MovieChat Forums > Harvey Weinstein Discussion > How the teachings of Islam could help us...

How the teachings of Islam could help us prevent more sexual abuse scandals

posted 7 years ago by Satan2016 (23345)
10 replies | jump to latest

The Independent and the Guardian compete for the "Fake News" awards.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/harvey-weinstein-islam-sexual-assault-rape-womens-rights-a8001521.html

Thus, the Quran 4:2 first establishes men and women as equal beings. Chapter 4:20 then forbids men from forcing a woman to act against her will, thereby ensuring women maintain autonomy and self-determination.

This verse also commands men to consort with women in kindness, forbidding men from so much as thinking ill of their wives. This preempts emotional and mental abuse. Chapter 4:35 furthermore prevents violence against women by forcing men to control themselves and never resort to physically harming women – preempting physical abuse.

Accordingly, the Prophet Muhammad by example demonstrated that the burden of modesty, respect, and combating abuse of women rests on men. Indeed, men must take the lead in stopping such sexual abuse. After all, while the Quran obliges women to dress modestly as a covenant with God, Islam prescribes no punishment whatsoever for women who choose to dress otherwise.

[–] Otter (24464) 7 years ago

Troll post of the day!

And against some pretty good competition, too.

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 7 years ago

Fake Prophet Muhammad was the Harvey Weinstein of his day, and this guy is still regarded as the perfect example of a human being by the brain-washed and ill-educated!

[–] Xenopharb (617) 7 years ago

This is an opinions page authored by Qasim Rashid, the national spokesperson for the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA.

What did you expect him to say?

What would you expect a Protestant, Catholic, or Hindu spokesperson to say?

None of their hands are clean, yet they all believe they show the way.

[–] not_a_virus.exe (1267) 7 years ago

Yes but the teachings of Jesus Christ are slightly less Weinstein-esque than the teachings of the prophet Mohammed. I would expect every follower of his to recognize that.

[–] Xenopharb (617) 7 years ago

Slavery, genocide, torture, rape, molestation, discrimination, ... are they all better?

None of their hands are clean.

[–] miedzhvietch (1) 7 years ago

None of these crimes you listed apply to a man called Jesus. His teachings have nothing to do with perversion and corruption of some members of the later Church. Jesus was, and still is, a great archetype of a good mentor and peaceful revolutionary. As opposed to the prophet Muhammad, who was basically an illiterate warlord, spreading his savage ideologies with a conquest. It is all about the sources and models and who's taking better example. There is no debate that Islamic world is literally the worst hellhole for women, where discrimination and human rights abuse is sad reality, right? In that context opinions of the above mentioned muslim apologist are nothing but duplicitous propaganda.

[–] Xenopharb (617) 7 years ago

That is a bit ethnocentric.

While I agree radical Islam, like the Taliban and ISIS, is full of human rights abuses, I disagree that radical Christianity has been much better.

Do not believe for a moment that Christianity has been the way to equality for women and minorities. It would be great if it was, but it has not been so historically.

In any case, Harvey Weinstein is neither a Christian nor a Muslim, and he is accused of some pretty horrendous things toward women.

[–] crc32 (2584) 7 years ago

"While I agree radical Islam, like the Taliban and ISIS, is full of human rights abuses, I disagree that radical Christianity has been much better."

Your missing the point. Islam from the begging spread through conquest led by Muhammad himself. You either converted to islam or you lost your head . Christianity initially spread through conviction of followers of Christ. Violence didn't start in christianity untill roman emperor constantine adopted it as the states religion at which point its spread is attributed through roman conquest IE Christian spread was a side effect of the roman empire.

"Do not believe for a moment that Christianity has been the way to equality for women and minorities. It would be great if it was, but it has not been so historically."
You must at least take notice that the 4 gospals said nothing about supressing minorities or women. Any supression of women is attributed to the words of Saint Paul who reflected the culture of his times. The modern churches of our times consider these Paul's personal opinions and not the ordained instructions of Christ. Heck there are churches being led by women these days. Islam on the other hand is pretty explicit about how to treat women and infidels.

[–] EricCartmanBrah (426) 7 years ago

Why do Independent allow an opinion piece like that? Also, that's a flimsy argument by itself. These 'Opinion articles' are for all intents and purposes journalistic work. The owners of the paper decides what gets published. I'd also like to add that Saudi Arabia owns almost half of Independent shares. Really independent alright, and not a conflict of interest...

[–] crc32 (2584) 7 years ago

sura 4:2 deals with orphans of war. The author must be referring to sura 4:4 which states you can't steal from your women. IE they can hold property.
4. You shall give the women their due
dowries, equitably. If they willingly
forfeit anything, then you may
accept it; it is rightfully yours.

Sura 4:20 also declares that if you give a wife something and you divorce her you can't take it back. IE forcing her against her will. In a certain context this would include your no longer entitled to sex so you can't just take that from her. If your married still its not even considered rape.

20. If you wish to marry another wife,
in place of your present wife,
and you had given any of them a great deal,
you shall not take back anything you had given her.
Would you take it fraudulently,
maliciously, and sinfully?

sura 4:35 Talks about about seperation. In that two representatives from both families shall handle the dispute.
Its actually sura 4:34 that suggests you avoid violence against your wife.

34. The men are made responsible for the women,**
and GOD has endowed them with certain qualities,
and made them the bread earners. The righteous
women will cheerfully accept this arrangement,
since it is GOD's commandment, and
honor their husbands during their absence.
If you experience rebellion from the
women, you shall first talk to them, then
(you may use negative incentives like)
deserting them in bed, then you may
(as a last alternative) beat them.
If they obey you, you are not permitted
to transgress against them.
GOD is Most High, Supreme.

Note that this verse actually allows violence against your wife but only as a last resort and that if she is complient you have no excuse to attack her. How this individual can claim these verses are treating woman as equals is beyond me.