Women in Islam

[Gideon300]

Iran is ruled by Sharia law. Many people are ignorant of what that means for women. I've watched interviews with young women who object to America's involvement with the war against Iran. One was wearing a revealing outfit that would get her arrested, beaten and likely raped - if she survived. The dress code is only the beginning of repression.

This not extreme Islam. It is according to Sharia law, based on the life of Mohamed and the Quran.

Marriage. A female has no say in who she may marry. Her husband is chosen for her and polygamy is permitted. The age of marriage is 13 for girls and 15 for boys. That minimum age can be waived if the father of the girl wants her to marry sooner. In some regions, it is common for close relatives to marry. This has lead to birth defects and the transmission of genetic disorders.

Once married, a woman has no right to independence. She also has no right to refuse sex. According to religious rulings, the primary purpose of a woman is to "pleasure" the husband.

Dress code. This is the obvious face of Islam. Women have been shot and killed because they did not wear the hijab appropriately. Many of those arrested and punished are not Muslim. That is of no consequence to the regime.

Rape. Non-Muslim women are allowed to be raped according to the Quran. This was made plain when Hamas invaded Israel. I fail to see how a 9 year old girl can consent to sex. But that is when Mohamed slept with his 9 year old wife. So Muslims think it acceptable.

Legal status. A woman has half the value of a man. In court, it means that her testimony is of half the value of a man.

Iran is not a Muslim nation as somewhere like Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia or Kuwait could be considered. It was secular up until 1979. Most other Muslim nations are steeped in Muslim culture and few know anything else. Indonesia is an exception.

All that non Muslim Iranians want is the same rights as anyone else. In the other words, the rights that Europe, the UK and parts of America are throwing away right now. It is the supreme irony that the Middle East is beginning to soften its hard line Islamist stance while much of the West is sinking into Muslim hell.

You do not have to like Mr Trump. You do not have to care about Israel. But criticising the war against Iran is absurd. Some complain about Epstein. I don't much about him. If you care about paedophiles getting what they deserve and the rights of women, you will approve of the War against Iran.

 

[arlev]

It is the supreme irony that the Middle East is beginning to soften its hard line Islamist stance while much of the West is sinking into Muslim hell.

That's an interesting observation.

The christianisation of the West has led Society to espouse 'tolerance' to the very ideas that will, ultimately, be its downfall.

I am constantly reminded (well, probably 'monthly' is the better word) that the nation who rejected the image of God in their society were overthrown and exiled away from their possession by a nation who were far worse than what they'd become.

We have to be careful with a direct analogy as the exiled nation were God's people under the Old Covenant and in no similar sense have the West ever been in that type of relationship - but Habbakuk pops into my head from time to time, when the prophet petitioned God to ask Him 'Why?'.

It made no sense to Him. Why would God give up His people into the hands of a nation who reflected less of His character?

 

[Gideon300]

There is another aspect of women in Islam that I omitted. I'm sure there are more, but this one is not well known in the West. Muslim men have permission to beat their wives. In the West, this called domestic violence. In Islam, it's just another means to control and suppress women.

 

[Gideon300]

That's an interesting observation.

The christianisation of the West has led Society to espouse 'tolerance' to the very ideas that will, ultimately, be its downfall.

I am constantly reminded (well, probably 'monthly' is the better word) that the nation who rejected the image of God in their society were overthrown and exiled away from their possession by a nation who were far worse than what they'd become.

We have to be careful with a direct analogy as the exiled nation were God's people under the Old Covenant and in no similar sense have the West ever been in that type of relationship - but Habbakuk pops into my head from time to time, when the prophet petitioned God to ask Him 'Why?'.

It made no sense to Him. Why would God give up His people into the hands of a nation who reflected less of His character?

It's extreme irony to me. I'm English by birth, London and my father was RAF. We moved all over the midlands. We ended up in Aden a bit before the British pulled out.

The UK made deals and commitments to Arabs and Israelis that were impossible to keep. Israel lost a good deal of the land that was intended for them originally. The British pulled out of Palestine after training Arab militias and the Egyptian army. The history of Britain in the Palestinian mandate is one of shameful betrayal of both Arabs and Israelis. I much admire Winston Churchill, but he was one of the worst offenders. And he presided over the end of the British empire. I do not believe this to be coincidence.

Now Muslims are taking over the country. As the church in England has declined, Islam has become entrenched? Coincidence? No such thing.

There is still hope. Muslims hate dogs. Lord help him who gets between a dog and his English owner. Recently during Ramadan, Camden council sent letters to residents telling them not to eat in public during the day as it offends Muslims. I saw footage of a Muslim berating a passenger on a train for eating during Ramadan. Some of these incidents have raised the ire of the English and there have been protests.

Will it be enough? I doubt it. The government is so indebted to Middle East money that it can't rein in Muslims.

Check out the first few chapters of Revelation. The seven churches no longer exist and what was Asia minor is now Turkey. That's right, Muslim. The towns are either ruins or have been renamed.

 

[Suze]

With regards

Iran is ruled by Sharia law. Many people are ignorant of what that means for women. I've watched interviews with young women who object to America's involvement with the war against Iran. One was wearing a revealing outfit that would get her arrested, beaten and likely raped - if she survived. The dress code is only the beginning of repression.

This not extreme Islam. It is according to Sharia law, based on the life of Mohamed and the Quran.

Marriage. A female has no say in who she may marry. Her husband is chosen for her and polygamy is permitted. The age of marriage is 13 for girls and 15 for boys. That minimum age can be waived if the father of the girl wants her to marry sooner. In some regions, it is common for close relatives to marry. This has lead to birth defects and the transmission of genetic disorders.

Once married, a woman has no right to independence. She also has no right to refuse sex. According to religious rulings, the primary purpose of a woman is to "pleasure" the husband.

Dress code. This is the obvious face of Islam. Women have been shot and killed because they did not wear the hijab appropriately. Many of those arrested and punished are not Muslim. That is of no consequence to the regime.

Rape. Non-Muslim women are allowed to be raped according to the Quran. This was made plain when Hamas invaded Israel. I fail to see how a 9 year old girl can consent to sex. But that is when Mohamed slept with his 9 year old wife. So Muslims think it acceptable.

Legal status. A woman has half the value of a man. In court, it means that her testimony is of half the value of a man.

Iran is not a Muslim nation as somewhere like Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia or Kuwait could be considered. It was secular up until 1979. Most other Muslim nations are steeped in Muslim culture and few know anything else. Indonesia is an exception.

All that non Muslim Iranians want is the same rights as anyone else. In the other words, the rights that Europe, the UK and parts of America are throwing away right now. It is the supreme irony that the Middle East is beginning to soften its hard line Islamist stance while much of the West is sinking into Muslim hell.

You do not have to like Mr Trump. You do not have to care about Israel. But criticising the war against Iran is absurd. Some complain about Epstein. I don't much about him. If you care about paedophiles getting what they deserve and the rights of women, you will approve of the War again

With regards to people making war against others , one thing that we need to remember is this ; we r not responsible for other people's actions . We r very much responsible for our own . In a practical sense , what this means to me is this , if I decide to kill someone just because I don't like their way of life ( whatever that my b ) , then I am very much in the wrong , Christians r not supposed to initiate violence ever . Vengeance is mine saith the LORD , I will repay . Jesus is our perfect example and he turned the other cheek . I am not responsible for the evil that others do . I know what is expected of me as a Christian and initiating violence is a definite no . If I do I will have to answer for it , it makes no difference if the person I wound / kill is good or bad , I will b judged on my actions , not theirs . We r all individually responsible for our own actions and we will have to stand in front of Jesus and give account of ourselves . Salvation is individual , so is responsibility and , judgement .
Also , it actually shows a lack of faith in God to take matters into our own hands , do we not believe God when He says ; Vengeance is mine , I will repay ? God is in charge and , no matter what the bad guys of this world do , His plan and purpose shall b fulfilled , God doesn't need our help , the earth shall b filled with His glory no matter what any human being does . I'm not saying this to b controversial or argumentative , these r my true beliefs .

 

[Gideon300]

With regards

With regards to people making war against others , one thing that we need to remember is this ; we r not responsible for other people's actions . We r very much responsible for our own . In a practical sense , what this means to me is this , if I decide to kill someone just because I don't like their way of life ( whatever that my b ) , then I am very much in the wrong , Christians r not supposed to initiate violence ever . Vengeance is mine saith the LORD , I will repay . Jesus is our perfect example and he turned the other cheek . I am not responsible for the evil that others do . I know what is expected of me as a Christian and initiating violence is a definite no . If I do I will have to answer for it , it makes no difference if the person I wound / kill is good or bad , I will b judged on my actions , not theirs . We r all individually responsible for our own actions and we will have to stand in front of Jesus and give account of ourselves . Salvation is individual , so is responsibility and , judgement .
Also , it actually shows a lack of faith in God to take matters into our own hands , do we not believe God when He says ; Vengeance is mine , I will repay ? God is in charge and , no matter what the bad guys of this world do , His plan and purpose shall b fulfilled , God doesn't need our help , the earth shall b filled with His glory no matter what any human being does . I'm not saying this to b controversial or argumentative , these r my true beliefs .

Just be glad that not everyone thought that way at the start of WW2. No God does not need our help. But I was born six years after the end of WW2. Much of London was still in ruins, there was still some rationing and there was a desperate shortage of housing. My mother and I lived for a time in a migrant hostel. God saved my life as I suffered two potentially fatal illnesses. But it was the military that ended the war.

What do you imagine would have happened if Hitler had been left unchecked? Quite a few people were against getting involved in WW2. That included the government of the time, led by Chamberlain, who famously proclaimed "Peace in our time". Sure, Nev. In your dreams. Left alone, Britain would have been helpless. Hitler occupied all of Europe. God did not intervene to prevent that either.

I understand the pacifist attitude. I don't agree. I had to wrestle with this issue because I was in the military when I was saved. Personally, even though my great grandfather was German, I much prefer English. God has not prevented the mass migration of Muslims to Europe, He has not stopped Muslims shouting "Allah Akbar" while murdering indiscriminately and He has not stopped the take over of Europe by Islam.

Maybe you are happy to live under a twisted Sharia legal system that treats you as sub human. I'm not. Since I'm not in a position to take up arms, I pray continually for the destruction of Islam, one of the devil's works.

Sure, God is in control. That's why I support the war against Iran. Sitting around a campfire singing "Kumbyah" won't cut it. Helping Muslims to achieve their dream of martyrdom will.

 

[JaumeJ]

That's an interesting observation.

The christianisation of the West has led Society to espouse 'tolerance' to the very ideas that will, ultimately, be its downfall.

I am constantly reminded (well, probably 'monthly' is the better word) that the nation who rejected the image of God in their society were overthrown and exiled away from their possession by a nation who were far worse than what they'd become.

We have to be careful with a direct analogy as the exiled nation were God's people under the Old Covenant and in no similar sense have the West ever been in that type of relationship - but Habbakuk pops into my head from time to time, when the prophet petitioned God to ask Him 'Why?'.

It made no sense to Him. Why would God give up His people into the hands of a nation who reflected less of His character?

Perhaps these words will allow for positive results in contemplating them: Now the Children of Israel, while they were in the wilderness, were disobedient, and by their disobedience salvation was gained by the nations."
I would understand that it refers to whosoever will to the Lord comes, not a blanket for the evil and the good combined. This would be ridiculous.

 

[Suze]

Just be glad that not everyone thought that way at the start of WW2. No God does not need our help. But I was born six years after the end of WW2. Much of London was still in ruins, there was still some rationing and there was a desperate shortage of housing. My mother and I lived for a time in a migrant hostel. God saved my life as I suffered two potentially fatal illnesses. But it was the military that ended the war.

What do you imagine would have happened if Hitler had been left unchecked? Quite a few people were against getting involved in WW2. That included the government of the time, led by Chamberlain, who famously proclaimed "Peace in our time". Sure, Nev. In your dreams. Left alone, Britain would have been helpless. Hitler occupied all of Europe. God did not intervene to prevent that either.

I understand the pacifist attitude. I don't agree. I had to wrestle with this issue because I was in the military when I was saved. Personally, even though my great grandfather was German, I much prefer English. God has not prevented the mass migration of Muslims to Europe, He has not stopped Muslims shouting "Allah Akbar" while murdering indiscriminately and He has not stopped the take over of Europe by Islam.

Maybe you are happy to live under a twisted Sharia legal system that treats you as sub human. I'm not. Since I'm not in a position to take up arms, I pray continually for the destruction of Islam, one of the devil's works.

Sure, God is in control. That's why I support the war against Iran. Sitting around a campfire singing "Kumbyah" won't cut it. Helping Muslims to achieve their dream of martyrdom will.

I knows fair bit about ww2 from my grandad , he was a p.o.w. in Burma . He hated the Japanese and never laid eyes on a German at all . He also hated himself because of all the people he killed . He was a lapsed catholic and when he became very ill , enough so that he knew he was dying , he was terrified to do so because he believed he would b going to hell because of all the blood on his hands . We all tried to convince him that he would b ok , God would forgive him , it was war , what else could he have done etc etc etc but he wasn't having any of it . In his eyes he was a murderer . We shall have to agree to differ on this topic .

 

[hornetguy]

My dad was in the Philippines during WW2. He was one of the most Godly, God-fearing men I've ever known. Yes, he killed the enemy, because that was his duty. He didn't brag about it, he just did what was required of him.

War, unfortunately, is necessary, to stop evil, if possible. Read Ecclesiastes... this was instituted by God....

3 There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under the heavens:
a time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,
a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing,
a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.

 

[Charlesiii]

The christianisation of the West has led Society to espouse 'tolerance' to the very ideas that will, ultimately, be its downfall.

Do you think this is true? I think the downfall of the West was effectively the rejection of Christianity, while still trying to maintain it's values. So far back as the 1950s (probably further), there was a push to relegate Christianity to "religion" and keep it out of all other aspects of life (e.g. science, government, soclety etc.) The hollow-shell of what was once a powerful force for good was then easily subverted and conquered.

 

[arlev]

Do you think this is true? I think the downfall of the West was effectively the rejection of Christianity, while still trying to maintain it's values. So far back as the 1950s (probably further), there was a push to relegate Christianity to "religion" and keep it out of all other aspects of life (e.g. science, government, soclety etc.) The hollow-shell of what was once a powerful force for good was then easily subverted and conquered.

I don't disagree with your observations.

But what I was trying to say (and, obviously, I must have phrased it poorly!) is that, for the past decade or more, the West has espoused 'tolerance for everything that has sat opposed to it - even towards the ideologies and beliefs that seek to destroy it.

So, the West - to put this crudely and metaphorically - allows the murderer to hold a gun, whose sole intention has been repeatedly declared by them to blow the West's brains out.

I'm not denying your observations - we have definitely seen the West 'christianised' ('holding a form of religion but denying the power of it') and what is present in our Society now is most definitely a 'hollow-shell' as you say.

Ultimately, we are where we are because of Romans 1 - but there are stages along that road that have outworked themselves in different ways.

And why is your avatar a chicken?

 

[Charlesiii]

I don't disagree with your observations.

But what I was trying to say (and, obviously, I must have phrased it poorly!) is that, for the past decade or more, the West has espoused 'tolerance for everything that has sat opposed to it - even towards the ideologies and beliefs that seek to destroy it.

So, the West - to put this crudely and metaphorically - allows the murderer to hold a gun, whose sole intention has been repeatedly declared by them to blow the West's brains out.

I'm not denying your observations - we have definitely seen the West 'christianised' ('holding a form of religion but denying the power of it') and what is present in our Society now is most definitely a 'hollow-shell' as you say.

Ultimately, we are where we are because of Romans 1 - but there are stages along that road that have outworked themselves in different ways.

I hear you. I don't know tolerance and weakness are real Christian values, though. Christ overturned the tables of the money changers, and wasn't afraid to call the Pharisees children of Satan. Probably enough to give the tolerant-minded folk of the last few decades heart palpitations. I think Christianity without Christ definitely becomes weak - but that is not real Christianity - maybe Churchianity?

And why is your avatar a chicken?

Lol! How kind of you to notice. I'm sure lots of folk will be trying to hand me white feathers now with the newest (world?) war for pedophiles, so I'm embracing my new/future role as the rooster of wisdom.

 

[arlev]

I hear you. I don't know tolerance and weakness are real Christian values, though.

Ah! I think I see the problem!

I was talking about 'tolerance' being Society's trait that has opened up the way for its own demise - I wasn't using the label for 'christian values' in believers.

I'm in the UK - here, the traditional, established church are ecumenical, tolerant and accepting of anything (except the really bad stuff) that brings people together. I'm not sure that the 'live' church is fully sound in that matter, though.

But tolerance has opened the way for our Society to come to an end.

 

[Suze]

My dad was in the Philippines during WW2. He was one of the most Godly, God-fearing men I've ever known. Yes, he killed the enemy, because that was his duty. He didn't brag about it, he just did what was required of him.

War, unfortunately, is necessary, to stop evil, if possible. Read Ecclesiastes... this was instituted by God....

3 There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under the heavens:
a time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,
a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing,
a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.

There is a difference between doing what u have to do under the laws of your land and , initiating violence , remember what Jesus says in John 18 V 36 . I loved my grandad a lot as I'm sure u did your dad .

 

[sparkplug]

Well, many take tradition as faith. When its really religion...There have been Christian denominations that do that. Your surprised?

 

[Gideon300]

Ah! I think I see the problem!

I was talking about 'tolerance' being Society's trait that has opened up the way for its own demise - I wasn't using the label for 'christian values' in believers.

I'm in the UK - here, the traditional, established church are ecumenical, tolerant and accepting of anything (except the really bad stuff) that brings people together. I'm not sure that the 'live' church is fully sound in that matter, though.

But tolerance has opened the way for our Society to come to an end.

Agree. The early church was not tolerant.
"Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership can righteousness have with wickedness? Or what fellowship does light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?" 2 Corinthians 6: 14 & 15.

A number of churches in Australia have adopted the world's morality. Some ordain openly homosexual ministers, some marry same sex couples and most have an "open door" policy. To me, the church is the body of Christ. It is not a safe haven for sinners who do not want to change. The Brethren have two meetings on a Sunday. The first is an evangelistic meeting where all are welcome. Then there is a break for informal fellowship. After that, the church itself meets. Where I went for some time, there was always communion. If someone was saved in the first meeting, they were welcomed into fellowship in the meeting of the Church.

The "open door" progressive churches are declining in Australia. This is the opposite of what those denominations hoped for. I don't know why they expected anything different. If there no differentiation between the world and the church, what's the point?

 

[arlev]

The "open door" progressive churches are declining in Australia. This is the opposite of what those denominations hoped for. I don't know why they expected anything different. If there no differentiation between the world and the church, what's the point?

I'm going off on a tangent here as I don't know if you read 'secular' books.

But I've been ploughing my way through 'Bonhoeffer - Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy' by Eric Metaxas and am up to almost 200 pages. I'm not altogether sure just where Bonhoeffer stood with Christ but he was a figurehead in the German churches as Hitler rose to power, eventually being murdered in 1944 for his participation in a plot to assassinate Hitler.

Yes, it's a biography - but he was a figure who was trying to stop the German churches sell their soul to the Reich and Naziism. It's been a fascinating read and, atm, the story is about how the established churches were selling themselves to conformity to Naziism while Bonhoeffer and others were trying to establish a church who would serve Christ rather than the Fuhrer.

It's quite an eye opener into just how easy it could all happen under a different guise in today's society.

Anyway, I'd recommend the book if you're interested - I've been quite interested in the Weimar Republic for a while so this was a good bridge to see the transition between it and Naziism through the effect it had on the Church.

 

[ResidentAlien]

I have no problem with the war with Iran; I have a problem with the way king wannabe has gone about it. He's not a king or an emperor. If the US acts like a dictatorship, how are we any better than Iran?

 

[Gideon300]

I have no problem with the war with Iran; I have a problem with the way king wannabe has gone about it. He's not a king or an emperor. If the US acts like a dictatorship, how are we any better than Iran?

The difference is that America is not murdering its citizens for not submitting to a religious death cult that treats women like dirt. And it is not killing Christians for not submitting to the aforementioned death cult. Since no one else in the world has the spine to take on Iran, I approve of the military action by Israel and the USA. I have mixed emotions about Mr Trump. I think his position on Ukraine is absurd. But his position on Iran is thoroughly justified.

Make no mistake, this war could be the end of the Muslim threat. If Muslims see the most powerful Muslim nation humbled by the "infidels" of the West, Islam may well lose its hold. There are already signs in the Middle East that Islam is becoming less influential, even in Saudi Arabia. However, if Iran prevails, it will prove to Muslims that "Allah" is indeed "Akbar".

Will God permit that to happen? In the long run, no. The whole world will see the glory of God. But God may allow Islam to prevail to punish the wickedness of the world. It's happened before. I'll be 75 soon, so I may not see either scenario come to pass. But I sure don't want my kids under the thumb of Sharia Law.

 

[Gideon300]

I may have omitted one more misogynist aspect of Islam. Under Sharia law, husbands are permitted to beat their wives. Listening to a Muslim male trying to explain and justify this is both fascinating and horrifying.

How any non Muslim woman can convert to Islam is beyond my comprehension.