Children are little ****bags who should be used for baynet practice.

[Al B. Sure!]

You can also have 4 wives too, but that's politically incorrect. Short way of looking at it is that they both have ideas of marriage, but they have nothing to do with one another. Christians see marriage as a union of a man and woman together for life. Two become one flesh.

And Christians are crazies who don't appreciate the changing conditions in people's lives or that humans make mistakes and that it is wrong to forever enslave a man and/or a woman to a loveless marriage.

[Ben Kenobi]

Even if he is a Muslim (which he clearly 100% is not), why does it make a difference? There were plenty of Americans going ape**** about Kennedy being a Catholic and yet it didn't make a difference in retrospect.

Kennedy was excoriated for being a Catholic. He went so far as to deny that he was a Catholic by saying that he would reject the pope. Faithful Catholics are a huge deal in America because of what happened in England where they were executed for their troubles.

Why would it be a big deal? First would be him lying about it, then the coverup on most of his background, etc. It would make every thing he has done make sense because it's been harmful to America in the long run.

[Ben Kenobi]

And Christians are crazies who don't appreciate the changing conditions in people's lives or that humans make mistakes and that it is wrong to forever enslave a man and/or a woman to a loveless marriage.

Funny that you don't see how a man owning 4 women is slavery while a man and woman becoming one together is not. "Each wife her own husband" is a phrase you will never hear from an Imam, for a reason. Islam believes that men are more valuable than women, and enforces that through and through in sharia.

[Al B. Sure!]

Funny that you don't see how a man owning 4 women is slavery while a man and woman becoming one togeher is not. "Each wife her own husband" is a phrase you will never hear from an Imam, for a reason. Islam believes that men are more valuable than women, and enforces that through an through in sharia.

Man owning four women?

Far be it for me to defend an outdated practice that I oppose but... Polygamy is conditional in Islam. It's conditional on ability to materially support multiple wives and demonstrate equitable treatment to them all. It's conditional on the approval of all the women in question, including any previous wife. It's not like women marry a man who already has a wife and they don't know that he already has a wife!

How is it slavery when the women agree to it and they have the right of Khula, permitting them to leave the marriage, if it goes against their interests?

Meanwhile, the Catholic wife has no recourse...

[giblets]

Ben's islamophobia seems to get more hysterical every time he brings it up.

[Ben Kenobi]

How is it slavery when the women agree to it and they have the right of Khula, permitting them to leave the marriage, if it goes against their interests?

Simple question, why doesn't Islam permit a woman to have 4 husbands?

And you are wrong about that, a woman cannot initiate a divorce either. Only the man can.

The reason it is the way that it is is because Islam sees women as slaves and their beliefs back it up.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben's islamophobia seems to get more hysterical every time he brings it up.

So you think owning 4 women is ok?

[loinburger]

And you are wrong about that, a woman cannot initiate a divorce either. Only the man can.

Considering that it would take all of five minutes of research for you to learn that this is not the case, I'm convinced that you're simply dishonest as opposed to ignorant.

[Ben Kenobi]

Considering that it would take all of five minutes of research for you to learn that this is not the case, I'm convinced that you're simply dishonest as opposed to ignorant.

Mind if I link to the practice of honour killings? Suprisingly the prophet is ok with them too. Sure, go ahead and divorce.

[Al B. Sure!]

Polyandry is not permitted. That is true. Why that is the case is obvious since, historically, virtually every society, including 7th century Arab society, has been male-dominated and only men had the means by which to support multiple partners (remember, polygamy is conditional on economic ability to support multiple wives). It's not fair. That is true.

A woman has the right of Khula, however:

Khula (Arabic:خلع) is the right of a woman in Islam to divorce or separate from her husband. After divorce, the husband is responsible for the education and maintenance of the children. The children live with the mother for seven years. After seven years, the children have the right to live with the father or the mother, as they decide.

A woman seeks a Khula while a man seeks a Talaq. The Iddah period (waiting time after a divorce) of a woman whom seeks a Khula, is one menstrual cycle or one month if she is no longer menstruating. This ensures that she is not pregnant. This is different from when a man seeks a Talaq, when the Iddah period is three cycles or three months. The Iddah period also allows for reconciliation for the husband and wife. There is still the need for witnesses when seeking a Khula as in a Talaq. The Mahr, depending on circumstances, may or may not be given back to the husband.

[Al B. Sure!]

Now, realistically, in a male-dominated society, it can be difficult for a woman to divorce her husband. However, both the Qu'ran and the Hadith provide her with the opportunity, even if the flaws in society can make it difficult. This is not an issue with the faith; it is an issue with man's temporal flaws. However, this has not always been the case. Fascinatingly enough,

In medieval Egypt, Al-Sakhawi recorded the marital history of 500 women, the largest sample of married women in the Middle Ages, and found that at least a third of all women in the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt and Syria married more than once, with many marrying three or more times. According to Al-Sakhawi, as many as three out of ten marriages in 15th century Cairo ended in divorce.[41] In the early 20th century, some villages in western Java and the Malay peninsula had divorce rates as high as 70%.[40]

I suppose as a Catholic, you would look at that in horror, but I fail to see how providing women with the option to divorce is somehow slavery compared to the Christian method of forever being bound to a loveless marriage. It is obvious to a reasonable and modern person which approach to divorce provides rights to women.

[Ben Kenobi]

Now, realistically, in a male-dominated society, it can be difficult for a woman to divorce her husband. However, both the Qu'ran and the Hadith provide her with the opportunity, even if the flaws in society can make it difficult.

Honour killings are ok in Islam, Albert. That's why I have a problem with their tearching wrt to 'marriage'. I have had some personal experience with this, and have seen the aftermath of an acid attack. It's not the culture, it's the religion that sanctions these things. We don't see Arab Christians do this to one another.

As for Islamic 'marriage', it's more like concubinage, which is what you are talking about. Christian marriage is very different. Only one man and one woman is a fundamental belief in the equal value of both the man and the woman.

[Al B. Sure!]

Equal value to be bound together in a loveless (or worse) marriage for the extent of their lives... real great system, that is.

I feel like this should have been covered under "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath".

[Al B. Sure!]

Also, obviously, 99% of Islamic marriages are one man, one woman. But, I guess the right to divorce means this is slavery?

[giblets]

Yeah, just like it's slavery when your boss hires other people.