Qur'an 4:34, the verse in which Allah green-lights beating one's wife, has far-reaching consequences in letter and spirit. It makes the Muslim family a microcosm of the Qur'anic deity's ordering of the universe and society, where submission is paramount, and the one who feels entitled to be in charge -- whether Muhammad's deity or the man of the house -- can do as he pleases, and is free to resort to brutality to ensure submission... while demanding to be called compassionate and merciful, of course. To do otherwise might hurt his feelings, and the rage that ensues would be your fault, naturally.
Thus, even in an ostensibly secular Muslim society, the idea that it is okay to beat your wife persists. And there is only one way it can be passed off as "culture": recognizing that the culture is informed and suffused with the priorities, issues and hangups of Muhammad's own culture (and of Muhammad himself), which upholding him as a prophet make sacrosanct.
"Domestic abuse still a taboo in Turkey," by Ivan Watson and Yesim Comert for CNN, July 30:
...Video footage filmed in September of 2009 shows Sidika outside of the hospital in the provincial capital of Van. Her face was horribly bruised; her head encased in bandages. Part of Sidika's right ear had been sliced off. The woman could barely walk and leaned on her brother for support, as she hobbled a few short steps into the hospital.
After the incident, Turkish authorities separated Sidika Platin and her children from her husband and placed them in a state-run women's shelter. But barely two months later, a local criminal court asked that Sidika and her children be handed back to Faruk Platin. He had not served any jail time for beating his wife.
"At that time, because he showed regret and because his [criminal] record was clean, his sentence was postponed," said Meral Demirbas, the governor of Saray district where Kapikoy is located.
"Also, the wife withdrew her complaint."
Sidika Platin is an ethnic Kurd who speaks no Turkish. According to eyewitnesses, when she appeared in court, she could not understand the judge or prosecutor, and relied on her husband to translate legal proceedings.
On a snowy day last December, local women's rights activists like Hamide Yeni could do little more then watch helplessly, as Faruk Platin led his mutilated wife away from the courtyard, back to the village where they lived.
"This kind of thing happens in every village," says Yeni, one of the founders of a grassroots local family protection association in the Saray district of southeastern Turkey. "There are thousands of women like Sidika out here."
In fact, according to a 2009 Turkish government report, 42 percent of women surveyed said they had been the victims of either physical or sexual abuse by their husband or partner. The report concluded that one in four married Turkish women had been injured by partner violence. Meanwhile, one in 10 Turkish women were injured by such violence while pregnant.
Some Turkish activists fear the real statistics for violence against women may actually be much higher.
"In all domestic surveys there are 'shadow figures.' That is because women are not willing to tell about the violence, it's a very sensitive issue," says Pinar Ilkkaracan, a co-founder of the Istanbul-based group Women for Women's Human Rights.
"We think it's much higher then 42 percent."
Domestic violence against women is not confined to economically-depressed, rural regions of eastern Turkey. According to the Turkish government survey, the statistics for physical and sexual assault were roughly the same in the countryside as in the most developed, fast-growing cities in the western part of the country.
Over the past 15 years, Turkey has adopted several progressive pieces of legislation to protect women, including a 1998 Protection Order against Domestic Violence. Reform of Turkey's Civil Code in 2001 gave women legal equal status to men in the family.
Meanwhile, changes to the country's Penal Code in 2004 criminalized marital rape. But critics argue that the Turkish state has lapsed far behind in implementing these laws....
The Islamic fetish and cult of hypermasculinity makes Muslims utterly incompatible with civilised society.
Uh, and just where are all the Wimmens Rights advocates in the West whilst all this is happening ? Probably trying on thier Burquas so that they can feel the love.
What else can be expected in a society brutalised by an Islamic belief that states unambiguously that it's OK for men to beat their wives?
I = Intolerant
S = Sadistic
L = Luddite
A = Amoral
M = Misogynist
"Domestic abuse" is far too mild a term for what seems to have been torture and extreme brutality. But by neatly slotting this attack into the category of "domestic" we whitewash it.
The victim needed the translation services of her attacker in order to understand the court proceedings? This is called justice?
As I said on another thread I think this focus on domestic abuse is a mistake. Is Robert saying that domestic violence in neighbouring Christian Russia doesn't reach these sorts of levels? Is that what he's saying? Because such claims would have to be scrutinised.
Islam is not objectionable to us because it encourages, or allows, domestic abuse (which it does) - it is objectionable because it has designs on our freedom.
Twenty years ago, it was a rare occasion if you ever heard anyone mention let alone discuss Islam. That was because it was then seen as irrelevant to our lives. Now, people understand if not in a very clear way that this ideology, which dominates the lives of over a billion people on this planet is very relevant to their lives.
Ayse Onal´s "Honour Killing, Stories of men who killed"
http://www.amazon.com/Honour-Killing-Stories-Men-Killed/dp/0863566170/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1280596711&sr=8-2-fkmr0
is a sad and terrible book. It also tells us about the lives of women kept in bondage by tradition and religion in a half medieval society.
@ notoshariah
You say that "I think this focus on domestic abuse is a mistake." Then you add, "Islam is not objectionable to us because it encourages, or allows, domestic abuse (which it does) - it is objectionable because it has designs on our freedom."
Yes, "our freedom" also extends to women. The point of the article is that Islam encourages this kind of abuse because of the way it considers women to be like a man's field, and a man can 'go upon' his field any time he likes.
Abuse of women in other societies is also reprehensible, but is not predicated on a 7th. Century Total Belief System, which Islam is.
In terms of abuse of women, you are not comparing like with like.
'Over the past 15 years, Turkey has adopted several progressive pieces of legislation to protect women, including a 1998 Protection Order against Domestic Violence. Reform of Turkey's Civil Code in 2001 gave women legal equal status to men in the family.'
And now with Erdogan in place, with other hardline islamists, these on-paper-only laws will also be repealed. Then the situation will be even worse for women.
"Domestic violence against women is not confined to economically-depressed, rural regions of eastern Turkey."
No it's not. It's all over the islamic world.
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/05/acid-attacks.html
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/07/oppression.html
Yesterday you told us that British NHS coverage of hymen re-construction wasn't the problem. Today...
-------------
"Is Robert saying that domestic violence in neighbouring Christian Russia doesn't reach these sorts of levels?"
----------
Do Christian Scriptures teach violence, subjugation, and second-class treatment of women? Does the Bible refer to women as tilth?
Your equivocation is nothing more rationalizing this barbarism. Marisol, by the way, posted the story and it doesn't appear to be a comparison of religiously sanctioned misogeny.
The violence is a symptom; Islam is the problem.
And yet we have people like this in the media
Florida – Burning the KORAN in protest to ISLAMIC sharia and jihad – CNN’s Rick Sanchez interviews Dove World Outreach Center’s Pastor Terry Jones – can’t understand why ANYONE would want to stand against ISLAM and Jihad
http://txlady706.wordpress.com/2010/07/31/florida-burning-the-koran-in-protest-to-islamic-sharia-and-jihad-cnns-rick-sanchez-interviews-dove-world-outreach-centers-pastor-terry-jones-cant-understand-why-anyone-would-want-to-stand/
Apologies to Robert - hadn't realised it was Marisol's post, but Robert does post a lot on domestic violence.
I think this is a bit of a mote in the eye situation, given the extent to which alcohol use in western societies is associated with violent abuse in the home. Islam most definitely can claim to oppose alcohol.
You see I feel if we get into this argument, this is where we go...we start looking at domestic violence and we see there is a strong connection with alcohol and before you know it we will see the freedom to drink alcohol being withdrawn from us (and we already see a lot of followers of Islam behind anti-alcohol initiatives in the West).
I think Medina is misrepresenting what I said about hymen reconstruction surgery. In fact I supported exposure of that...I merely pointed out there were a series of Islam-related health issues which are kept hidden by the mainstream media: I mentioned injuries to children from sword beating ceremonies, horrendous genetic diseases resulting from inter-cousin marriage traditions associated with Islam, and the huge number of self-harm incidents associated with pressure on young girls to marry partners they don't wish to marry.
But the main focus should be the totalitarian nature of Islam: and the consequent assault on our freedoms, the undermining of our law-based societies and the terrorist threat.
In Turkey, 23.5% of females are illiterate and, according to In the 2004 report “Turkey: Women Confronting Family Violence,” Amnesty International cited a study by the Purple Roof Foundation, which found that 88.2 percent of surveyed women were living in violent situations, and 68 percent had been beaten by their husbands.
In another example, The International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights cited a study by the General Directorate of Women’s Status and Problems, which found that 97% of women experience both physical and psychological abuse by partners and relatives.
And yet this is the country that the European Commission, Barack Obama, Tony Blair and many others believe should be admitted into the European Union. They are clearly unable to see beyond their cheap-labour tinted glasses.
It seems that there is a gap between the law and culture, proving the maxim once again that civilization cannot be legislated. And once Islam has predominated for a while, civilization is difficult to restore.
But the main focus should be the totalitarian nature of Islam: and the consequent assault on our freedoms, the undermining of our law-based societies and the terrorist threat.
-------------
I agree. The source of it all is following the Quran and life of Muhammed. It supersedes all earthly laws.
jewdog-
Don't you see a gap in the Quran: "no compulsion in religion" yet "if a man changes his Muslims faith, kill him?"
If there were truly a gap between the cultural practices and laws, the husband above would have been prosecuted, not let go. This is the summary punishment worlwide for Islamic terror. The culture is the law.
Txlady706, I just looked at the Rick Sanchez; it's hard to believe that the networks actually pay salaries (and probably pretty generous ones) to idiots like him. I believe it's the first time I've seen him -- I haven't watched TV news in decades -- and now, having seen him, I hope it's the last.
Excellent post, Buraq.
Islamically-sanctioned "domestic violence"—including the horror of honor killings—are a growing issue in the West. At issue in the West, as well, is the growing pressure to impose Shri'ah law—often the caveat is made that it will only apply, at first, at any rate—to "domestic issues". One aspect of this is the ipso facto sanctioning of wife beating, as women are pressure to drop charges.
notoshariah, I believe you are wrong in seeing no link between the sanctioning of 'domestic abuse' and the threats to our freedom. Women, children, Infidels, and "apostates" all suffer under Islamically-sanctioned violence.
All of us fall under one category or another here...
Wife breating is also done by christian man in the west. I remember many time my drunk father who was than good church going christian breat my mother. At time the police was told by highter up to not arrest the man but to stop him from breating up his wife.
DOI,
A. Christian men get thrown in jail these days for wife
beating
B. Christianity does not sanction wife beating
C. The US is not ruled by any one religions specific
religous laws
D. Muslim men site wife beating as their right per the
Koran thereby indicating it (the koran) encourages
them to abuse their wives.
E. I personally do not believe you had Christian father.
F. I actually am a Christian & if my spouse were to beat
me my pastor would counsel him and try to help him
understand how wrong it is and help him get counseling.
G. Your just full of it aren't you?
btw, DefenderofIslam...Islam is indefensible
"Domestic abuse still a taboo in Turkey"
...................
If only this were literally true...
"According to the Turkish government survey, the statistics for physical and sexual assault were roughly the same in the countryside as in the most developed, fast-growing cities in the western part of the country."
coincendently ....Islam is the major religion in both settings..
ebonystone:
It's amazing that these western men think that this Religion is somehow equal to any other religion. This is Sharia. This is Islam. There is no separation. Abuse of women is not only sanctioned it is required. I posted that on my blog,then I saw this and I just kept thinking to myself, "how can this guy sit there and defend Islam. Doesn't he know? Doesn't he care? Because how could he not know by now? " What would be GREAT is if we got together and created TV advertisements that would warn people about what is actually in the Q'RAN. Also, if SIOA could take out a TV add that would come on after that, so as to give Muslims a chance to find refuge if people were trying to escape. It's sad that in AMERICA we are afraid to talk in public about this tragedy that is happening on our own soil. How far America has fallen. And watching this man, one can see the brainwashed and propogandized sad little man (well - shell of a man)
DefenderofIslam, here's the difference.
Qur'an 4:34 instructs a man under what circumstances he can beat his wife (i.e., only if she has disobeyed him, and he must try reasoning with her before he beats). In the ahadith, however, Mohammed states that a man must never be asked why he has beaten his wife; so if he disobeys the Qur'an's limitations, there is no penalty. It is never suggested that a Muslim man should never beat his wife, even though Ayesha once requested Mohammed to announce such a revelation.
So a man who beats his wife may be obeying the Qur'an. But if he is disobeying, the abused wife is not allowed any court of appeal.
I Timothy 3:3 states that a Christian should not hit anyone, since hitting is a sign of serious immaturity. From the context (you really need to read all of vv 1-12), this verse refers specifically to not hitting children or slaves, but it applies also to not hitting a wife. A Christian who strikes his wife should, after three warnings and offers of help, be thrown out of the Church.
So a man who beats his wife is disobeying the Bible. Yes, of course wife-beating sometimes happens among Christians. It happens among disobedient Christians.
notsoshariah, are you implying that the private lives of Muslims in Muslim countries are not the business of the rest of us? I disagree. Muslim women and children have the same human rights as any other person in the world. In practice, it is extremely difficult to help them whiles they are under Islamic rule (or even under Islamic culture in a Western democracy). That does not alter their basic right as human beings not to be abused in their own homes. These atrocities are the concern of us all.
"As David Cameron calls for Turkey to join the EU, PETER HITCHENS on the disturbing picture of growing repression at the heart of 'Eurabia'"
By Peter Hitchens In Istanbul.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1299213/Peter-Hitchens-disturbing-picture-growing-repression-heart-Eurabia.html#ixzz0vL6siYrL
Peter Hitchens is one of the few in Britain who understands islam.
Islam responds to tolerance by demanding more.
It responds to retreat by advancing.
It is wisely cautious when weak, ferocious when strong.
It recognises no equals and makes no compromises.
In Holland now, as in US, UK, France and other Democratic states, domestic violence is addressed vigorously.
Civil servants of health services, police now are allowed to intervene behind the front door, to demand perpetrators out of the house for 10 days or more, and demand prosecution and treatment of them. Even in the absence of an indictment of their spouses now!
But among the experts and employees in the Health Service and Police are persons of Turkish and Moroccan descent. By their headscarves some of them are easily recognizable as Muslima's. But others may still be that, even if they don't wear the headscarves. It's to me still a riddle what their position is; presumably that "Islam does not condone violence" or something.
I feel there is a lack of insight of real Islamic influence among the Dutch authorities. Or a lack of demand of real, thoroughly outspoken and acted upon, division among Muslims who condemn domestic violence as really cultural and non-Islamic and those who still practice or condone it.
Also I like the effect of publicity about Domestic violence among Muslims worldwide to be thus that women think very, very hard before they just like that marry Muslims.
Would you support banning Sharia law in the US and Europe?
Thanks for the statistics which, I believe, is a major key to revealing the truth about Islam. Muslims are not swayed by such evidence -- muslims are not swayed by anything but Islam -- but readers who are new to the truth Robert spreads about Islam are swayed. And they get to see muslims lie and obfuscate in their effort to discredit the stats. I will use your stats elsewhere, as I hope others do as well. Thanks, again.
Faye Sullivan you are so brainwatch too to think that Christian didnot allow wife breating too. My fater was than Christian who regurater breat my mother when he was drunk he have split personality. He was able to past lie dector test as they never gave him one while he was drunk and it they did it wouldnot be allow in court as evidence. I never breat than woman or than wife in my life. Many muslim in america donot breat they wife as they donot believe that Islam doesnot support in wife breating. So unless very christian in the world act like perfect christian then they have no right to critize any other religions in the world.Than christian man cause touble by falsely calling the police that than muslim man was breating his wife. The DA and the police have to say they where sorry for they action.
Before quoting the Bible, you should first make sure your quote is relevant to the matter at hand. 1 Timothy 3:3 has nothing to do with the current matter. It is all regarding the way an overseer of the church should be chosen. Also, I have no idea what translation you're using, but it's way off. Timothy is divided into sections, the first being about an overseer, the next being about a deacon. There are translations from the Catholic, NIV, King James Version of the Bible, both widely used. The King James version being a little closer to the Catholic version, since less was changed (as long as you ignore the fact that they left out quite a few books entirely 0.o)
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=1Ti&c=3&t=NIV
Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=1Ti&c=3
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
http://www.newadvent.org/bible/1ti001.htm#vrs2
A faithful saying: If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desires good work. 2 It behoves therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behaviour, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher, 3 not given to wine, no striker, but modest, not quarrelsome, not covetous, but 4 one that rules well his own house, having his children in subjection with all chastity.
Now, for the rest of this I'm merely going to quote the Catholic Bible, from New Advent (awesome site, includes Greek and Latin), since that is the Bible I am most familiar with. You are welcome to do your own research with your translations as you see fit, but they really should closely resemble each other, as do the KJV and NIV.
Ephesians 5:22-33 as a whole could be used here instead. It speaks of the way a husband and wife should treat each other.
http://www.newadvent.org/bible/eph005.htm
Or there's always the trusty "Love is patient, love is kind"
of Corinthians 13:4
So you see, there *are* good Bible verses you could have used. Unfortunately, 1 Timothy 3:3 is not one of them. Please google to verify your information before posting it, lest you make other Christians look bad.
As for the Qur'an, you actually have your facts more or less straight. It seems to me, from where I sit, that you assume you know your Bible, but because you are less familiar with the Qur'an, you took the time to look up the particular verse in question, making sure you got it right. Next time, check your work in all cases, and you really will have done a pretty good job in quoting religion against religion.
If I were to do such a thing, I think my favorite verses would be John 8:1-11. Just sayin'. ;-)
The difference is that Islam codified in Sharia law makes domestic violence "legal." And, the reason we haven't heard about it as much before is that it is a "crime" punishable by death under Sharia law to question or insult Islam or Muhammad, including Muslim male supremacy inherent in Islam. The only reason we are hearing more about it now is because the global jihad is very active, and global communications are allowing worldwide comparisons. We are getting more of the whole picture and many are trying to understand the whole picture, hopefully before it is too late and global jihad has conquered where Hitler failed.
Mary - I am arguing about what is the most effective way to prevent the victory of Islam. I am certain that one of the least effective ways is to accuse it of encouraging domestic violence when there is an horrendous problem with alcohol-related domestic violence in non-Islamic communities.
Shariah law does not, as far as I know, sanction honour killing. Although, clearly honour killing does reflect Islamic values (second class status of women).
We should remember that as little as 25 years ago Western societies permitted rape within marriage and many had laws against adultery.
If Islam was simply a conservative social movement that had bad outcomes on domestic violence it wouldn't matter that much. But it is much more than that, as you clearly understand. It has global ambitions and a totalitarian credo, that looks to subjugate non-Muslims across the planet.
I think the focus should be on the totalitarian ideology, not domestic violence.
ClepereDelse, I was using Marshall's Interlinear Bible. The phrase that your translations have rendered as "not violent" is "me plekten" (literally "not a hitter") in the Greek.
Yes, the context is about how to select church leaders. One necessary quality is "didaktikon" ("a good teacher"). ALL of the rest, including "me plekten", are moral qualities. They are required of Christian leaders because they are required of all mature Christians.
I suppose you could make a case that there are different rules for "immature Christians", but that argument doesn't wash with me. Nobody should aspire to be an immature Christian. It's simply a list of qualities that all Christians should have acquired after a time, again, with the possible exception of didaktikon.
I don't know why this passage is so often overlooked in teachings against domestic violence. It could be that it's easy to overlook one word in the middle of a long list. (Another example is in 1:10 of the same epistle, where "andrapodistais" ("kidnappers") are among the mega-sinners being condemned. You can easily overlook it, and therefore assume that St Paul never spoke against slave-trading.) It could also be that some Christians condemn wife-beating but wish to reserve the right to strike their children (not common in my community, but I've heard of such things happening in America), therefore this passage makes them uncomfortable.
However, the qualities of the mature Christian also include "ruling his own household well, with obedient and respectful children. If a person who doesn't know how to rule his own household, how will he look after God's congregation?" This clearly suggests that a mature Christian can manage his household without hitting his family (among other qualities), otherwise he wouldn't be able to manage a church without hitting the congregation.
No, this passage does not specifically mention wife-beating. But I don't think it's a huge stretch to say that if you're
"not a hitter" in general, then you don't hit your wife either.
I agree any sensible person could use Ephesians 5:21ff or I Corinthians 13 to make the same point. But there are always going to be silly people who claim that if you love your wife and give yourself up for her, then you'll be willing to beat her for her own good, and that a "gentle" person is one who only beats with a good reason. So I thought I'd pick the passage that specifically condemns hitting. If you know of another, by all means cite that one too.
DOI
You idiot my post clearly states that wife beating is not sanctioned in the bible and it is in the Qu'ran. I did not say that no Christians did it. Just that they are going against the word of God when they do. Muslims are doing just what the Quran tells them to when they beat their wives. You calling me brainwashed is comical.
Additionally your first post tried to make it look as though the police came when your father beat your mother and just left because they did not deem it important. This last post you seem to indicate they tried to do something but were not successful as your father had a split personality. Your father beat your mother and drank because he was nuts not because he was a Christian.
Conclusion:
Christianity tells men NOT to beat their wives.
Islam tells men TO beat their wives.
Learn to spell because your posts are hard to decipher!
btw defenderofislam......islam is indefensible.
notoshariah wrote:
Shariah law does not, as far as I know, sanction honour killing. Although, clearly honour killing does reflect Islamic values (second class status of women).
..........................
Consider this:
A manual of Islamic law certified by Al-Azhar as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy says that "retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right." However, "not subject to retaliation" is "a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring." ('Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2).
...
This does indeed sanction honor killing in a vast number of cases.
Let's not attack anyone, but educate. Anger expression causes further affliction. Having lived here for nine months now, I understand how passionate yet frustrated Turkish people can be, with their lives. Social-economic situation is very complex - think health economics, including mental and emotional health. They have so much love, but they don't know how to love. Touch one person at a time, with all your heart, if you're called to. Gear yourself with true strength.
>
The Excellence of Love