₦airaland Forum

The writer did not spare us the details but went ahead enumerating rights that Islam supposedly bestowed on Women. But many of these rights existed before Islam. Besides most of them were repealed by Muslims after Muhammad 's death via fabricated and authenticated Ahadith. For instance the writer boast of the right of women to work and earn without the obligation of spending on the family.

But this was common even before Islam where in most cultures, only men were obligated to spend on the family and besides, this right is diminished by the fact that, in orthodox Islam, a man have so much authority over his wife that he can decide to forbid her from working and that is flat. This happen in many cases. If we go through orthodox Islamic texts today, we 'll find teachings that impede many of these rights. I 'll give just 3 examples. JackBizzle has given us one.

PIPE BOMB!

Shalom!

Article Review and Rating

The OP 's article thrives on the ignorance the of common reader. It will not interest the advanced reader. It has been repeated too often by orthodox muslims, it has become a clichè that orthodox Islam does empower women. If so, how come muslim states are the most repressive and backward in women affairs?

Let s' take Islamic Republic of Iran as case study;

Before the Iranian revolution, under the secular state, Iranian women had handsome rights. Women could vote, could work and earn in most fields, the marriage age for women was 18, their family right were increased, extra-judicial divorce by men was scrapped.

After the revolution in 1979, a Sharia theocratic state based on "Islamic" teachings was established by Ayatollah Khomeini. Within months, women were stripped off most of their rights and reduced to weaklings. Extra-judicial divorce by men was restored, [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%27s_Family_Protection_Law]family protection laws in favor of women[/url] were repealed, hijab(abaya) was enforced. Women were barred from several Jobs they were entitled to in the past(e.g Judge), marriage age for females was reduced to 9 and the participation in societal sphere was markedly reduced. Of course, the women tried to protest but it was too late. You can't eat your cake and have it. The funny thing is that these women heavily supported the revolution, little did they know what Khomeini and his circle of Mullahs were up to. Today women in Iran long for the secular laws before the revolution.
They are evidence that Sharia or orthodox Islam doesn't empower women.

Shalom.

I don't have a thing for scholars. I find them boring, repetitive and simply rehearsing the same lines that have been passed down for generations without questioning.

I prefer thinkers and intellectuals. From among orthodox muslim voices, Khalid Abou El Fadl, a Professor of Law in US is my favourite. His moral and rational approach to Islam, his stance on human right and Justice, his criticism of puritan Islam and religious fanaticism as well as his support for religious pluralism and democratic values put him ahead of many orthodox Islamic scholars in my book.

If there were thinkers like Khalid Abou El Fadl in the orthodox Muslim world, it would be much better.

Empiree: As for http://islamqa.info/en/45528, you basically frustrating yourself . FGM is haram. this site provided no proof. You need to Dr.bilal phillips on youtube. Just stop this nonsense of urs.

Since when did Bilal Philips become an Imam of Fiqh in Ahlul Sunna? Do you have any ahadith to support your stand? Here are ahadith for you;

Sahih Bukhari
Abu Hurayrah reported that the Prophet said: "The fitrah is five things – or five things are part of the fitrah – circumcision, shaving the pubes, cutting the nails, plucking the armpit hairs, and trimming the moustache."

Sahih Muslim
Aa’ishah said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “When a man sits between the four parts (arms and legs of his wife) and the two circumcised parts meet, then ghusl is obligatory.”

See more;
http://islamqa.info/en/60314

Instead of admitting that this ugly act is prescribed by their tradition, they keep on denying in order to save their ego. Let us see what their Imams of Fiqh have on this issue.

Imam Sha'afi and Hanbali
Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Majmoo’ (1/367): Circumcision is obligatory for both men and women in our view. This is the view of many of the salaf, as was narrated by al-Khattaabi. Among those who regarded it as obligatory is Ahmad… it is the correct view that is well known and was stated by al-Shaafa’i (may Allaah have mercy on him), and the majority stated definitively that it is obligatory for both men and women.

See Fath al-Baari, 10/340; Kishshaaf al-Qinaa’, 1/80

Imam Maliki and Hanafi
That circumcision is Sunnah for both males and females. This is the view of the Hanafis and Maalikis, and was narrated in one report from Ahmad. Ibn ‘Aabideen al-Hanafi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in his Haashiyah (6/751): In Kitaab al-Tahaarah of al-Siraaj al-Wahhaaj it says: Know that circumcision is Sunnah in our view – i.e., according to the Hanafis – for men and for women. end quote.

See: Mawaahib al-Jaleel, 3/259

Anyone notice from the above that FGM is prescribed in orthodox Islam?

The funny thing is, despite all the emphasis they lay on Sunnah or Hadith, they do not keep many of its teachings.
For instance, beards is mandatory according to their traditions. How many Muslim men keep beards today? They grow 'westernized beard'(a.k.a stubble) or even shave everything, yet they accuse the sisters of wearing 'westernized hijab'.
They take pictures and make videos of themselves with phones or cameras whereas their tradition forbid making images of man or animals.
Although their traditions forbid music, they cannot not help but use Musical tones for their Islamic songs or Videos.

I could go on exposing their false religion and self-righteousness for days, but i don't want to hurt anyone 's feeling. The rabbit hole goes very deep.

Empiree: Irrelevant...my point is you are so bias. Use all sorts of twisted words or phrases as you want doesnt change anything. There are plenty of cases of muslim persecution at the hand of average non muslims (usually for islamic appearance like hijab, "brown skin" or simply for being suspected muslim) that you skipped. The least you can say is 'i know they are'. Only less than 1% of these incidents are seen in main stream media.

Just as typical, you bemoan the media again. Thanks to political correctness, how many percent of Muslim excesses get reported? If you think, you are the only one with a grudge against the mainstream media, go ask the Christians how they feel.

But how about a whole lots of so called criminal prosecution by govt deliberately targeting and persecuting muslims just for being muslims but they paint them supporting terrorism etc just to get away with crimes. Some have been killed in the west and abroad by means of 'hit list'. These cases dont make it to main stream at all. They would rather report the opposite I advice you to visit "Mother Jones" magazine. See if you can locate Trevor Aaroson or on youtube or his books, "Terrorist For The fbi", Informants, The Terror Factory-how they manufacture terrorists etc. They are available on amazon and ebay for a fee. Or website like loonwatchdotcom where lots more are reported.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2014/10/how-one-man-refused-to-spy-on-fellow-muslims-for-the-fbi-and-then-lost-everything/

o wait, check out Gulet Mohamed on youtube and hear his story. Trevor Aaronson and Glen Greenward are favorite journalists on this. Your problem is you are whitewashed, and since you claim to believe in Quran, here is juz 49:6

I am sure you know what you doing. Your attacking muslims here just makes no sense to me. Now, am not denying mischief by some muslim or so called muslim govt. That you tried so much not to paint all muslim is still irrelevant. The point is this is not news at all, period. And wait go and read on Aafia Sidique, or a muslim guy sentenced to 15yrs just for sending 300$ to fund his orphanage in paki. the list go on.

Those are terror related matters. Of course, there involve harrassment of Muslims which is pretty bad. But i wouldn't call it Islamophobia or sheer hate for Muslims. It is born out of frustration and quest for culprits over terrors' acts like 9/11 or 7/7. Even in Nigeria where Muslims make up 50% of the masses, there has been reports of harrassment of Muslims over allegation or suspicion of terror. It wasn't so before Boko Haram emerged.

With hate and fiery preachers in the West, radicalization in the Mosques, most of which are run by Salafists or Muslim Brotherhood affiliates, Muslims emigrating from the West to join Al Qaeda/ISIS or serving as fifth columnists; It is hard to describe the FBI acts as Islamophobic or sheer hate.

Thank you for the Verse(49:6). If you read through my article, every allegation i made can be proved. Whenever the West enact laws to disenfranchise muslims the way Sharia does to non-Muslims, you can shout, "Islamophobia".

Looks like you want to paint them as following Shariah order. Thats just very wrong. They are not. 98.99% of them are not.

What are you saying? That the Sudanese court wasn't keeping Sharia when Mariam Ibrahim was nearly executed for apostasy or or Sharia doesn't rule death for the case of the Christian couple recently burnt in Pakistan over blasphemy? Empiree, how well do you know Sharia? Better than the Muslim Brotherhood group that hanged Muhammad Taha for heresy?

There isn't proof for this unjust doctrine from the Qur'an which no where sanction aggression but defense and resistance. The reason being that Offensive Jihad is a foreign doctrine introduced to serve the interest of power and wealth hungry Ummayad Caliphs. Because the Arabs will buy anything marketed as Islam, the Ummayad effected the fabrication of these ahadith to buy their full support, even though it was a secular state requiring no religious justification for decisions.

@tartar9

Your assertion that all land must fall under Sharia have been employed by Islamist insurgents for long. I am not shocked to hear this since i know it is covered in your religious text, although most orthodox Muslims continue deny it.

Accordingly, orthodox Muslim sages divided the world into two parts; "Abode of Peace and Abode of War", the former being the Muslim land under sharia and the latter being the non-Muslim land to be fought to establish Sharia law.

It is God 's will that the Muslim world now under the grip of fanatics lack the military and technological competence to mount an invasion or offensive Jihad. Otherwise, the very war crimes that US and Isreal are guilty of will be nothing compared to the slaughter & massacres by the Mujahidins and their Caliphs, in compliance with the following ahadith:::

Sahih Bukhari
Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387 :
Narrated by Anas bin Malik

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah."

Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."

tbaba1234:
You are the one that needs to be confronted with the kind of falsehood, you produce.

Am no fan of Bill Maher. In fact, untill the recent outburst over his comment, i never knew him. Believe it or not, Maher isn't alone. He simply took the word off the tip of the tongues of a lot of people. I think it was an honest opinion but many misconstrued it as deliberate attack on muslims.

If you think that you can vehemently deny ISIS, while your ideology rules execution for apostasy/blasphemers, for drawing Muhammad or for criticising Muhammad and offensive Jihad to get infidel states under Sharia; you are deceiving yourself.

Empiree:
usermane, na wa for u oooo. U no get tired of this?. Wetin dey wori u sef? why u dey freaking 1 sided?

I have tried as much as possible not to paint the whole muslims with one brush. That 's why i often use terms like extremists, fanatics, Islamists or Islamaniacs. If anyone still feel offended after this, then it is guilty conscience.

Upon all the phobia for Islam in the West, Muslims are dismantling Churches to build Mosques. A Christian in your sharia state isn't even permitted to expand his Church.

A Muslim once complained to me of US visa issuers' discriminating against Muslims. Though, i sympathized with him but i couldn't deny the truth. This same Muslim find nothing wrong in barring of non-Muslims from Mecca and Medina. These same Muslims go to the West with utter disregard for the culture, abuse the freedom, protesting against the law. While in their homeland, mere expression of contempt for the law by non- Muslims is crime.

In spite of this Islamophobia Muslims cry about, Western Liberals like George Galloway fearlessly stand for you.
Ben Afflek stood for you against his fellow westerner. When Salmaan Taseer stood for Aasia Bibi, he was crushed by fellow muslims. When Farag Foda stood for the Copts, he was killed by his brothers, Muslim Brotherhood.

Please, lets utilize more of reason and less of emotion when we judge or analyze.

UPDATED POST

Anti spam bot banned me for 48 hours. The agents of Islam section can't stand my ideas and opinions about them. So, they left me in the cold despite my mails. I "ll invite the to the way of God(Qur'an 4:135).


Who said Muslims don't suffer mistreatment in the West? My point is that "Islamophobia" is different from what Muslims cry of. There is need to differentiate hate for beards or headscarf from hate for Islam. They aren't synonymous.

As much as Muslim sites exists narrating ordeals of Muslims enduring oppression at in the hands of non Muslims. Christian sites replete with ordeals of non-muslims oppressed by muslims can also be found online.

The plight of those hijabis and beardos discriminated or assaulted in the West is subtle relative to Aasia Bibi and her likes in the Sharia states. For the former 's oppression is based on sentiments which with no backing from the state while the latter 's oppression is based on religious motives with backing from the state. Who then is blamable for "Islamophobia" other than the Muslim world?

tbaba1234:
You support Bill Maher? shows how far your understanding of Islam is. Bill Maher is an Islamophobe. They

I have posted fatwas by the biggest scholars in the muslim world denouncing ISIS

https://www.nairaland.com/1927844/not-path-paradise-response-isis

https://www.nairaland.com/1807306/conclusive-scholarly-opinions-isis

Etc.

Reacting emotionally to ridiculousness is normal at least among the general populace but there have been intellectual responses as well.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzusSqcotDw


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn0NgLRcVOM

So long, tbaba. I 've heard it before. Please go confront tartar9 at:
Jihad- Is it only for defence?

tbaba1234:
This is a generalized and quite frankly false and silly assertion. Muslims do not consider non muslims as enemies unless there is a genuine reason to. The only people to come up with such ridiculous generalizations are people with either spectrum of extreme values.

Alright, i get that, it was a mistake in typing.

Those Muslims protesting for lifting the ban on the veil in the West whereas they couldn't care less about the imposition of veil on non-Muslim women in the Middle east are responsible for Islamophobia.

In Wuppertal, Germany, those self appointed "Shariat Patrol" that took to street, disturbing and harrassing people are responsible for Islamophobia.

Those Muslims migrating from their homes over the world to join terror groups like ISIS are responsible for Islamophobia.

Those Islamists who killed Theo Van Gogh in cold blood for just a B-movie are responsible for Islamophobia.

In the true sense of the word, there is no such thing as Islamophobia and if and only if there is, the ones raising the alarm, the whistle blowers, the Muslim world is to blame. Islamophobia is a reaction to Islamania.



http://flamesoftruth./2014/11/03/75/

That Pakistani Muslim mob that just lynched and burnt to death a Christian couple alleged to have desecrated the Qur’an is responsible for Islamophobia.

The recent Canadian Muslim convert (Michael Zehaf-Bibeau) who couldn't wait to open fire on innocent persons in public is responsible for Islamophobia.

The Sudanese Sharia court that nearly executed a Mariam Ibrahim for apostasy except for international is responsible for Islamophobia.

The Pakistan Sharia court that is is about to execute Aasia Bibi after three years in prison is responsible for Islamophobia.

The fanatic cannot see beyond his nose, so he lack objectivity. In the picture, he sees non but himself. In himself, he sees nothing but good. It is often easier to seek excuse and blame it on others than to admit our faults a make amendments. That is why the fanatics find solace in raising alarms for Islamophobia whenever he is confronted. But even if he has a point, who is responsible for this Islamophobia.

One can discover the double standard of the whistle blowers, those raising false alarm on Islamophobia, when he observes that the complains and censures that non Muslims are branded Islamophobes for making, other Muslims also make the same without getting branded as Islamophobes. In fact, the alarm for Islamophobia is often employed by fanatics to cover up their losses, insecurity, dogma and paranoia.

No one, not even the media attempted to confront or call on the Islamists for these, preferring to be politically correct. That is why earlier last month, when Bill Maher cited the common ground between the mainstream Muslims and ISIS, they reacted emotionally, hurling insults and accusations of Islamophobia at him. In short, they confirmed his words, because an innocent man seldom react with emotion and outbursts when incriminated. He calmly present evidence of his innocence.

To these Muslims, disapproving the use of noisy speakers in the Mosques or condemning the deeping of feet in the public wash hand basin during ablution is Islamophobia.

So, Islamophobia came to be known as hate for attitudes and doctrines of Muslim dogmas instead of hate for justice, peace, tolerance, love, freedom and service to God, which it truly is. It then becomes hard to criticize or confront muslims and their dogmas without getting branded as an Islamophobe. The Sex-Ring and Trojan horse School scandals by Islamists in UK are evidences of this.

In their homeland, they dominate. Non-muslims have to endure all their excesses in order to live. But this luxury isn't available to them in the West. Thus, they distort the whole situation, playing the victim, blaming it on others and raising alarm of Islamophobia.

To the fanatics, any verbal opposition to Muslims blocking the road while holding their congregational Salat is Islamophobia, any disapproval of female circumcision or Child marriage conducted by Muslims is Islamophobia.

The false alarms for Islamophobia is recent phenomenon due to increased migration of Muslims from Middle-east to the west for the past decade. Many of these Muslims migrated with certain attitudes contemptuos to the Westerners and culture. The Westerners would not have any of these attitudes and became vocal expressing their concerns. Obviously, there was need for attitude adjustment on the part of the Muslims. But fanatics among Muslims or Islamaniacs hardly admit their fault.

For one, the West have a warped understanding of Islam. Their prejudice and biase often stem from poor presentation of Islam by the ignorant and fanatic muslims.

For two, we have earlier defined Islam in the light of Qur'anic verses and linguistics. The western society is much closer to the Qur'anic society based on tolerance, love, respect, freedom and justice than the muslim world. No wonder the western society has bested the middle east on overall scale for over the past 5 centuries. Hence, it is ironic to charge the West of Islamophobia & enmity to Islam.

Fanatic Muslims differ on a wide range of issues spanning from crucial ones as authority of the clergy to trival ones like shaving the hair. But regardless of their differences, they are united on one claim; "The West and Non-Muslims are the avowed enemies of Islam".

Thereof originate the alarms of Islamophobia. Although this is nothing but a figment of their imagination. The West cannot be guilty of Islamophobia because:

Islam relate to a state of peace among men and service to God. So, it is not possible to have a muslim or tenet of Islam incompatible with peaceful values like justice, equity, moderation and tolerance.
Phobia is a term for a strong hate or aversion to something.

Therefore, Islamophobia suppose to mean a strong aversion to peaceful, just, equitable, tolerant principles and service to God alone.

EDITED

Alright, you just stated that Jihad transcend defence according to orthodox Islamic teachings. This has been my my criticism of orthodox Islam, but the apologists deny.

Insha Allah, I will give my contribution on this tonight.

tsolz700:
RIP to the dead..
But they caused it upon themselves..
How can you desecrate the holy Quran in a pakistani village?
May Allah forgive them

This is a common ill among many people; lack of objectivity. If you cared to read before jumping to post, you won't have any reason to believe this desecration was deliberate.

During the time of the Prophet, disbelievers and hypocrites use to blaspheme, ridicule the Prophet and mock the Qur'an(6:10-11 13:32 9:64-65, 37:36 34:8 15:6) No order to penalize them was revealed in the Qur'an. Muslims were just required to ignore or admonish them(6:68-69).

Yet, mainstream Muslims take it upon themselves to punish and in fact kill anyone alleged to have blasphemed. This, they justify as protecting the honour of the Prophet and Qur'an. Ironically, these Muslims have no regard for the message of the Qur'an even though they idolise the leaflets which they recite like a piece of mantras day and night without paying heed to its meaning. This is why ignorance persist in the Muslim world. (See; Holy Ignorance Is Behind Attacks On Two Nigerian Churches).

Your response indicate a degree of tolerance for this Pakistani mobs. However, am not shocked. I 've always maintained that there are far more extremists and terror in the Muslim society than often estimated. Remember that this killing isn't the handwork of Islamist insurgents. This is the handwork of some of the so called 'Peaceful majority' of muslims often touted as anti-violence/terrorism.

So, there is no need to pretend that this kind of terror perpetuated by the Pakistani muslim mob isn't known in the muslim word. Wasn't it here in Nigeria that an Igbo man was murdered by a muslim gang over his wife alleged to have cleaned up here baby with pages of Qur'an? Wasn't it just this year that another muslim mob in Katsina burnt down two Churches over a Teacher alleged to have disregarded Muhammad?

This is my pipe bomb for this Friday, tsolz700. Be consumed by the Flames Of Truth.

Abuamam:
Shallow and worthless analysis. The writer obviously started with a prejudice, then sought to prove it with half-truths and insinuations.

As an educated fella with no less than a secondary school certificate, when you find a write up with half truths and insinuations, you have to spell out what has been left out and misconstrue or else, you are just as sentimental as the writer.

Tell it to the birds, sino. Concentrate on the topic and forget usermane.

^^^^
Once again, you 've opted to employ straw man argument and raise the banner of "submit to your creator" to butress your point. This contradict several verses of Quran and your own perception of life.

Our bone of contention isn't the permissibility of marking Halloween but the authority of the ulamas to ban it. If you have gone through the Quran, you "ll find that the most one can do in the name of God is to admonish. Non can ban and enforce, not even the Prophet or ulemas(24:54 9:31). This is where "no compulsion in religion" comes in(2:256). To be rewarded, one must keep the law out of reverence to God and not under compulsion of another man. If the ulamas stop at deeming Halloween unislamic, that 's fine. But if they enforce this fatwa(which is their plan) by any means, they 've crossed the line.



Your emphasis on respect and obedience to the clergy is a glaring denial of your perception. This is typical of a Muqalid. It is worth recalling that you dismissed a Saudi cleric for justifying the ban of women from driving, yet you sing a different tune today. If the clergy decide to ban everything disliked or sinful in Islam such as apostasy, and punish offenders in line with that, you 'll be the girl who cried, "wolf!".

When i heard this news, i knew the Islamists were at it again, seeking for attention. Their ban denying Malaysian muslims the right to choose, not only contradict freedom of beliefs but expresses sentimentality. I 'd like to see them ban Ashura day where Shiite torture themselves from dawn till dusk. But of course, they won't. Even after debunking the Hadith on Ashura day fasting as a fabrication by the Ummayads, they insist on marking this day annually.

One of their excuse is that "Halloween is a superstitious festival and Islam is against superstitions". It is amusing to hear this. For these people subscribe to more superstitions than the Westerners marking Halloween. That the very people who believe Satan eat with left hand, black dogs are devilish and must be killed, human pictures or photographs drive away Angels, the earth is carried on a giant whale and other fables, superstitions or urban legend to ban Halloween on ground of superstitions is a killing joke.