The mistaken concept of "freedom" that arose as a result of being fed on the resentment and revolution against the corrupt social system that ruled European society, resulted in the emergence of the concept of "personal freedom" which is raised by those who call for women's liberation in Islamic countries. They believe freedom to be a release from every kind of restriction, becoming free from every regulation and getting rid of any type of supervision -- even if it springs from the innate sound nature of the person and his own conscience. The advocates of women's liberation would happily demolish all moral curbs and even the conscience if necessary.

In this way, nothing stands in the face of one’s enjoyment of life or spoils the ecstasy of his temporary enjoyment. This means that everyone should be left to do whatever they wish without any restrictions, regulations or supervision. They advocates of "freedom" strive hard so that society acknowledges this right and the government protects it. This is their concept of "freedom".

The West believes that there should be no religion to regulate the lives of people and restrict their excesses; no morals to refine their behavior, awaken the feelings and stir the spirit of chivalry and sense of honor; no ideals or virtues to be a criterion for knowing the difference between good or bad deeds; and no modesty to prevent people from committing excesses or what is openly evil. All these matters should no longer exist because they are considered history. Everything that belongs to the past is considered "an obstacle in the way of progress" and should be demolished.

This was the slogan of those who advocate freedom in the West and the East. Even if the latter could not explicitly say this, their concept of freedom reveals this; its characteristics are diffused from their slogans under the name of freedom. If the current application of freedom in Islamic countries continues in this way, it would definitely lead to the same social and moral chaos that has engulfed the West.

Since the liberation of women is the chief measure and an important element in the overall concept of freedom according to these people, they have directed most of their attention to them and worked on adapting women to the role that they wanted her to play. They encouraged her to leave her home in the name of freedom and liberation. They drove her to various fields of work that contradict her nature. Consequently, they destroyed her femininity, the family and home in the name of "freedom" and "liberation".

They urged and coerced her to forsake her Hijab (Islamic covering) and display her beauty to quench their sexual desires in the name of "freedom" and "liberation". They took her from her protector and maintainer, her husband, by inciting her to rebel against his right of being in charge so that it becomes easy for them to deceive her and fulfill their goals.

They let her—rather forced her to— mix with non-Mahram (marriageable) men and be in seclusion with them. Consequently, they destroyed her chastity, dignity and modesty in the name of "freedom" and "liberation". They took everything from her in the name of freedom and only gave her very little in return.

Is this real freedom? Does freedom mean giving one’s self full rein without any restrictions? Does freedom mean rebelling against religion, ideals and virtues?
Does life, in this concept, become a sublime human life that conforms to the status accorded to man on earth by Allah The Almighty, which is inhabiting the earth and being a successor to authority on it?

Freedom in the correct sense is being free of these heinous concepts. A sublime human life does not accept this concept. Rather, true freedom is to be free from everything that the advocates of debauchery erroneously tout as "freedom".

Islamweb

Rashduct4luv:

The mistaken concept of "freedom" that arose as a result of being fed on the resentment and revolution against the corrupt social system that ruled European society, resulted in the emergence of the concept of "personal freedom" which is raised by those who call for women's liberation in Islamic countries. They believe freedom to be a release from every kind of restriction, becoming free from every regulation and getting rid of any type of supervision -- even if it springs from the innate sound nature of the person and his own conscience. The advocates of women's liberation would happily demolish all moral curbs and even the conscience if necessary.

This is not correct.

There's freedom and there's law.

Having freedom does not mean one should violate the laws.

In this way, nothing stands in the face of one’s enjoyment of life or spoils the ecstasy of his temporary enjoyment. This means that everyone should be left to do whatever they wish without any restrictions, regulations or supervision. They advocates of "freedom" strive hard so that society acknowledges this right and the government protects it. This is their concept of "freedom".

Again this is false. Kindly read above.

The West believes that there should be no religion to regulate the lives of people and restrict their excesses; no morals to refine their behavior, awaken the feelings and stir the spirit of chivalry and sense of honor; no ideals or virtues to be a criterion for knowing the difference between good or bad deeds; and no modesty to prevent people from committing excesses or what is openly evil. All these matters should no longer exist because they are considered history. Everything that belongs to the past is considered "an obstacle in the way of progress" and should be demolished.

Is this a strawman or dishonesty?

The west didn't say no religion, religion is still well practiced in the west but not the bases for their constitution. The western countries are mostly secular and as well liberal. Morality can exist without religion, it has been proven many times, infact morality is subjective, it will be difficult to use religion as bases of morality.

There are many religions in the west, how do you expect them to pick a moral standard of a particular Religion for their country? It doesn't make sense.

What they do is inter-subjective morality, where everyone agrees to a standard without involving religion to it. This is the constitutional law. You can practice your religious morality but your morality is not superior to that of the state law.

This was the slogan of those who advocate freedom in the West and the East. Even if the latter could not explicitly say this, their concept of freedom reveals this; its characteristics are diffused from their slogans under the name of freedom. If the current application of freedom in Islamic countries continues in this way, it would definitely lead to the same social and moral chaos that has engulfed the West.

Most Islamic countries are freedom killers, you can't practice your religion, protest, dress as you wish, mingle with opposite sex, no women right or even human rights etc. But you see many of them enjoying the freedom in western countries and when there's an issue with the Muslim community in the west you see them protesting and shouting "Islamaphobia'. This is the most dishonesty and nonsensical thing about Muslims in the west.

Since the liberation of women is the chief measure and an important element in the overall concept of freedom according to these people, they have directed most of their attention to them and worked on adapting women to the role that they wanted her to play. They encouraged her to leave her home in the name of freedom and liberation. They drove her to various fields of work that contradict her nature. Consequently, they destroyed her femininity, the family and home in the name of "freedom" and "liberation".

Can you state the nature of women? I would like to see this.

And also, is social construct the same as nature?

They urged and coerced her to forsake her Hijab (Islamic covering) and display her beauty to quench their sexual desires in the name of "freedom" and "liberation".

Is this part of nature or social construct? Is hijab part of women nature?

They took her from her protector and maintainer, her husband, by inciting her to rebel against his right of being in charge so that it becomes easy for them to deceive her and fulfill their goals.

This is 21st century mister man, women have been proven to be working hard, be leaders, be fighters, soldiers etc.

Your point here is lame, you can go back to the primitive erra where they haven't evolve enough.

They let her—rather forced her to— mix with non-Mahram (marriageable) men and be in seclusion with them. Consequently, they destroyed her chastity, dignity and modesty in the name of "freedom" and "liberation". They took everything from her in the name of freedom and only gave her very little in return.

Lmao!!! Who forced them and what did they took from them?

Is this real freedom?

Why not tell us what freedom is?

Does freedom mean giving one’s self full rein without any restrictions? Does freedom mean rebelling against religion, ideals and virtues?
Does life, in this concept, become a sublime human life that conforms to the status accorded to man on earth by Allah The Almighty, which is inhabiting the earth and being a successor to authority on it?

This is funny, muslims often claim Allah gave humans freewill and here we're reading about someone having issues with freedom.

Are you guys confused or what?

Freedom in the correct sense is being free of these heinous concepts. A sublime human life does not accept this concept. Rather, true freedom is to be free from everything that the advocates of debauchery erroneously tout as "freedom".

Ok, freedom is following Allah's laws or be punished for not doing so. Oh that's the definition of Islamic freedom.

Islamweb

This article writer is Ignorant and irrational, he's as well delusional.

This is not correct. It's like you are a teacher in real life. I agree it may not be correct to an atheist like you.
You are always against religion so no chook mouth for this matter.

tintingz:
This is not correct.

There's freedom and there's law.

Having freedom does not mean one should violate the laws.

Again this is false. Kindly read above.

Is this a strawman or dishonesty?

The west didn't say no religion, religion is still well practiced in the west but not the bases for their constitution. The western countries are mostly secular and as well liberal. Morality can exist without religion, it has been proven many times, infact morality is subjective, it will be difficult to use religion as bases of morality.

There are many religions in the west, how do you expect them to pick a moral standard of a particular Religion for their country? It doesn't make sense.

What they do is inter-subjective morality, where everyone agrees to a standard without involving religion to it. This is the constitutional law. You can practice your religious morality but your morality is not superior to that of the state law.



Most Islamic countries are freedom killers, you can't practice your religion, protest, dress as you wish, mingle with opposite sex, no women right or even human rights etc. But you see many of them enjoying the freedom in western countries and when there's an issue with the Muslim community in the west you see them protesting and shouting "Islamaphobia'. This is the most dishonesty and nonsensical thing about Muslims in the west.



Can you state the nature of women? I would like to see this.

And also, is social construct the same as nature?

Is this part of nature or social construct? Is hijab part of women nature?

This is 21st century mister man, women have been proven to be working hard, be leaders, be fighters, soldiers etc.

Your point here is lame, you can go back to the primitive erra where they haven't evolve enough.

Lmao!!! Who forced them and what did they took from them?

Why not tell us what freedom is?



This is funny, muslims often claim Allah gave humans freewill and here we're reading about someone having issues with freedom.

Are you guys confused or what?

Ok, freedom is following Allah's laws or be punished for not doing so. Oh that's the definition of Islamic freedom.



This article writer is Ignorant and irrational, he's as well delusional.

.

Rashduct4luv:


This is not correct. It's like you are a teacher in real life. I agree it may not be correct to an atheist like you.
You are always against religion so no chook mouth for this matter.


.

I dare you to refute my response and see how ridiculous you will sound.

Rashduct4luv:
The mistaken concept of "freedom" that arose as a result of being fed on the resentment and revolution against the corrupt social system that ruled European society, resulted in the emergence of the concept of "personal freedom" which is raised by those who call for women's liberation in Islamic countries. They believe freedom to be a release from every kind of restriction, becoming free from every regulation and getting rid of any type of supervision -- even if it springs from the innate sound nature of the person and his own conscience. The advocates of women's liberation would happily demolish all moral curbs and even the conscience if necessary.

Quest for freedom is inate in human nature and any system/culture that stands to remove such often leads to tyranny, and if against women becomes an institutionalized misogyny. In as much I don't subscribe to the unrestricted freedom, as we almost have in the west (for women), the level of misogyny in the Arab and Islamic world is criminally high. An average Arab women will chose to live in the west than in the muslim world; at least in the west there is 'right to chose'.

Rashduct4luv:
In this way, nothing stands in the face of one’s enjoyment of life or spoils the ecstasy of his temporary enjoyment. This means that everyone should be left to do whatever they wish without any restrictions, regulations or supervision. They advocates of "freedom" strive hard so that society acknowledges this right and the government protects it. This is their concept of "freedom".

There is no any society that provide unrestricted freedom. There is law and order and there are consequnces for actions. Laws are made to, in a way, restrict freedom. The issue here is that women, in the west, are granted more right (or freedom) day by day while muslim women are not. As I said earlier, there are more advantages in 'freedom' than 'institutionalized misogyny' against women. Remember what happened in Iran recently, an Iranian woman committed suicide because her freedom was denied and she was arrested for watching a football match. The resulting international backlash led to Iran changed the policy and women, this month ,were allowed to enter a stadium and watch a football match.

Rashduct4luv:
The West believes that there should be no religion to regulate the lives of people and restrict their excesses; no morals to refine their behavior, awaken the feelings and stir the spirit of chivalry and sense of honor; no ideals or virtues to be a criterion for knowing the difference between good or bad deeds; and no modesty to prevent people from committing excesses or what is openly evil. All these matters should no longer exist because they are considered history. Everything that belongs to the past is considered "an obstacle in the way of progress" and should be demolished.

The multicultural west wants to accomodate all culture hence do not want to based their laws on religion. This policy is what leads to the growth of Islam, in the west, for the last 20 years. If the Judeo-christian principles is to be enforced, as was done before, Islam will not have a space in the west. I will however agree with you that this 'inclusiveness' has also led to moral decadance in the western world, because there seem to be a thin line between 'freedom' and 'responsibility'. Excessive freedom can make one irressponsible and reckless, this is where moderation, and not total restriction, needs to be placed on freedom.

Rashduct4luv:
This was the slogan of those who advocate freedom in the West and the East. Even if the latter could not explicitly say this, their concept of freedom reveals this; its characteristics are diffused from their slogans under the name of freedom. If the current application of freedom in Islamic countries continues in this way, it would definitely lead to the same social and moral chaos that has engulfed the West.

I agree with you here but your argument would have made more sense if the religious card is not played. However this should not be the basis for oppression of women which is prevalanet in most muslim countries. As I said earlier, freedom is good but uncontrolled freedom is dangerous to any society. In Saudi arabia women are not allowed to drive (oppression) because they (the saudis) believed that giving women right to drive is a kind of freedom which can affect the social interraction between men and women in the society.

Rashduct4luv:
Since the liberation of women is the chief measure and an important element in the overall concept of freedom according to these people, they have directed most of their attention to them and worked on adapting women to the role that they wanted her to play. They encouraged her to leave her home in the name of freedom and liberation. They drove her to various fields of work that contradict her nature. Consequently, they destroyed her femininity, the family and home in the name of "freedom" and "liberation".

The writter here still have the mindset that women are meant to be second class in any society. Modern societies are evolving hence roles are shifting which make women more economically viable in the society. We now have female engineers, doctors, architects and even combatants, and of course this shift in role is good for a modern technoogy-driven society. These are the things muslim countries are afraid of and one of the reason they are lacking behind in human capital index.

Rashduct4luv:
They urged and coerced her to forsake her Hijab (Islamic covering) and display her beauty to quench their sexual desires in the name of "freedom" and "liberation". They took her from her protector and maintainer, her husband, by inciting her to rebel against his right of being in charge so that it becomes easy for them to deceive her and fulfill their goals.

This is why muslim countries are deemed very oppresive against women because they do not try to create a balance between morality and human right. A woman on a hijab can be a prostitute while a woman on Jeans and Polo shirt can be modest, I have seen many instances like that. In Iran and saudi arabia, many women have been killed while thousands are jailed for failing to wear the hijab and the region with the highets rate of unreported domestic violence is the muslim world. I am sorry to say this, going by this statementm, protector and maintainer, it is clear that women are regarded as property of men in the muslim world.

Rashduct4luv:
They let her—rather forced her to— mix with non-Mahram (marriageable) men and be in seclusion with them. Consequently, they destroyed her chastity, dignity and modesty in the name of "freedom" and "liberation". They took everything from her in the name of freedom and only gave her very little in return.

This is rather emotionally blackmailing the west than saying the fact. The freedom the west provides makes individual responsible for his/her action and punishable if it goes against the law. Only an immature mind will blame a system for all his problems and failures. If one choses to do drugs or prostitution, the government are not to blame but the individual. Muslims should learn to accept responsibility for their mistakes and weaknesses instead of blaming the system or external forces.

Rashduct4luv:
Is this real freedom? Does freedom mean giving one’s self full rein without any restrictions? Does freedom mean rebelling against religion, ideals and virtues? Does life, in this concept, become a sublime human life that conforms to the status accorded to man on earth by Allah The Almighty, which is inhabiting the earth and being a successor to authority on it?

Learn from the Japanese and see how they organize their perseonal lives and society. Japan offers freedom to her citizens and yet one of the most pious, honest and organized society of earth. Islamic culture lives in fear and laws hence all actions are viewed with a negative lense especially if they are not from an arabian or islamic culture.

Rashduct4luv:
Freedom in the correct sense is being free of these heinous concepts. A sublime human life does not accept this concept. Rather, true freedom is to be free from everything that the advocates of debauchery erroneously tout as "freedom".

Your definition of freedom is subjective and defined with respect to your religion. Freedom also means a woman should marry who she loves and not who the father likes, which is very common in a conservative muslim country.