So The Koran Says You Can Beat Your Woman.

[youngmafbog]

This guy still defends his previous ramblings and justifies it by saying the Koran says so and what else can you do if your woman wont listen?

Is this really what we want in this country and the EU and does Merkel know about this?

How long before one of our 80 odd Sharia courts rules its ok to 'lightly' beat your missus.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3644382/Islamic-Council-leader-defends-advice-men-lightly-beat-wives-women-not-fulfilling-duties.html

[woofgang]

I am not sure that the Mail should be being so holier than thou....in the Uk its still legal to smack a child and use a shock collar or a prong collar on a dog.

[youngmafbog]

I hope you are not linking dogs to women ??

[-Talbot-]

So The Koran Says You Can Beat Your Woman.



Do the give any sort of combat lessons?
The wife keeps winning atm due to her superior footwork :0/

(I think we have done this one)

[Old_Geezer]

Of course you should. You are responsible for your child's upbringing. Your spouse is responsible for themselves.

[ummmm]

OG...are you saying of course you should hit your children?

[Old_Geezer]

In the right circumstances yes, of course. Been discussed before I think though.

[youngmafbog]

I think OG is pointing out the difference.

So it appears no one is bothered by this fella's preaching then and all find it perfectly acceptable. How odd.

[ummmm]

Who on earth has suggested it's acceptable?

It's not acceptable to beat your wife, lightly or not. No one should be afraid in their own homes!!

[Old_Geezer]

They mistakenly find it acceptable, we have little affect on that view. Does the law here not already cover spouse abuse ? I appreciate domestics is apparently a difficult area, the thread probably needs a legal eagle to explain.

[ummmm]

There are laws in place if the victim choosing to use our system and not Sharia.

[Old_Geezer]

Well it's changing the subject somewhat, but I think that ought be banned. I have no warm feeling that it is merely an arbitration. What's there to arbitrate between when the law already covers a situation ? The discussions here convince me that folk are probably made to feel obliged to use it and ignore any rights under law.

[woofgang]

My point was that we, too, live in a society where its legal to use violence as a correction.

[Old_Geezer]

All punishment can be considered violent in that non compliance results in being physically forced into something. Feminists proved that all the time with their claims of pornography being violence to women. Since children are pushing boundaries and (some) not willing to behave if you try talking, it is reasonable to have a physical aspect as legal. I don't think it wise to try to totally remove "violence", as you put it, via the law since the State is also violent when it incarcerates folk.

[TheChair]

Some people use the Bible to justify their inhumanity:
St Paul’s advice about whether women are allowed to teach men in church:
“I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” (1 Timothy 2:12)

In this verse, Samuel, one of the early leaders of Israel, orders genocide against a neighbouring people:
“This is what the Lord Almighty says... ‘Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” (1 Samuel 15:3)

The ending of Psalm 137
“Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us – he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.” (Psalm 137:9)


Another blood-curdling tale from the Book of Judges, where an Israelite man is trapped in a house by a hostile crowd, and sends out his concubine to placate them:
“So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight. When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold. He said to her, ‘Get up; let’s go.’ But there was no answer. Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.” (Judges 19:25-28)

St Paul condemns homosexuality in the opening chapter of the Book of Romans:
“In the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.” (Romans 1:27)

In this story from the Book of Judges, an Israelite leader, Jephthah, makes a rash vow to God, which has to be carried out:
“And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord, and said, ‘If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, then whoever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return victorious from the Ammonites, shall be the Lord’s, to be offered up by me as a burnt-offering.’ Then Jephthah came to his home at Mizpah; and there was his daughter coming out to meet him with timbrels and with dancing. She was his only child; he had no son or daughter except her. When he saw her, he tore his clothes, and said, ‘Alas, my daughter! You have brought me very low; you have become the cause of great trouble to me. For I have opened my mouth to the Lord, and I cannot take back my vow.’” (Judges 11:30-1, 34-5)

The Lord is speaking to Abraham in this story where God commands him to sacrifice his son:
‘Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt-offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you.’ (Genesis 22:2)

“Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.” (Ephesians 5:22)

“Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel.” (1 Peter 2:18)

[andy-hughes]

Anyone can take any religious text and use it as perceived instruction to behave inappropriately.

But you cannot justify an entire nation on the basis of the words and actions of one person.

I would not want to be judged as an English person based on the actions of Tony Blair.

[douglas9401]

Seems that followers of both works of fiction need help from mental health professionals.

[douglas9401]

"I would not want to be judged as an English person based on the actions of Tony Blair."

Thanks for that, takes the pressure off Edinburgh.

[albaqwerty]

I wouldn't want to be judged as a British person on the actions of Tony Blair

I wouldn't want to be judged as a Scottish person on the actions of Nicola Sturgeon either.

[Mamyalynne]

I am firmly of the opinion that if you follow a faith that has ancient scriptures written in such terms you have to understand those were the terms and phraseology used to keep people in line then.


Then you must also accept that with time and knowledge we have better ways of dealing with such matters that do not include using violence against others.

Yes, that makes me an idealist but I would rather be that than a slave to an ancient text.

There are ways in which things can move on but the will to adapt must be across the board and not just from those who are considered dissenters to their faith.

I doubt it will ever fully happen.

[ToraToraTora]

Another belter from the R0_P. I think they had riots in Pakistan recently for the right to beat your wife.