last time I checked, lying automatically makes you wrong. Have the rules changed? If you meant something else by this, please clarify.

 

[cyberjacques]

I never said that

Oh, really?

But that was true of almost every older society and culture! Ancient Greece, Rome, China, India, Native Americans, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims.

The thing is, many Christian nations engaged in some of these practices commonly in the past, some still do today in other parts of the world…

Did you all know that in 1892 Italy made a law that raised the minimum age of marriage to 12? That’s right, in Catholic Italy pre-1892 a man could have sex with an elementary age girl! Does that mean all we Catholics are pedophiles?

There are PLENTY of Bible quotes that can be distorted to justify beating women. Heck, I could write a whole book on the OT, but for now I have remembered hearing many people in the past using the “wives submit to their husbands” NT passage as a way of saying that a husband could even kill his wife since she must submit to him in all things.

You have been making the moral relativism argument this entire time. Don’t say you haven’t.

Perhaps I should also point out the US connections with the Nazi party? Oh and perhaps you would like to justify FDR’s assistance to the Communists?

And if we are gonna bring Jews into this, then maybe you should see how Sephardic Jews were treated in the Muslim parts of Spain versus what the “Catholic” monarchs did to them afterwards. There is a good reason why the Jews fled to North Africa and the middle east during this time.

Am I going to defend Americans who sympathized with and aided Nazis and Communists? No. Why? Because even if those individuals were Christian, they were not holding to Christian codes of conduct. This is the same answer you’re going to get every time you ask me this question. The same goes for those European monarchs. They may have been Catholic, but did the Catholic Church approve of what they were doing?

And might I say, God bless any Muslim who has ever helped someone of another faith. It gives me hope.

 

[jerry_h_1700]

And might I say, God bless any Muslim who has ever helped someone of another faith. It gives me hope.

And believe me, I know a ton of them here in the US. I can’t speak for all worldwide or ones who I have not met, but I can speak from personal experience

 

[Valke2]

Oh, really?

And might I say, God bless any Muslim who has ever helped someone of another faith. It gives me hope.

God bless anyone who helps anyone of any faith at any time.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

From people saying stuff…

…Such as the above.

Nonsense. The truth is not demonization.

Unfortunately for your proposition, nothing I have said about Muhammad is not true.

 

[jerry_h_1700]

darvish.wordpress.com/2006/10/20/the-prophets-letters-to-christians/

Letter to the Monks of St. Catherine Monastery

In 628 C.E. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) granted a Charter of Privileges to the monks of St. Catherine Monastery in Mt.Sinai. It consisted of several clauses covering all aspects of human rights including such
topics as the protection of Christians, freedom of worship and movement, freedom to appoint their own judges and to own and maintain their property, exemption from military service, and the right to protection in war. An English translation of that document is presented here:

“This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.

“Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate. No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants. No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).”

 

[jerry_h_1700]

A Letter from the Prophet Muhammad To The Assyrian Christians

“God has told me in a vision what to do, and I confirm His command by giving my solemn promise to keep this agreement.

“To the followers of the Islam I say: Carry out my command, protect and help the Nazarene nation in this country of ours in their own land. Leave their places of worship in peace; help and assist their chief and their priests when in need of help, be it in the mountains, in the desert, on the sea, or at home. Leave all their possessions alone, be it houses or other property, do not destroy anything of their belongings, the followers of Islam shall not harm or molest any of this nation, because the Nazarenes are my subjects, pay tribute to me and will help the Muslims. No tribute, but what is agreed upon, shall be collected from them, their church buildings shall be left as they are, they shall not be altered, their priests shall be permitted to teach and worship in their own way-the Nazarenes have full liberty of worship in their churches and homes. None of their churches shall be torn down, or altered into a mosque, except by the consent and free will of the Nazarenes. If any one disobeys this command, the anger of God and His Prophet shall be upon him.

“The tribute paid the Nazarenes shall be used to promote the teachings of Islam and shall be deposited at the treasury of Beth Almal. A common man shall pay one denar (piece of money), but the merchants and people who own mines of gold and silver and are rich shall pay twelve denars. Strangers and people who have no houses or other settled property shall not have taxes levied upon them. If a man inherits property he shall pay a settled sum to the Baitulmal treasury. The Christians are not obliged to make war on the enemies of Islam, but if an enemy attacks the Christians, the Muslims shall not deny their help, but give them horses and weapons, if they need them, and protect them from evils from outside and keep the peace with them. The Christians are not obliged to turn Muslims, until God’s will makes them believers.

“The Muslims shall not force Christian women to accept Islam, but if they themselves wish to embrace it, the Muslims shall be kind to them.

“If a Christian woman is married to a Muslim and does not want to embrace Islam, she has liberty to worship at her own church according to her own religious belief, and her husband must not treat her unkindly on account of her religion. If any one disobeys this command, he disobeys God and his prophet and will be guilty of a great offense.

“If the Nazarenes wish to build a church, their Muslim neighbors shall help them. This shall be done, because the Christians have obeyed us and have come to us and pleaded for peace and mercy.

“If there be among the Christians a great and learned man the Muslims shall honor him and not be envious of his greatness.

“If any one is unjust and unkind to the Christians he will be guilty of disobeying the Prophet of God.

“The Christians should not shelter an enemy of Islam or give him horse, weapon or any other help. If a Muslim is in need the Christian shall for three days and nights be his host and shelter him from his enemies. The Christians shall, furthermore, protect the Mohammedan women and children and not deliver them up to the enemy or expose them to view. If the Nazarenes fail to fulfil these conditions, they have forfeited their right to protection, and the agreement is null and void.

“This document shall be entrusted to the Christian chief and head of their church for safe keeping.”

The peace of God be over them all! This agreement is written by Moavijah Ben Sofian, according to the dictates of Muhammad, the Messenger of God, in the 4th year of the Hegira in the city of Medina.

Qur`an says: “And abuse not those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest exceeding the limits, they abuse Allah through ignorance. Thus to every people have We made their deeds fair-seeming; then to their Lord is their return so he will inform them of what they did” (6:109)

Qur’an says: “Those who restrain their anger and pardon men. And Allah loves the doer of good (to others)” (3: 133)

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Is that why Muslims have treated Assyrian Christians worst than dirt for 14 centuries?

Muhammad’s idea of tolerance is humiliation and subjugation. No thanks.