To Veil or Not To Veil

[Arnab]

The context in which that quote was used, implied that the debate had become useless as you could not change anyone's mind

WTF? Not at all! I did NOT enter the debate in order to "change anyone's mind"! Which is exactly what I said! Get that inside your thick skull. Don't make up your own quack psychoanalytical contexts.

You obliged at my request? What exactly was my request, eh? I asked you to prove the two points and you proved neither of them.

Lemme racap here:

You call atheists as extremist and dogmatic. That atheists think religion is to blame for all the ills in the world. And that atheists think everyone else is a stupid idiot. Sweeping comments with no actual proof that atheists really think like that.

I would have let these go, because these are simply ludicrous assumptions based on quack psychoanalysis.

But then you suggest that the "Quran and Science" page is a good example of how atheists think. Then it caught my attention. Because I was the only atheist in that thread.

You are trying to prove that I thought everybody else in that thread was a "stupid idiot".

You are trying to prove that I tried to "convert" everyone in that thread to atheism.

Both of these are WRONG ASSumptions. I didn't enter the debate to accomplish either of these tasks.

What is you point, fab?

Nothing. Nada. Zero. Zip. Zilch.

[Shubho]

Please, please, please STOP. Your endless squabbling is a drag. Why don't you guys just go out for dinner and discuss these issues without exchanging insults? Your little arguments lead me to think that you're a married couple or something.

Make LOVE, not WAR.

[Edited on 2-3-2004 by Shubho]

[chinaman]

Dear Arnab

Reminding you once again, attack the message not the messenger. And if you can't control your urge to phrase your aurgument without those ornaments, do not reply at all. If I had to edit your post even for a single word for either it's meaning or it's tone, it will become an empty post. Please do not answer to this post because I wouldn't be wasting my energy to reply. We already had enough discussions in the past. Cheers.

[Arnab]

If I had to edit your post even for a single word for either it's meaning or it's tone, it will become an empty post.

Look, don't give empty warnings. If you want to delete an entire post based on my "tone", go ahead. Do it.

You as a moderator are not accountable for whatever steps you take. This is clearly not a democratic forum or anything. You won't be held accountable. It's ok. I understand.

And personally, I don't rely on your judgment of the properness of my "tone".


-----------


Shubho,

lol man! I am pretty sure of that too. In fact, I think, if hypothetically fab went to my college or something and was single, I might have ended up marrying her.

[Edited on 2-3-2004 by Arnab]

[rafiq]

that's hilarious! the question is, would she have married you??

[Hasib]

I found this on the net.

Q3.Why does Islaam degrade women by keeping them behind the veil?
Answer.
The status of women in Islam is often the target of attacks in the secular media. The ‘hijab’ or the Islamic dress is cited by many as an example of the ‘subjugation’ of women under Islamic law. Before we analyze the reasoning behind the religiously mandated ‘hijab’, let us first study the status of women in societies before the advent of Islam.

1. In the past women were degraded and used as objects of lust
The following examples from history amply illustrate the fact that the status of women in earlier civilizations was very low to the extent that they were denied basic human dignity:
1. Babylonian Civilization:
The women were degraded and were denied all rights under the Babylonian law. If a man murdered a woman, instead of him being punished, his wife was put to death.
2. Greek Civilization:
Greek Civilization is considered the most glorious of all ancient civilizations. Under this very ‘glorious’ system, women were deprived of all rights and were looked down upon. In Greek mythology, an ‘imaginary woman’ called ‘Pandora’ is the root cause of misfortune of human beings. The Greeks considered women to be subhuman and inferior to men. Though chastity of women was precious, and women were held in high esteem, the Greeks were later overwhelmed by ego and sexual perversions. Prostitution became a regular practice amongst all classes of Greek society.
3. Roman Civilization:
When Roman Civilization was at the zenith of its ‘glory’, a man even had the right to take the life of his wife. Prostitution and nudity were common amongst the Romans.
4. Egyptian Civilization:
The Egyptian considered women evil and as a sign of a devil.
5. Pre-Islamic Arabia:
Before Islam spread in Arabia, the Arabs looked down upon women and very often when a female child was born, she was buried alive.

2. Islam uplifted women and gave them equality and expects them to maintain their status.
Islam uplifted the status of women and granted them their just rights 1400 years ago. Islam expects women to maintain their status.

Hijab for men
People usually only discuss ‘hijab’ in the context of women. However, in the Glorious Qur’an, Allah (swt) first mentions ‘hijab’ for men before ‘hijab’ for the women. The Qur’an mentions in Surah Noor:
"Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: and Allah is well acquainted with all that they do." [Al-Qur’an 24:30]

The moment a man looks at a woman and if any brazen or unashamed thought comes to his mind, he should lower his gaze.

Hijab for women.
The next verse of Surah Noor, says:
" And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons..." [Al-Qur'ân 24:31]

3. Six criteria for Hijab.
According to Qur'ân and Sunnah there are basically six criteria for observing hijab:
1. Extent:
The first criterion is the extent of the body that should be covered. This is different for men and women. The extent of covering obligatory on the male is to cover the body at least from the navel to the knees. For women, the extent of covering obligatory is to cover the complete body except the face and the hands upto the wrist. If they wish to, they can cover even these parts of the body. Some scholars of Islam insist that the face and the hands are part of the obligatory extent of ‘hijab’.
All the remaining five criteria are the same for men and women.
2. The clothes worn should be loose and should not reveal the figure.
3. The clothes worn should not be transparent such that one can see through them.
4. The clothes worn should not be so glamorous as to attract the opposite sex.
5. The clothes worn should not resemble that of the opposite sex.
6. The clothes worn should not resemble that of the unbelievers i.e. they should not wear clothes that are specifically identities or symbols of the unbelievers’ religions.

4. Hijab includes conduct and behaviour among other things
Complete ‘hijab’, besides the six criteria of clothing, also includes the moral conduct, behaviour, attitude and intention of the individual. A person only fulfilling the criteria of ‘hijab’ of the clothes is observing ‘hijab’ in a limited sense. ‘Hijab’ of the clothes should be accompanied by ‘hijab’ of the eyes, ‘hijab’ of the heart, ‘hijab’ of thought and ‘hijab’ of intention. It also includes the way a person walks, the way a person talks, the way he behaves, etc.

5. Hijab prevents molestation
The reason why Hijab is prescribed for women is mentioned in the Qur'ân in the following verses of Surah Al-Ahab: "O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad); that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." [Al-Qur'ân 33:59]

The Qur'ân says that Hijab has been prescribed for the women so that they are recognized as modest women and this will also prevent them from being molested.

6. Example of twin sisters
Suppose two sisters who are twins, and who are equally beautiful, walk down the street. One of them is attired in the Islamic hijab i.e. the complete body is covered, except for the face and the hands up to the wrists. The other sister is wearing western clothes, a mini skirt or shorts. Just around the corner there is a hooligan or ruffian who is waiting for a catch, to tease a girl. Whom will he tease? The girl wearing the Islamic Hijab or the girl wearing the skirt or the mini? Naturally he will tease the girl wearing the skirt or the mini. Such dresses are an indirect invitation to the opposite sex for teasing and molestation. The Qur'ân rightly says that hijab prevents women from being molested.

7. Capital punishment for the rapists
Under the Islamic shariah, a man convicted of having raped a woman, is given capital punishment. Many are astonished at this ‘harsh’ sentence. Some even say that Islam is a ruthless, barbaric religion! I have asked a simple question to hundreds of non-Muslim men. Suppose, God forbid, someone rapes your wife, your mother or your sister. You are made the judge and the rapist is brought in front of you. What punishment would you give him? All of them said they would put him to death. Some went to the extent of saying they would torture him to death. To them I ask, if someone rapes your wife or your mother you want to put him to death. But if the same crime is committed on somebody else’s wife or daughter you say capital punishment is barbaric. Why should there be double standards?

8. Western society falsely claims to have uplifted women
Western talk of women’s liberalization is nothing but a disguised form of exploitation of her body, degradation of her soul, and deprivation of her honour. Western society claims to have ‘uplifted’ women. On the contrary it has actually degraded them to the status of concubines, mistresses and society butterflies who are mere tools in the hands of pleasure seekers and sex marketeers, hidden behind the colourful screen of ‘art’ and ‘culture’.

9. USA has one of the highest rates of rape
United States of America is supposed to be one of the most advanced countries of the world. It also has one of the highest rates of rape in any country in the world. According to a FBI report, in the year 1990, every day on an average 1756 cases of rape were committed in U.S.A alone. Later another report said that on an average everyday 1900 cases of rapes are committed in USA. The year was not mentioned. May be it was 1992 or 1993. May be the Americans got ‘bolder’ in the following years.

Consider a scenario where the Islamic hijab is followed in America. Whenever a man looks at a woman and any brazen or unashamed thought comes to his mind, he lowers his gaze. Every woman wears the Islamic hijab, that is the complete body is covered except the face and the hands up to the wrist. After this if any man commits rape he is given capital punishment. I ask you, in such a scenario, will the rate of rape in America increase, will it remain the same, or will it decrease?

10. Implementation of Islamic Sharee'ah will reduce the rate of rapes
Naturally as soon as Islamic Sharee'ah is implemented positive results will be inevitable. If Islamic Sharee'ah is implemented in any part of the world, whether it is America or Europe, society will breathe easier. Hijab does not degrade a woman but uplifts a woman and protects her modesty and chastity.

Source- Allaahuakbar

[acker]

No matter how u argue for it , it appears to be done for the benifit of a lot of insecure men who are paranoid that their women will desert them for another man.
You may as well make them walk around in a cardboard box with a peep hole cut out of it.
Since these people have lost their identity already.
As for the post about how much better America , Australia , etc would be with sharia law
Well mmmm I dont agree totally but I do think a shift on a few laws to something along those lines would not be such a bad thing.
Re. Automatic sentencing and punishments for Rape , Child molestation , Murder , Assault etc
Because the Western legal system has lost touch with reality and with the average person.

[fab]

Thanks for the post Hasib, it was interesting.

Originally posted by acker
Re. Automatic sentencing and punishments for..

What do you mean by 'automatic sentencing'?

[acker]

"Automatic sentencing"
A set of punishments pre determined
For instance
"Murder"
(a) 15 years ( say accomplice )
(b) 25 years ( say 2nd degree homicide )
(c) Life ( say 1st degree homicide )
Once the severity has been judged the sentence automatically gets set at the above catagory that the judgement falls into.
The jury determines guilt or innocense and the severity of the crime.
This takes away the abnormalities of different judges dealing different penalties for simular crimes.
It will also take away the right of appeal against the punishment because the punishment is pre-set.
The only appeal can be against the guilty / not guilty verdict.
Their seems to be a lot of cases currently in the news here , where appeals board judges are overturning jury verdicts and sentencing on "points of law" in some cases causing needless re-trials where guilt still stands.
Some Australian judges may as well practice law on Mars , because thats how far out of touch they are with the Australian community.
Thats what I mean by "automatic sentencing" or a limited form of sharia.
It will also save heaps of money thats going down the throats of legal parasites.

[fab]

I think they tried something similar to what you are proposing in the NT for juvenile offenders. I don't think it worked out that well as they ended up sending first time offenders who stole packets of biscuits to gaol! The punishment should really fit the crime, and that type of pre-set punishment leaves little room for flexibility..

I also don't understand why the general public should have a say in the punishment of a crime.. Surely judges, barristers etc who have spent most of their lives studying the law would know better than lay people?

[Edited on 5-3-2004 by fab : ugh - can't spell]

[Zobair]

the article hasib posted says that according to a report published (FBI?) 1900 rape cases are reported on average per day. That makes for a staggering 693500 cases per year!!!!! That is absolutely shocking for an advanced democracy like US, with a apparently stable law and order system!!!! Makes you think!

[Edited on 5-3-2004 by pompous]

[acker]

Originally posted by fab


I also don't understand why the general public should have a say in the punishment of a crime.. Surely judges, barristers etc who have spent most of their lives studying the law would know better than lay people?

[Edited on 5-3-2004 by fab : ugh - can't spell]

Fab the general publics taxes pay for the judges , so I think they should have quite a bit of say on how the justice system they are paying for performs. Also if you look at the system a bit closer u may notice that the rich who can afford better legal representation get away with more than the poorer folk who can not afford as much legal power. A lot of the money the richer folk use to spend on this is from tax savings from minimizing what they pay the government in taxes. And a lot of the time they end up in court is because of disputes about how much tax they are paying. And the court system is mainly funded by the general public who cant afford the legal power those people can.
This is a vicious circle screwing the middle & poorer classes in this country , and making fat cats fatter from their toil , and letting the delinquent children of the fat cats enjoy the prospect of getting away with crimes that the rest of the community would be punished for.
The legal system in Australia is in urgent need of total overhaul..

[Ockey]

Fab the general publics taxes pay for the judges

The general publics taxes also pay for the public health care system and hence the general public has the right to determine what kind of surgery a patient should undertake!

[acker]

The general public has the right to have its opinion heard in relationship as to who is eligiable to receive the benifits of public health care , I would think their would be a tax payer uproar if it was discovered that Kerry & James Packer or Rupert & Lachlan Murdoch were getting their GP's to bulk bill their visits.

[Ockey]

By the same token the general public has the right to define what constitues a crime in a society but to actually take part in the legal proceeding and assign predetermined sentences for every possible crime is doing the job of the legal system.

Also, no two crime are the same and hence assigning predetermined prison terms for a crime would be unjust.

[acker]

scenario
2 identical crimes are committed by 2 identical villians
the only difference is that
villian (a) is rich and can spend $1 million dollars on his legal defence
villian (b) is poor and gets a legal defence provided by legal aid
I would expect villian (a) would get a much lighter sentance than villian (b)
Thats why I beleive the legal system stinks because it has been tainted by greed and money. And money tends to sway the verdicts handed out.

[Hasib]

geez... talk about changing topics!!! 1st it started of with tighter soccer uniforms. From there Veil... now the legal system!!!

[crickipagol]

Here is a bit of stat for you guys:

In Saudi Arabia, 60% marriages end up in divorce every year.

I guess, when the veil comes off, the truth comes out

And to add more juice to it. In today's news, country's law makers are having tough time to control obesity among middle aged women. I guess, this group is the rest of the 40%, who survivied the marriage.

[acker]

then again maybe its the 60% who did'nt
maybe the veil is ok , but the shapeless body clothing has to go.
At least we've got back to the original topic , abiet for a brief detour..

[reinausagi]

Since the advent of sunscreen I have found the use of a veil to be redundant.

Both my grandmothers wore Burkhas and veils. My mother wore one until she was married. I believe that my dad advised her that she was a beautiful woman and neither the general populace of Dacca nor, that of Karachi would recoil in horror, should she show her face in public due to it's hediousness...

[fab]

acker, media sensationalisation or not, that kid was sent to prison for stealing some biscuits. What could they sensationalise about that? Even without the juicy bits the punishment just did not fit the crime..

tough time to control obesity among middle aged women.

Ugh.. while the skinny poor of the world starve, the fat rich folks eat their way to death. Humans are such nasty creatures, aren't we?

[acker]

So on 3 seperate occasions he stole buiscuts Fab ?
Probably addicted to Tim Tams.

[fab]

indeed.. THAT, or perhaps he planned to sell the biscuits at 500% profit and use the money to fund his petrol sniffing addiction.
(if i remember correctly, i think the first time he stole some stationery)

[say]

Originally posted by Hasib
I found this on the net.

Q3.Why does Islaam degrade women by keeping them behind the veil?

Hasib, you are one of the liveliest participants of this forum. I am really saddened to see you falling for this Propaganda material.

I know its not easy to discuss/question about the logical flaws of the Islamic thinking (Everyone will start thinking I am anti-religious or something like that ) but if you take a deeper look at these logics/arguments yourself, you'll see many of them doesn't make sense and are nothing but cheap propaganda.

[Hasib]

Everything is propaganda... somethings r good propaganda some r bad. Propaganda is something that is designed to change ppls minds