Amazingly Brave Pakistani Woman Defies Mullah On TV

liah

I was blown away by this video and thought I should share. This woman is insanely brave, and insanely right, and I think anyone could look to her for inspiration. Fair play to her for standing up for herself against a country like Pakistan, and showing them what Islam is supposed to be about. I hope nothing bad happens to her as a result..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMnAmRa4NYw

questionmark?

Give that women a medal. She clearly did nothing wrong and was very brave to stand up and be heard like she did. Saying you brought shame on the ideoligacal foundations of Pakistan by going to India was enough before the other allegations. I hope no harm comes to her from this but I have my reservations.

chocgirl

Saw this earlier too and thought she was really inspirational, I really hope she'll be looked after too but I doubt it very much, incredibly brave though!

Galvasean

She should high-tail it out of that intolerant hole. I can't imagine it being particularly safe for her now. The place is full of loons.

Little Acorn

Brilliant link Liah. Such a strong woman, loved the way that she refused to be silenced or spoken over. Did a bit of searching for more about her, and found her website.
Aswell as her television and acting career, this woman has a degree majoring in Psychology, Sociology, and Persian.
She can speak 5 languages, and has done much charity work.
She even worked as a representative for the World Health Organization for 2 years. http://veenamalik.com.pk/profile/

All this already after just turning 27!

Love how she responds when he starts trying to shame her by saying that her son's will not be able to look at her pictures in the future etc,
"Islam also means that I am the sole provider for my five sisters and my brother, and I have paid for their education."
- then going on to completely own him with further brilliant arguments.

Couldn't believe when he said "there is no need to get so emotional!"

Anyhow, class video. Definitely a very strong, bright, passionate and inspirational woman.
Thanks for the link!:)

Walls

See how she touches her hair? Appearing with that in plain sight is viewed as a provocation in that culture, and she knows it. So she gives a lot of non-verbal clues of difiance as well...

Cupcake_Crisis

Inspirational!

lecker Hendl

I know this isnt AH but half way through it, it reminded me of this clip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bi8wjMvUFA

On a serious note, she did well to stand up for herself and the manner in which she backed up her points was excellent. However, it might have been a silly thing to do and she may very well have out herself in jeopardy with her comments. I hope not, but they are very extreme over that direction as we know.

Table Top Joe

liah wrote: »

I was blown away by this video and thought I should share. This woman is insanely brave, and insanely right, and I think anyone could look to her for inspiration. Fair play to her for standing up for herself against a country like Pakistan, and showing them what Islam is supposed to be about. I hope nothing bad happens to her as a result..

That is what Islam is supposed to be about,women are considered to be worth half a man according to the Quran,to be fair they are simply following the book of God(as they see it at least)


That said i can only applaud this lady,fair play indeed,my heart goes out to women in her position,not only does she now have to fear random men on the street over there but no doubt men in her own family will be ashamed enough to kill her,can she even go back there and live a normal life?? just sad,sad stuff,hope she finds peace

liah

Table Top Joe wrote: »

That is what Islam is supposed to be about,women are considered to be worth half a man according to the Quran,to be fair they are simply following the book of God(as they see it at least)


That said i can only applaud this lady,fair play indeed,my heart goes out to women in her position,not only does she now have to fear random men on the street over there but no doubt men in her own family will be ashamed enough to kill her,can she even go back there and live a normal life?? just sad,sad stuff,hope she finds peace

I was referring mostly to how she turned it around on the aul lad, telling him he had no right to gaze upon her, etc. I mean yeah, Islam is an oppressive religion, but fair play to her for calling him out on also being a hypocrite.

Table Top Joe

Maybe i just read it wrong sorry,this kind of crap makes my blood boil tbh,your right of course,these guys have some nerve,to use another holy reference(one i can get behind to boot!)


"Take the log out of your own eye and you will see clearly enough to take the splinter from your brothers eye"(or something to that effect,you get the idea;))


You would think she had sex on national tv(with an atheist)the way he was going on,from what i can gather she appeared on a western tv show without covering herself up or something......seems a bit ott even for that lot,she might as well have been talking to the wall

beano345

" i don't think that her son will like to look at his mother's picture's in the future" thats a fairly rock bottom comment from such a "holy" man.

Adrian009

liah wrote: »

I was blown away by this video and thought I should share. This woman is insanely brave, and insanely right, and I think anyone could look to her for inspiration. Fair play to her for standing up for herself against a country like Pakistan, and showing them what Islam is supposed to be about. I hope nothing bad happens to her as a result..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMnAmRa4NYw

Not a millon miles away from some of the issues Irish women faced up to in the 1960's, 70's, 80's, and 90's.

goose2005

liah wrote: »

I was blown away by this video and thought I should share. This woman is insanely brave, and insanely right, and I think anyone could look to her for inspiration. Fair play to her for standing up for herself against a country like Pakistan, and showing them what Islam is supposed to be about. I hope nothing bad happens to her as a result..

Read a biography of Muhammad. That's what Islam is about. Four times in the Quran, Allah permits men to rape their female slaves, and Muhammad handed captive women around like candy.

Walls

In truth, the Bible is hardly much of a bastion for women's rights either. I agree with you, merely pointing out it is not limited to the Muslim faith.

dfx-

It's not especially the particular details of what she is arguing about that makes it a great video for me. It's the ferocity and feeling of conviction in her belief in doing so or setting him straight.

irishconvert

goose2005 wrote: »

Read a biography of Muhammad. That's what Islam is about. Four times in the Quran, Allah permits men to rape their female slaves, and Muhammad handed captive women around like candy.

Complete nonsense. Back it up or retract it.

Jaafa

As I Muslim let me say that this woman is indeed justified in what she said and did.

Women have total choice in Islam and she can chose to live how she feels is right. Anyone who tells you different about Islam is a liar. Simple as that.

The man she was arguing with is part of the 'oldguard' as it where. Slow to change his views on Islam despite the times. They will die out.

I personally believe that as long as the 5 pillars of Islam (and perhaps a few others things) remain then Islam can adapt to the changing times and it will change I believe.The man here is conservative and in denial of that.

At goose2005
I defy you sir/madam to find one piece of evidence for your claims.

michelledoh

Great vid OP! Very brave.

Anyone see that Libyan woman being bundled off by govt officials on TV there lately? However much women are second class citizens in some parts of the west, it's 100 times worse in the Mid East, and there's even honour killings in the UK every year too, in the name of Islam. Sickening.

pickarooney

Everything about that woman, from the 7 minutes and 39 seconds I've seen/heard/read of her, is absolutely awe-inspiring.

Wibbs

irishconvert wrote: »

Complete nonsense. Back it up or retract it.

Clumsily put certainly, but complete nonsense? More debatable. Explain the term 'Those your right hand possesses" found a fair bit all over the Quran(and in hadith). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma_malakat_aymanukum Basically slaves. The passage(s) that spells out those women allowed to a man sexually can and have been taken to mean all sorts of things in this context. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma_malakat_aymanukum_and_sex

Mohammad and his followers had female slaves. Either bought and sold with many captured in battle and raids. Even if these women were married to other (non muslim)men they were allowable to their captors in marriage and allowable to them sexually. I'm sure these women went willingly... Actually the wearing of veils and the like was not a requirement in the home for both wives and female slaves. Unless the slave girl belonged to the mans wife in which case no. She was off limits. As was pimping women out as prostitutes, but female slaves were allowable to Muslim men in the time of the Prophet and beyond.

Jaafa

Wibbs wrote: »

Clumsily put certainly, but complete nonsense? More debatable. Explain the term 'Those your right hand possesses" found a fair bit all over the Quran(and in hadith). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma_malakat_aymanukum Basically slaves. The passage(s) that spells out those women allowed to a man sexually can and have been taken to mean all sorts of things in this context. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma_malakat_aymanukum_and_sex

Mohammad and his followers had female slaves. Either bought and sold with many captured in battle and raids. Even if these women were married to other (non muslim)men they were allowable to their captors in marriage and allowable to them sexually. I'm sure these women went willingly... Actually the wearing of veils and the like was not a requirement in the home for both wives and female slaves. Unless the slave girl belonged to the mans wife in which case no. She was off limits. As was pimping women out as prostitutes, but female slaves were allowable to Muslim men in the time of the Prophet and beyond.

Slaves at the time were common. And as is shown in your link they were well treated('Muhammad during an illness before his death recommended people to care of the captives').
Given only what work they could do ('only be required to perform what he can bear of work')
and even though sexual intercourse was allowed with them no where does it say it is allowed to be forced on them.
For such rights to be given to slaves back then would have been thought mad.(Remembering slavery was in america until 1865)

In any case this term 'those whom you own' is usually interpreted as referring to prisoners of war more so than slaves. You might say theres no difference but prisoners of war would be people who had taken up arms against followers of Islam and thus by their logic deserve some form of punishment.

Obviously today slavery is not acceptable and as I said before Islam can change with the times. Its the conservative people who attempt to stop it.

Hazys

Jaafa wrote: »

Slaves at the time were common. And as is shown in your link they were well treated('Muhammad during an illness before his death recommended people to care of the captives').
Given only what work they could do ('only be required to perform what he can bear of work')
and even though sexual intercourse was allowed with them no where does it say it is allowed to be forced on them.
For such rights to be given to slaves back then would have been thought mad.(Remembering slavery was in america until 1865)

In any case this term 'those whom you own' is usually interpreted as referring to prisoners of war more so than slaves. You might say theres no difference but prisoners of war would be people who had taken up arms against followers of Islam and thus by their logic deserve some form of punishment.

Obviously today slavery is not acceptable and as I said before Islam can change with the times. Its the conservative people who attempt to stop it.

Muhammad was a nice slave master, isn't he lovely.


Sex was allowed with his slaves but it wasn't forced :rolleyes:

Wolfe Tone

Islam, like many/most religions is fundamentally sick and depraved and exists simply to control.


Sure wasnt Muhammad a pedophile?


Hopefully the woman will be ok.

Jaafa

Hazys wrote: »

Muhammad was a nice slave master, isn't he lovely.


Sex was allowed with his slaves but it wasn't forced :rolleyes:

Slaves were a fundamental part of many societies of the time. To expect humans to just give it up like that is foolish.

As for your second post I don't understand what you mean by it.

Wibbs

Wolfe Tone lets ease back on the sick/depraved/paedophile stuff please. Debate the points yea but the above sails a little close to the "don't be a dick" rule. Thanks

Hazys

Jaafa wrote: »

Slaves were a fundamental part of many societies of the time. To expect humans to just give it up like that is foolish.

As for your second post I don't understand what you mean by it.

Muhammad from my understanding was a messenger for God, doing God's work and spreading the muslim religion, etc. He had slaves at this time and thought it was ok to treat people like that (it doenst matter if he was nice to them or not he still owned other people).

The second part you said it was allowed for Muhammad to have sex with his slaves but it wasnt forced. C'mon seriously, do you think if the slaves had the opportunity or free will to say 'No' or did they all have Stockholm Syndrome?


So this guy is the main leader of your religion, he thought it was his right to own people and rape his slaves and Muslim people follow him, his life and his word as gospel...are you saying that this type of belief is not instilled in the Muslim religion a 1,000 years later?


Also, Muhammad did have a 6yr old wife.

Wibbs

Jaafa wrote: »

Slaves at the time were common.

So? This is not an argument if you're suggesting this plan was divine in nature.

and even though sexual intercourse was allowed with them no where does it say it is allowed to be forced on them.

Yes so there's no serious difference in power between a slave master and his slave? You really believe a slave woman, who had pretty much zero defence in law compared to a Muslim man was in a position to refuse sex? A woman who may have been taken in battle or a camel raid and knew or had even seen her husband killed by said Muslims. You're kidding right?

For such rights to be given to slaves back then would have been thought mad.(Remembering slavery was in america until 1865)

Untrue. Thinkers had grappled with the whole slavery issue long before Mohammad came along. Hell even in Ireland within a generation of St Patricks arrival slavery went from a given(The Irish were famed as slavers and pirates) to very very little. Nothing to do with Christianity directly as Jesus said nothing about slaves which was a bit remiss of him and there were still slave markets in Rome at that time. But patrick as an ex slave wasn't too happy about the practice.

You mention America and yes that was a serious blot on the "christian" west, but how much slavery was going on in Europe? How many save markets were there? That would be sod all. How many were in the "muslim" middle east? How many harems? How many slavers were raiding Europe for their human cargo. The south of Ireland suffered from a couple of raids. How big was the percentage of Islamic slave traders in Africa selling said slaves to the US? I'll give you a hint, it was high.

In any case this term 'those whom you own' is usually interpreted as referring to prisoners of war more so than slaves. You might say theres no difference but prisoners of war would be people who had taken up arms against followers of Islam and thus by their logic deserve some form of punishment.

Oh sure, their logic, what about this God you speak of? Surely they would be a bit morally against suggesting sexual exploitation of prisoners of war and slaves? Even previously married ones weren't an issue.

Sorry while most if not all faiths have had a well dubious record of inequality towards women in the past and today, Islam is certainly one of the more guilty of that and still is. You speak of conservatives? I agree, they are holding things back, but who has read more of the religious books and instructions? The average Muslim(or Hindu or Christian) or the scholar? Funny how it usually follows the more religious these guys get the more backward they become. This is why I rate faiths by their most devout adherents. Tells you a lot.

Wibbs

Hazys wrote: »

Also, Muhammad did have a 6yr old wife.

Not quite. She was 6 when she was betrothed to him, but 9 when married. Though some scholars consider her older than that. For me the younger age is as likely. After all the scholars who reported this in the generations after him didn't see it as unusual enough to comment upon.

Wolfe Tone

Wibbs wrote: »

Not quite. She was 6 when she was betrothed to him, but 9 when married. Though some scholars consider her older than that. For me the younger age is as likely. After all the scholars who reported this in the generations after him didn't see it as unusual enough to comment upon.

That is indeed what I was referring to, I admit I was too abrasive in my post, but the video had angered me, apologies!

Hazys

Wibbs wrote: »

Not quite. She was 6 when she was betrothed to him, but 9 when married. Though some scholars consider her older than that. For me the younger age is as likely. After all the scholars who reported this in the generations after him didn't see it as unusual enough to comment upon.

TBH it doesnt really matter what exact age she was 6, 9, 12, etc. The problem is the majority of people in the Muslim religion believe what was the norm 1000yrs ago (owning slaves/their women, marrying teens, etc) is still relevant in the modern day.

Table Top Joe

Some of the stuff here had me rolling my eyes and my blood boiling...but i see Wibbs has already addressed my problems with some of the posts here,very well put too


Where does respect for religion end and respect for women begin? therell never be true equality as long as religion has any power(pretty much any of them really)


The word of God can be changed by mere mortals when the times change eh? interesting concept......

Jaafa

es so there's no serious difference in power between a slave master and his slave? You really believe a slave woman, who had pretty much zero defence in law compared to a Muslim man was in a position to refuse sex? A woman who may have been taken in battle or a camel raid and knew or had even seen her husband killed by said Muslims. You're kidding right?
Untrue. Thinkers had grappled with the whole slavery issue long before Mohammad came along. Hell even in Ireland within a generation of St Patricks arrival slavery went from a given(The Irish were famed as slavers and pirates) to very very little. Nothing to do with Christianity directly as Jesus said nothing about slaves which was a bit remiss of him and there were still slave markets in Rome at that time. But patrick as an ex slave wasn't too happy about the practice.

I was simply saying that was and wasn't allowed was layed out. Whether this was obeyed or taken advantage of neither you nor I can even pretend to know for sure.

You mention America and yes that was a serious blot on the "christian" west, but how much slavery was going on in Europe? How many save markets were there? That would be sod all. How many were in the "muslim" middle east? How many harems? How many slavers were raiding Europe for their human cargo. The south of Ireland suffered from a couple of raids. How big was the percentage of Islamic slave traders in Africa selling said slaves to the US? I'll give you a hint, it was high.

I mentioned America just as an example of how long slavery takes to be abolished and I think its naive to think it would just disappear when Islam came in. (By 1970 I believe it was gone legally in all mid east counties) I'm not justifying it here nor there.

Oh sure, their logic, what about this God you speak of? Surely they would be a bit morally against suggesting sexual exploitation of prisoners of war and slaves? Even previously married ones weren't an issue.

Certainly. I think I gave my opinion on this above. I'll clarify if you like?

Sorry while most if not all faiths have had a well dubious record of inequality towards women in the past and today, Islam is certainly one of the more guilty of that and still is. You speak of conservatives? I agree, they are holding things back, but who has read more of the religious books and instructions? The average Muslim(or Hindu or Christian) or the scholar? Funny how it usually follows the more religious these guys get the more backward they become. This is why I rate faiths by their most devout adherents. Tells you a lot.

You say all faiths but I think women were thought of as 'inferior' before any organized religion came along. I agree women are taken advantage of and with religion (including Islam) being the excuse. It is my belief that these people are in the minority (I understand that a minority in 1.2 billion people is still a lot). If you have proof to the contrary I'll certainly take that into account. I can't and wont justify these people. In my opinion they are not true muslims.

I like to think I'm a good muslim. I treat women with as much respect as any man. I'm against slavery. I'm for womens freedoms. What others do in the name of Islam I can't justify and I can't speak for them. You see my faith as flawed,I see peoples interpretation of it as flawed.

PeakOutput

Fair play to her she seems to understand exactly the problems that people from the west have with what they perceive to be islam and is trying her best to show this is not always the case

the pakistani language is awfull to listen to though

opinion guy

irishconvert wrote: »

Complete nonsense. Back it up or retract it.

Ok hold up here. I see you are a mod of the Islam forum. And your sole input into this thread is this ? Spoken with authority which you do not have here since you are NOT a mod of the ladies lounge.

As a moderator of the Islam forum I ask you - what do YOU think of this woman in the video ? What is YOUR response and reaction to the points she made ? What is YOUR response to apparent hypocrisy of the cleric in the video ?

Do you not think this woman is brave and to be commended ?

Wibbs

PeakOutput wrote: »

the pakistani language is awfull to listen to though

Which one? Urdu? Pashto? Kashmiri? Punjabi? There are a few. It sounds like Urdu to me. Kashmiri sounds nicer.

Jaafa wrote: »

I was simply saying that was and wasn't allowed was layed out. Whether this was obeyed or taken advantage of neither you nor I can even pretend to know for sure.

Well what was allowed was the capture of women, married or not as slaves/war booty. Women that could be married off or kept as slaves with sexual access. In that framework, which do you think is more likely? Right moral thinking or not? Not very well planned out either way.

I mentioned America just as an example of how long slavery takes to be abolished and I think its naive to think it would just disappear when Islam came in. (By 1970 I believe it was gone legally in all mid east counties) I'm not justifying it here nor there.

Like I said in this small backwater at the edge of Europe it dwindled to very little within one or two generations.

You say all faiths but I think women were thought of as 'inferior' before any organized religion came along.

Not really. In most pre farming societies women and female deities are treated as equal. Even after that there are enough examples of more equitable faiths.

I like to think I'm a good muslim. I treat women with as much respect as any man. I'm against slavery. I'm for womens freedoms. What others do in the name of Islam I can't justify and I can't speak for them. You see my faith as flawed,I see peoples interpretation of it as flawed.

And that's very good to read and for the future of your faith. I've always had more faith in people than faiths anyway.

pickarooney

Wibbs wrote: »

Thinkers had grappled with the whole slavery issue long before Mohammad came along. Hell even in Ireland within a generation of St Patricks arrival slavery went from a given(The Irish were famed as slavers and pirates) to very very little. Nothing to do with Christianity directly as Jesus said nothing about slaves which was a bit remiss of him and there were still slave markets in Rome at that time. But patrick as an ex slave wasn't too happy about the practice.

Around the turn of the Millennium, Dublin had the largest slave market in Europe. Granted, the tables had turned a bit and the locals were pitcher turned catcher but the Norse settlers are part of our shared history.

irishconvert

opinion guy wrote: »

Ok hold up here. I see you are a mod of the Islam forum. And your sole input into this thread is this ? Spoken with authority which you do not have here since you are NOT a mod of the ladies lounge.

What's with the bad attitude?

opinion guy wrote: »

As a moderator of the Islam forum I ask you - what do YOU think of this woman in the video ? What is YOUR response and reaction to the points she made ? What is YOUR response to apparent hypocrisy of the cleric in the video ?

Do you not think this woman is brave and to be commended ?

First of all I would not trust this video which has been highly edited and more than likely incorrectly translated by MEMRI, read about them here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East_Media_Research_Institute#Translation_inaccuracy

Secondly I don't know what she is supposed to have done in the Big Brother show so I can't comment on it.

If you have more direct questions fire away and I'll do my best to answer.

metrovelvet

I dont see this as just an Islam issue, but this woman was obviously attacked, betrayed and shamed by her own people. Community is not always a good idea.

Wibbs

pickarooney wrote: »

Around the turn of the Millennium, Dublin had the largest slave market in Europe. Granted, the tables had turned a bit and the locals were pitcher turned catcher but the Norse settlers are part of our shared history.

Oh agreed. I just used the example of how fast a social concept can be overturned. And without divine intervention.

opinion guy

irishconvert wrote: »

What's with the bad attitude?

Oh I wouldn't call it a bad attitude. I just don't like it when someone choses to ignore the major issues at hand and chooses instead to focus on one small issue that noone was paying attention to in order to distract from the main issues.

First of all I would not trust this video which has been highly edited and more than likely incorrectly translated by MEMRI, read about them here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East_Media_Research_Institute#Translation_inaccuracy

Secondly I don't know what she is supposed to have done in the Big Brother show so I can't comment on it.

If you have more direct questions fire away and I'll do my best to answer.

Through the magic of google basically I have discovered that what she did was - hugged some guy, gave the guy a head massage (called sexy but didnt' look sexy to me), and kissed said guy on a cheek - each thing on separate occasions.
Some videos here:
http://www.thecurrentaffairs.com/veena-malik-sexy-massage-ashmit-patel-big-boss-4.html


I agree with you the editing is a bit much. But in the video the cleric clearly admits he has not even watched the show. Do you think it is appropriate for a supposed learned cleric to cast judgement on someone in public based entirely on heresay ? And perhaps you can clarify this one - if he is a cleric do the Islamic rules say he should not gaze upon a woman more then once ?

metrovelvet

opinion guy wrote: »

Oh I wouldn't call it a bad attitude. I just don't like it when someone choses to ignore the major issues at hand and chooses instead to focus on one small issue that noone was paying attention to in order to distract from the main issues.




Through the magic of google basically I have discovered that what she did was - hugged some guy, gave the guy a head massage (called sexy but didnt' look sexy to me), and kissed said guy on a cheek - each thing on separate occasions.
Some videos here:
http://www.thecurrentaffairs.com/veena-malik-sexy-massage-ashmit-patel-big-boss-4.html


I agree with you the editing is a bit much. But in the video the cleric clearly admits he has not even watched the show. Do you think it is appropriate for a supposed learned cleric to cast judgement on someone in public based entirely on heresay ? And perhaps you can clarify this one - if he is a cleric do the Islamic rules say he should not gaze upon a woman more then once ?

Thats a really big bad thing for them, the touching. [I often wondered how this works in a medical context.]

irishconvert

opinion guy wrote: »

Oh I wouldn't call it a bad attitude. I just don't like it when someone choses to ignore the major issues at hand and chooses instead to focus on one small issue that noone was paying attention to in order to distract from the main issues.

Sounds ike bad attitude to me, and rude & confrontational on top of it. There is nothing wrong with being polite to someone, even if you don't like their religion.

opinion guy wrote: »

Through the magic of google basically I have discovered that what she did was - hugged some guy, gave the guy a head massage (called sexy but didnt' look sexy to me), and kissed said guy on a cheek - each thing on separate occasions.
Some videos here:
http://www.thecurrentaffairs.com/veena-malik-sexy-massage-ashmit-patel-big-boss-4.html


I agree with you the editing is a bit much. But in the video the cleric clearly admits he has not even watched the show. Do you think it is appropriate for a supposed learned cleric to cast judgement on someone in public based entirely on heresay ?

I agree, nobody, including the cleric, should cast a judgement on anyone based on hearsay.

opinion guy wrote: »

And perhaps you can clarify this one - if he is a cleric do the Islamic rules say he should not gaze upon a woman more then once ?

Islamic rules say any man should not gaze at a women (other than his wife) for any length of time. You are supposed to "lower your gaze". However this rule refers to lustfully staring at women, it is not supposed to mean you don't look at a woman if you are having a conversation with her.

pickarooney

It never ceases to amaze/depress/confuse me the way religious people will do anything to applly dogma literally to others and twist, wriggle, weasel and reinterpret everything to suit their own agenda when the tables are turned. Doesn't that **** get really tiring really quickly?

Why not use your obvious ability to interpret the world to experience it as a free-thinking individual instead of endlessly hammering square-peg issues into anachronistic, round-hole ideaologies? Christ, you all sound so petty and miserable with your do this/don't do that/god says/it is written/will of the creator palaver.

opinion guy

irishconvert wrote: »

Sounds ike bad attitude to me, and rude & confrontational on top of it. There is nothing wrong with being polite to someone, even if you don't like their religion.

You'll have to take my word for it then - this is not me with an attitude problem, nor being rude.

I agree, nobody, including the cleric, should cast a judgement on anyone based on hearsay.


Islamic rules say any man should not gaze at a women (other than his wife) for any length of time. You are supposed to "lower your gaze". However this rule refers to lustfully staring at women, it is not supposed to mean you don't look at a woman if you are having a conversation with her.

OK but who is to say when looking is lustful or not ?

And you still haven't commented on her alledged crimes.

metrovelvet

opinion guy wrote: »

You'll have to take my word for it then - this is not me with an attitude problem, nor being rude.



OK but who is to say when looking is lustful or not ?

And you still haven't commented on her alledged crimes.

Her crimes were touching. That is a BIG deal for Muslims. They are not allowed to touch women at all before marriage, even if giving change in a shop.

opinion guy

metrovelvet wrote: »

Her crimes were touching. That is a BIG deal for Muslims. They are not allowed to touch women at all before marriage, even if giving change in a shop.

Thank you metrovelvet, I heard you the first time.

I am looking for irishconverts opinion on her "crimes"

irishconvert

opinion guy wrote: »

You'll have to take my word for it then - this is not me with an attitude problem, nor being rude.

Ok, I'll take your word for it.

opinion guy wrote: »

OK but who is to say when looking is lustful or not ?

The person doing the looking I would imagine is the best judge of this.

opinion guy wrote: »

And you still haven't commented on her alledged crimes.

That's because you didn't ask me.

But if you are asking me, I didn't watch the video so I can only rely on hearsay. Do you want me to comment on hearsay?

metrovelvet

What exactly are you commenting on then?

Dont you think you should watch the videos so you know what people are talking about?

opinion guy

irishconvert wrote: »

Ok, I'll take your word for it.


The person doing the looking I would imagine is the best judge of this.


That's because you didn't ask me.

But if you are asking me, I didn't watch the video so I can only rely on hearsay. Do you want me to comment on hearsay?

Maybe you missed this:

opinion guy wrote: »

Ok hold up here. I see you are a mod of the Islam forum. And your sole input into this thread is this ? Spoken with authority which you do not have here since you are NOT a mod of the ladies lounge.

As a moderator of the Islam forum I ask you - what do YOU think of this woman in the video ? What is YOUR response and reaction to the points she made ? What is YOUR response to apparent hypocrisy of the cleric in the video ?

Do you not think this woman is brave and to be commended ?

Or are you being deliberately evasive because you fear your honest opinion on this will be attacked if you post it ? Where is your courage in your convictions ?

irishconvert

metrovelvet wrote: »

What exactly are you commenting on then?

Dont you think you should watch the videos so you know what people are talking about?

My original comment was in response to a poster which said the Qur'an allows rape. I said this is nonsense. I didn't comment on the video, opinion guy began questioning me about it.

opinion guy wrote: »

Maybe you missed this:



Or are you being deliberately evasive because you fear your honest opinion on this will be attacked if you post it ? Where is your courage in your convictions ?

I will not comment on a video which has been edited by a company run by an ex-Israeli Intelligence Agent, a company which has a reputation for inaccurate translation to suit their agenda. I don't trust the video, it is obviously highly edited, and I don't trust the translation. Therefore I will not comment on it.

Now if you want to ask me a direct question (e.g. Are Muslim women allowed to touch men they are not married to), I will answer it. What exactly do you want to ask me? I can see you are trying to lead me in to some kind of trap. Just be up front and ask what you really want to know and I will answer you.