Muslim women cannot object to husbands’ marriages: CII chief

[livingdead]

Please read up on the concept of "ijtehaad" and how it is the proper mechanism for keeping Islamic law updated and relevant to changes that occur in all societies with time.

looked up in wiki, it seems to be a tradition of using your own logic/deduction instead of always giving importance to precedence.
Surely a lot of modern laws are vastly superior to any such law that can be derived from religious texts by experts in that field, if one allows rational arguments based on modern sensibility to be the guiding force of islamic jurisprudence, you will need to almost completely ignore religious text.

 

[Dubious]

Please read up on the concept of "ijtehaad" and how it is the proper mechanism for keeping Islamic law updated and relevant to changes that occur in all societies with time.

The literal meaning of Ijtehaad is derived from the root word ‘jehad’ (striving) and the meaning of ‘Ijtehaad’ in Islamic Jurisprudence would mean to strive to find a solution to an issue in light of the guidance of the Quran and Sunnah.

Ijtehaad is the process where the scholars of Islam strive to find a solution to an issue on which the Quran and Sunnah are silent.

For example an issue of the modern times is : ‘is it legal to pull off the life-support system of a person who is declared as brain-dead?’.
Because it is a new development of modern technology, the Quran and Sunnah are obviously silent on that particular and specific issue. Thus the respected scholars of Islam must do ‘ijtehaad’ and strive to derive a ruling in light of the guidance of the Quran and Sunnah whether the pulling off of the life support system of a person who is declared as brain dead is permissible or impermissible in Islam.


Ref:Qiyaas
Qiyaas is a term used in Islamic Jurisprudence when determining the ‘root-cause’ of the process to do Ijtehaad.Qiyaas is a process whereby a clear ruling of the permissibility or impermissibility of an act or thing is applied to an issue closest related to it.

For example,Allah and His Messenger (saws) have declared ‘khamr’ (wine,alcohol, etc.) as haraam.Now if someone were to ask for a ruling on the usage of marijuana,the scholars of Islam would do Qiyaas and determine the root cause of the haraam of ‘khamr’ is its intoxication;thus basing their ‘Qiyas’ on intoxication, they would rule that all things that intoxicate would be considered haraam in Islamic Law; andbecause the usage of marijuana intoxicates, it too would be considered haraam

 

[utraash]

dude the quote in the Quran says that you can marry 4 wives bit it further goes to say "Only if you can do justice, and Allah knows you cannot do Justice, so it is better that you only marry one"

Is there any specific reason with number 4...?
I personally believe in one n only one.... Human lust has no ends if you give a reason of affordability.......

 

[Dubious]

Are the results of those tests regard as valid evidence in Pakistani Courts?

Yes....they are otherwise we wouldnt have forensic labs...

IF your source is this BS:

DNA test can’t be primary evidence in rape cases: CII

Then you should also know that ACCORDING TO THE QURAN....a rape victim doesnt need 4 witness but a husband or a man accusing a woman of fornication does!

And the 4 have to people who dont lie....

the 4 have to see the penetration act

the 4 are also punishable for witnessing the act and not doing something to stop it!

So if this imam is your source then also know how stupid he sounded with the requirement of the 4 witness!

Furthermore, for rape the punishment is for the rapist nothing for the woman...woman are ONLY punished for consensual sex or fornication or adultery!

Please at least know ABC of Islam before typing for sure you will be asked what confusion you passed on the day when ALLAH will question you!

You already have 1 foot in the grave ab tou kuch daro!

Actually no. Again the apologist claims are very different than the reality of Muslims:

QUOTE:

Countries where in some cases a woman's testimony is worth half of that of a man:

• Algeria (in criminal cases)[13]
• Bahrain (in Sharia courts)[14]
• Egypt (in family courts)[15]
• Iran (in most cases)[16]
• Iraq[17]
• Jordan (in Sharia courts)[18]
• Kuwait (in family courts)[19]
• Libya[20]
• Morocco (in family cases)[21]
• Palestine (in cases related to marriage, divorce and child custody)[22]
• Qatar (in family law matters)[23]
• Saudi Arabia[24]
• Syria (in Sharia courts)[25]
• United Arab Emirates (in some civil matters)[26]
• Yemen (not allowed to testify at all in cases of adultery and retribution)[27]

OIC countries where women's testimony is known to be equal to a man's in all cases:

• Tunisia[28]
• Oman[29]

And before we claim it is only "in some cases" or only in "some matters of finance", the basic problem is that these practices clearly violate the principle of EQUALITY under the LAW for ALL.

Yea wiki is the friend of everyone in India too

Maybe English isnt your first language

where in some cases a woman's testimony

And anyway I am talking about the Quran while like the media you are interested in what is happening and being called Islam...go figure!

 

[Dubious]

Is there any specific reason with number 4...?
I personally believe in one n only one.... Human lust has no ends if you give a reason of affordability.......

Many believe 4 was said to put a fullstop to unreasonable questioning....


And the next line after this 4...in fact the next line is an order : Surah Nisa verses 1-3


O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one soul and created from it its mate and dispersed from both of them many men and women. And fear Allah , through whom you ask one another, and the wombs. Indeed Allah is ever, over you, an Observer.

And give to the orphans their properties and do not substitute the defective [of your own] for the good [of theirs]. And do not consume their properties into your own. Indeed, that is ever a great sin.

And if you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four. But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one or those your right hand possesses. That is more suitable that you may not incline [to injustice].

 

[utraash]

Many believe 4 was said to put a fullstop to unreasonable questioning....


And the next line after this 4...in fact the next line is an order : Surah Nisa verses 1-3


O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one soul and created from it its mate and dispersed from both of them many men and women. And fear Allah , through whom you ask one another, and the wombs. Indeed Allah is ever, over you, an Observer.

And give to the orphans their properties and do not substitute the defective [of your own] for the good [of theirs]. And do not consume their properties into your own. Indeed, that is ever a great sin.

And if you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four. But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one or those your right hand possesses. That is more suitable that you may not incline [to injustice].

This is very ambiguous one again... If you want to put complete full stop why not three or two ...? Why laws are made specific to male only why not woman? Why not woman a given chance to marry 4 guys n still remains in marriage with all four if she can do justice with all of her four hubbies ?
I feel its defenseless if it exist in other religions .....
There are few dos n dons which are obsolete in every religion better throw them out of religion......

 

[Srinivas]

Islamic Laws are framed when Females are more than males.

 

[Dubious]

This is very ambiguous one again... If you want to put complete full stop why not three or two ...? Why laws are made specific to male only why not woman? Why not woman a given chance to marry 4 guys n still remains in marriage with all four if she can do justice with all of her four hubbies ?
I feel its defenseless if it exist in other religions .....

Well, firstly women in general are not as horny as men (biology + psychology)

2ndly, the men doesnt get pregnant

3rdly, men dont have menstruation

4thly, more men die in war and hence more widows and women need protecting....the allowance (for max of 4 during an era where there was no limit at all and no idea of justice in between the wives) was actually for that case...

lastly, a man can have more than 1 wife a woman would only get jealous while a woman having more than 1 husband the man can go into anger to kill ....and not to mention disgusting..

Another reason for this is coz MANY cultures have polygamy practices...Look at Hinduism itself, Hindu kings who were a depiction of the god had more than 1 wife and numerous concubines, Jewish kings had the same, same goes for Christians....Now if a religion puts a upper limit it is wrong when other religions put no limit nor any mention of stopping it?

There are few dos n dons which are obsolete in every religion better throw them out of religion......

Well, we are not the ones who made the laws and are no one to throw out or put things on our will then it would be man made law not divine law....

 

[utraash]

Well, firstly women in general are not as horny as men (biology + psychology)

So men be given free hand to quench their lust.... Biological reason cant justify polygamy n depriving women status in marriage.....

2ndly, the men doesnt get pregnant
I could not get this here ....



3rdly, men dont have menstruation
Absurd reason yar ....

4thly, more men die in war and hence more widows and women need protecting....the allowance (for max of 4 during an era where there was no limit at all and no idea of justice in between the wives) was actually for that case...
4 wives for a men who can make widow not more than four ... Is that you are implying here ?



lastly, a man can have more than 1 wife a woman would only get jealous while a woman having more than 1 husband the man can go into anger to kill ....and not to mention disgusting..
Weird reason again .....



Another reason for this is coz MANY cultures have polygamy practices...Look at Hinduism itself, Hindu kings who were a depiction of the god had more than 1 wife and numerous concubines, Jewish kings had the same, same goes for Christians....Now if a religion puts a upper limit it is wrong when other religions put no limit nor any mention of stopping it? Religion is not about putting some limit but putting things morally right for humans n not allowing any scope of deviation from righteous path or dharma ....
There is case of Draupadi too who married five brothers in epic of Mahabharata, all lived peacefully which also shows how brotherhood can be held in such complex marriages...... I can criticize my gods anytime for their immoral acts .... Secondly their marriage has nothing to do with polygamy in general you can do a little research into this... In Hinduism polygamy is not encouraged at all otherwise hindus would have been more around 3-4 bn population by now.....

Well, we are not the ones who made the laws and are no one to throw out or put things on our will then it would be man made law not divine law....

Its better to have man made laws than a such divine laws which is biased in nature for humans.....

 

[VCheng]

looked up in wiki, it seems to be a tradition of using your own logic/deduction instead of always giving importance to precedence.
Surely a lot of modern laws are vastly superior to any such law that can be derived from religious texts by experts in that field, if one allows rational arguments based on modern sensibility to be the guiding force of islamic jurisprudence, you will need to almost completely ignore religious text.

It is not a matter of ignoring religious texts. It is just a matter of keeping them away from matters of State, and confined to where they belong - as personal matters.

 

[livingdead]

It is not a matter of ignoring religious texts. It is just a matter of keeping them away from matters of State, and confined to where they belong - as personal matters.

In most cases there is no conflict, issue is there are cases in which we got conflict, and state says its under their remit to decide what should happen, where a religious person might say... hold on, why is state getting involved.
For example, should state be involved in religious marriage. If islamic marriage allows a man to marry 4 women, should state get involved? if yes, why?

 

[VCheng]

In most cases there is no conflict, issue is there are cases in which we got conflict, and state says its under their remit to decide what should happen, where a religious person might say... hold on, why is state getting involved.
For example, should state be involved in religious marriage. If islamic marriage allows a man to marry 4 women, should state get involved? if yes, why?

The State only has to ensure that it treats ALL its citizens EQUALLY under the law, regardless of gender or religious belief. If men get this right, then so do women, from the State's point of view.

 

[livingdead]

The State only has to ensure that it treats ALL its citizens EQUALLY under the law, regardless of gender or religious belief. If men get this right, then so do women, from the State's point of view.

yes but nobody is forcing people to marry under islamic law.. people do out of their own free will.. they know the package.. if they want something different marry under secular law or go for civil partnership.
There are clubs in this country that do not allow women. Some private schools are boys only. Is govt going to intervene in all of them and ensure equality?

 

[Armstrong]

Yes the courts do otherwise soo much money wouldnt be invested in Forensic science...How can I say so...My cousin worked for one and he went to court to give evidence and explanation....Mostly for rape cases....

As far as the implementation of the CII’s controversial recommendation is concerned, the Supreme Court had already decided last year in favour of DNA tests in rape cases. “The apex court has declared DNA evidence as admissible in rape cases. Now there is no ambiguity about it,” observed Barrister Salman Akram Raja, who was part of the case.

DNA evidence in rape cases: For religious leaders, it's still a question mark - Pakistan - DAWN.COM

 

[VCheng]

yes but nobody is forcing people to marry under islamic law.. people do out of their own free will.. they know the package.. if they want something different marry under secular law or go for civil partnership.
There are clubs in this country that do not allow women. Some private schools are boys only. Is govt going to intervene in all of them and ensure equality?

Private clubs have their own rules, and even then many fairness provisions apply, it all depends on the particular case. Remember the Augusta National Golf Club? The law applies to all public and State endeavors, so there is a big difference.