Women in Islam

[JaumeJ]

It is always important for each of us to bare in mind that to our "Father we are seen in Spirit and dtruth.
Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Perhaps Islam would learn from this, were Islam to read the Word???

 

[Charlesiii]

The difference is that America is not murdering its citizens for not submitting to a religious death cult that treats women like dirt.

It sounds like you don't know what abortion is. My tyrant is better than your tyrant is never a good reason for a war, because usually, the tyrants aren't that different, even if they can con their subjects into believing it.

 

[Charlesiii]

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.

Yes. I think a lot of society's previous values - innocent until proven guilty, trial by a jury of one's peers, all equal before the law, even around slavery and workers rights etc. (even probably the debtor is slave to the lender, which is more wisdom than a value) all come from Christianity. With the elimination of Christianity from government which started in earnest (in my guestimation) about 100 years ago, there is no basis for such traditional values, and these have hence been eroded by what is expedient and the powers can get away with.

There is lip service paid to God and the church (where convenient), but only when it serves the ruling interests.

 

[Charlesiii]

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.

(I wasn't disagreeing with you, btw! In case I wasn't clear enough...)

 

[arlev]

(I wasn't disagreeing with you, btw! In case I wasn't clear enough...)

You were clear - and you are allowed to disagree. Just disagree nicely like everyone else does on this forum .

 

[hornetguy]

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?

Only about a million ways.
He's not acting like a dictator.... he's acting like a president that actually WANTS the US to resume our place in world leadership... you know, the place that made the US the one place that everyone wants to come to.....

 

[ResidentAlien]

Before anyone in the US criticizes Iran for the way they treat women, they should first look at the way maga and Christian nationalists treat our own women. Not that long ago, the current president proposed paying women to have more children. Pete Hegseth's pastor, Doug Wilson, doesn't think women should have the right to vote. Hegseth himself discourages women from joining the military. They've done all they can to take away a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy. Just to be clear, I'm not for abortion, but I'm for the right of a woman to make the choice, not the state.

The message is clear: They want women to stay barefoot and pregnant, and to be more reliant on men.

 

[hornetguy]

Before anyone in the US criticizes Iran for the way they treat women, they should first look at the way maga and Christian nationalists treat our own women. Not that long ago, the current president proposed paying women to have more children. Pete Hegseth's pastor, Doug Wilson, doesn't think women should have the right to vote. Hegseth himself discourages women from joining the military. They've done all they can to take away a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy. Just to be clear, I'm not for abortion, but I'm for the right of a woman to make the choice, not the state.

The message is clear: They want women to stay barefoot and pregnant, and to be more reliant on men.

Just because one or two "maga" people have crazy ideas about women, that is no reason to broad-brush the whole movement.

I've heard that there are some folks claiming to be Christian that are having affairs, stealing from other Christians, LOTS of things... so, by your logic the whole "Christian" movement must be thieving adulterers...

You know better than that.... or, you should, anyway.

 

[Charlesiii]

Only about a million ways.
He's not acting like a dictator.... he's acting like a president that actually WANTS the US to resume our place in world leadership... you know, the place that made the US the one place that everyone wants to come to.....

Engaging in an illegal war of aggression whilst under a flag of truce that 80% - 90% of the population are opposed to (and for which he got elected specifically because he said he was not going to get into?) Dictator behaviour there. Maybe you can try to argue a benevolent dictator (for some who might benefit), but a dictator nonetheless.

 

[hornetguy]

Engaging in an illegal war of aggression whilst under a flag of truce that 80% - 90% of the population are opposed to

are we talking about the same "war" ? Under a "flag of truce" ? Iran has been one of the most prolific killers of US citizens for the past almost 50 years... and the largest supporter of terrorism, world wide. Every president for the past 40 years or so has stated that "something" needed to be done to stop them... only Trump was man enough to do it, instead of hand-wringing and appeasing... or outright supporting them, like Obama.

"support" for the war is about 50-50.... and the make-up of those for/against is VERY telling. It is pretty much a reflection of MAGA vs. TDS....

According to a March 2026 PBS News/NPR/Marist poll, 44% of Americans support military action, while 56% oppose it.

• Partisan Divide: Support is heavily polarized. Roughly 84% to 85% of Republicans support the military action, compared to only 7% to 14% of Democrats. Among independents, support is generally low, ranging from 31% to 38%.

 

[ThereRoseaLamb]

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 .

Ok but when you are defending your country or your allies, that's a different situation.

 

[ThereRoseaLamb]

Before anyone in the US criticizes Iran for the way they treat women, they should first look at the way maga and Christian nationalists treat our own women. Not that long ago, the current president proposed paying women to have more children.

What's wrong with Christian women having more children? What's wrong with raising more children for the Lord?! That's how Muslims have been taking over nations for eons, they breed their own country. What's wrong with having larger Christian families?! Where do you think God wants time spent, making money or raising children for the Glory of God??

Pete Hegseth's pastor, Doug Wilson, doesn't think women should have the right to vote.

Well, seeing women voting for people like Kammy and Hillary kinda makes one wonder if some women shouldn't vote. Whatever the pastor believes, that's not going to change.

Hegseth himself discourages women from joining the military.

Again, not something that is going to change. I understand his reasoning but we're way past that topic and it won't change in the US. None of these ideas are MAGA.

They've done all they can to take away a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy. Just to be clear, I'm not for abortion, but I'm for the right of a woman to make the choice, not the state.

The message is clear: They want women to stay barefoot and pregnant, and to be more reliant on men.

110% wrong on abortion, not that that surprises me. As to the last comment, how daft. smh Look at the VPs wife, does she look barefoot and pregnant to you? rofl

 

[Lynx]

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?

This is pretty obvious, but I guess I have to mention it anyway...

You are roundly criticizing the government and there are no government agents breaking your door down. That's one big difference between here and iran. Just off the top of my head.

 

[Charlesiii]

are we talking about the same "war" ? Under a "flag of truce" ? Iran has been one of the most prolific killers of US citizens for the past almost 50 years... and the largest supporter of terrorism, world wide. Every president for the past 40 years or so has stated that "something" needed to be done to stop them... only Trump was man enough to do it, instead of hand-wringing and appeasing... or outright supporting them, like Obama.

"support" for the war is about 50-50.... and the make-up of those for/against is VERY telling. It is pretty much a reflection of MAGA vs. TDS....

According to a March 2026 PBS News/NPR/Marist poll, 44% of Americans support military action, while 56% oppose it.

• Partisan Divide: Support is heavily polarized. Roughly 84% to 85% of Republicans support the military action, compared to only 7% to 14% of Democrats. Among independents, support is generally low, ranging from 31% to 38%.

If you're going to try to justify war crimes by calling them manly, we're not going to find common ground. What I will say is that if everyone supporting military action was obliged to go and fight (starting with Trump), there'd be a lot less people supporting military action.

Too many folks are so happy to wage war against a peaceful people, until their own lives, homes and families are on the line. Then they're too old, or too fat, or too sick, too pregnant, too female, or whatever other excuse. "War is good, as long as its someone else's life at stake, not mine" is a cowardly attitude, imho.

 

[hornetguy]

If you're going to try to justify war crimes by calling them manly, we're not going to find common ground.

Please specify the "war crimes" that the US is performing....

And what is YOUR definition of a president that repeatedly says we need to stop Iran, but does nothing about it? Would that fall under your definition of "man enough" ?

The US is not waging a war against the people of Iran, as has been stated and SHOWN in this conflict. The US is waging a war against the radical Muslim regime that has sown the seeds and actions of terror for almost 50 years.

 

[Charlesiii]

Please specify the "war crimes" that the US is performing....

And what is YOUR definition of a president that repeatedly says we need to stop Iran, but does nothing about it? Would that fall under your definition of "man enough" ?

The US is not waging a war against the people of Iran, as has been stated and SHOWN in this conflict. The US is waging a war against the radical Muslim regime that has sown the seeds and actions of terror for almost 50 years.

Feigning an intent to negotiate (such as under a flag of truce) while secretly preparing an attack, like a bombing, constitutes perfidy under international humanitarian law (IHL), also known as the laws of war. This is considered a war crime.

Real men don't use force unless it is required. Similarly with deception. Deception and application of unneeded force whilst feigning negotiation are morally questionable, and usually signs accompanying Satan's minions. If you're talking Jael and Sisera, such action may be justified (but only because Jael was clearly the weaker in the relationship). If Trump's use of deception and force was justified, by implication, you are implying he and the US forces are weaker than those of Iran (which I think most would dispute).

The US is waging a war against the entire world. Iran is getting bombed. US allies in the Middle East are getting bombed. Europe and a good fraction of the developed world are in danger of food shortages. All because of the (apparently) reckless actions of a US president who has acted against the will of those who elected him (and being elected on the promise of the opposite), for the (expected) benefit of a rogue pariah state.

 

[Charlesiii]

Please specify the "war crimes" that the US is performing....

And what is YOUR definition of a president that repeatedly says we need to stop Iran, but does nothing about it? Would that fall under your definition of "man enough" ?

The US is not waging a war against the people of Iran, as has been stated and SHOWN in this conflict. The US is waging a war against the radical Muslim regime that has sown the seeds and actions of terror for almost 50 years.

Further to the above, bombing the girl's school (twice!) within the hour probably constitutes an act of terrorism. I guess I got so used to that sort of thing during the genocide in Gaza, I started to normalise it as part of legitimate warfare, but let's call it what it is.

"Terrorism is the calculated use or threat of violence against civilians or property to create a climate of fear, intimidate governments, and advance political, religious, or ideological causes."

I think we can both agree that terrorism is not a very manly trait, either.

 

[Mem]

This is an excerpt from the World History Encyclopedia about Persian women, in particular.

Persian women have historically been influential figures, balancing tradition, resilience, and modern empowerment across centuries.

Historical ​

In ancient Persia, women enjoyed significant rights and social status. They could own property, conduct business, travel independently, and participate in governance, particularly within royal circles. Notable figures include Queen Atossa I, who influenced imperial policies, and warriors like Pantea Arteshbod and Artemisia I, who commanded troops and naval forces. During the Achaemenid and Sassanian empires, Persian women were recognized as autonomous individuals capable of shaping society, a status that declined after the Arab conquest in 651 CE.

 

[Mem]

It's ironic though, isn't it? That such as Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib had to come to America for the opportunity to express themselves as more than half a voice?

 

[hornetguy]

Feigning an intent to negotiate (such as under a flag of truce) while secretly preparing an attack, like a bombing, constitutes perfidy under international humanitarian law (IHL), also known as the laws of war. This is considered a war crime.

Nothing was done "in secret" .... our warships had been moved to the gulf area weeks before. Trump repeatedly stated that our desired outcome was negotiation. But, there were lines in the sand that Iran was not to cross, and there were concessions that they had to make, in order to move forward.... they repeatedly, adamantly refused. They were, from all intel accounts, just weeks from having the uranium refined enough to build bombs. THEIR strategy was to stall, lie, postpone long enough to get their bombs built.

THAT is why Trump gave them a hard, fast deadline to make the concessions. When they PROVED that they had no intention of stopping their drive to get nuclear weapons, the US and Israel took action.

That is not "perfidy"... that is a practical response to an un-cooperative threat to the US and the safety of the gulf region.

Further to the above, bombing the girl's school (twice!) within the hour probably constitutes an act of terrorism. I guess I got so used to that sort of thing during the genocide in Gaza, I started to normalise it as part of legitimate warfare, but let's call it what it is.

That is no more terrorism than the crash of our service aircraft... it was an accident... in wars, bad things happen, many times, accidentally.

You really need to remove your TDS tinfoil hat...