1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Yup, really... Plato

Reader comment on item: A Democratic Islam?
in response to reader comment: Taj: Not really? Really?

Submitted by Taj (United States), Jun 1, 2008 at 19:43

Plato:

Would I be wrong in assuming that the Koran is the touchstone for the constitutions of true Muslim countries? All sharia laws have to be Koran-compliant. Muslims in Hindu majority India want sharia laws, Muslims in the UK want sharia laws there and other countries with a respectable number of Muslims. So in a Muslim majority country no government will survive that does not rule or at least claim to rule by sharia.

First, you'd have to define "true Muslim countries". Second, there are at least 16 Muslim majority countries that have secular governments that are surviving just fine...

She is subservient to her her father, brother, son. The last sermon makes clear what degree Muslim women have: a man's prisoner or an animal. (Ibn Ishaq, Tabari. You can of course throw suspicion on their reports).

Where did you get that from, lol? And what if she has no father, brother, or son? As a matter of fact, a woman is certainly never subservient to a brother and especially son. I am not sure what last sermon you read but the one that Muhammad gave states that women have rights over their husbands, are to be treated kind, and are their husbands' partners:

O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives only under Allah's trust and with His permission. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers.

If the degree is only referring to responsibility in contributing to supporting the household then why are two women required to witness a deed or why do they inherit only half what their brothers get (Oh I forgot she has no responsibility to support the household. But what if she wants to and is capable of it as millions of women have proved?)

Two women are not required to witness a "deed". They are required to witness a written contract that allows for future payment over a specific time. Two women are required so that if the contract is disputed the women are supports to each other as witnesses. Prior to this verse, women were not allowed to witness any contracts. The double witness injunction protects them from sexist blame during any future dispute.

Additonally, the inheritance rules were actually a reform, giving women inheritance when before they had no such rights. The seemingly disparate allotment pertains to the fact that women had the new right to keep and dispose of her wealth as she so chose whereas men had to use theirs in support of the household. If a woman choose to contribute, she does so at her own whim and volition.

Since you seem to want to quibble about sentence construction and their INTENDED meaning even in such hastily written posts

My posts aren't hastily written, nor am I quibbling. You asserted I said something which I did not, so I merely and obviously needed to correct your assertion.

Just an affirmative statement. Nothing to support it? Anyway it they are not democratic practices what are they? Islamic? (I know, you did not say so)

Indeed it was affimative...I would not call them "democratic practices" since they are extant sans democracies in many instances, as well as absent at times within various "democratic" examples...

So in fact did they or did they not?

This is not a matter of fact, but one of opinion - thusly , in my opinion, these practices have not petered out.

And pure Islamic logic. Nothing Allah gives is weak. People are weak. But you clean forgot that humans have been given the faculty of thinking, emotions etc by Allah (were you referring to physical weakness by any chance?). So Allah made people weak.

Please note that "made" and "give" are 2 different terms with 2 different meanings...

Regards

Taj

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Yup, really... Plato by Taj

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)