Tunisia Lifts Ban on Muslim Women Marrying non-Muslims

[Srinivas]

Wth ..
A true muslim woman would never marry a non muslim men unless he accepts islam .

Anyway , their country their rules .
Hope it'll be not included in religious teachings of Islam .

Pakistan should protest and take this issue to GCC and UN.

 

[patman]

Common sense wins for once

 

[mike2000 is back]

shouldn't be equal...
Nowhere in Islam it says... Woman and Man shouldn't answer their duty to the state.

Huh.....it doesn't say so explicitly I supposed, but they are laws in religion that shows a woman cant be equal to the man. For example from what I've red, in Islam a woman can't marry a non Muslim man (THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS) , but a Muslim man can marry a non-Muslim woman as far as she's among people of the book(Christian, Jews, sabians ).
Many will see this as unfair and another proof women arean't equale to men if we follow religious rules by the letter.
So in this case, I asked would the country go against the region to make and women equal under similar laws?

NOTE THAT RELIGIONS IN GENERAL ARE QUITE PATRIARCHAL. We can't escape from that.

On the state level, we find Iran and Saudi Arabia(at least up until the last decade) to be closest to trying to implement the laws in accordance with the Holy Scriptures and religious texts. Apart from that, I think the Emirate of Sharjah and Emirate of Abu Dhabi also have these elements. Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia etc. are poor examples if I am honest.

Why do you think KSA, Iran, and emirates of Abu Dhabi (many will disagree with you on this three countries) are closest to REAL Islam and its teachings? And what makes you think Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey are far from this real Islamic laws/standards implementation?

 

[Hamilcar]

People need to understand something, Tunisia's long name is simply the Tunisian Republic, not the Arab Tunisian Republic (like Egypt or Syria) and not the Islamic Tunisian Republic (like Iran, Pakistan or Mauritania)
Same as Turkey, it's a Muslim people in a secular state.
it is a multi-ethnic nation (united under the Tunisian identity and speak the same language but racially you'll find Arabs, Middle Easterns, Amazighs, Turks, Andalusians, Europeans, Blacks and many others) and although around 96 to 97% of the population at the very least are Muslims, there are Christian, Jewish, Bahá'í, Ahmadi, Agnostic and Atheist Tunisians.
All these people and faiths are to be respected and treated equally in any modern state, and the Tunisian constitution does not only guarantee the freedom of religion and practice but also the freedom of choice and liberty of conscience. Thus there is no more legal basis to keep any discriminatory bans or laws based on religion.
it's not like the state is forcing people to intermarry, it's simply giving them the freedom of choice.
a devout Muslim woman or man would only marry a Muslim regardless of laws, but there are those who either are not that devout or interpret religion in a different way and they should be free to do so.

 

[HannibalBarca]

For example from what I've red, in Islam a woman can't marry a non Muslim man (THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS) , but a Muslim man can marry a non-Muslim woman as far as she's among people of the book(Christian, Jews, sabians ).
Many will see this as unfair and another proof women aren't equal to men if we follow religious rules by the letter.
So in this case, I asked would the country go against the region to make and women equal under similar laws?

Even man shouldn't... There is many views regarding this... Both Woman and Man should not... doesn't mean they can't...

Tunisia doesn't care about the region... when it comes to his internal affairs...
60 years ago... Bourguiba took off the hijab of a woman in front of the world... as an act of "liberalisation"... Whatever it was or wasn't the right thing to do... that's not the Q...but it shows you... How little we care..of what others may think.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

So does it mean we should legalise all these crimes?

No of course not. Priorty. Maybe we ought to give more priorty to these caes of "forbidden" and less about any stray cats that are in awe of the grass on other side of the fence.

Seems to me we have a very skewed moral compass. We need to reserve our indigignation for those things that are eating up our societies. Not stray women. Once their minds stray they are "lost" anyway.

 

[Metanoia]

Why do you think KSA, Iran, and emirates of Abu Dhabi (many will disagree with you on this three countries) are closest to REAL Islam and its teachings? And what makes you think Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey are far from this real Islamic laws/standards implementation?

In terms of domestic policies and the organizing of their respective societies, they at least extract and try to implement the laws based on religious texts. They don't allow music, immodesty, lewd behaviour,unnecessary gender mixing, alcohol etc. in public. Saudi Arabia had quite a strict control over their television as well and what kind of things were shown...though that's drastically changed now. The laws regarding adultery and fornication are also based upon the religious texts. These countries also enable their population to perform the ritual prayer by mandating prayer breaks. There are many other examples as well. They're largely a traditional, conservative and family friendly society.

By no means there are no shortcoming in Iran or Saudi, but a lot of these shortcoming are due to the human factor rather than due to the religious texts. After all, it is a fallible human who is trying to implement the law.

Although Pakistan is a Islamic Republic in name, anyone who has ever visited Pakistan or lived there know what's what. Even though there are some Islamic laws, there is absolutely zilch implementation. The rest of the countries allows or tolerate things which goes against the Islamic principles.

I would also like to add that regardless of school of thought or any sect, the guiding principles in Islam are the same. For instance the capital punishment for murder, adultery, rape etc or the banishment of alcohol and the concept of Hijab, obligation of ritual prayer are identical and corresponds without any difficulty.

 

[Azadkashmir]

Ahahahah .... As expected, you always carry the cup when it comes to unorthodox views on here. I don't think many people will agree with what you just said though.

I just speak the truth/.

 

[war&peace]

No of course not. Priorty. Maybe we ought to give more priorty to these caes of "forbidden" and less about any stray cats that are in awe of the grass on other side of the fence.

Seems to me we have a very skewed moral compass. We need to reserve our indigignation for those things that are eating up our societies. Not stray women. Once their minds stray they are "lost" anyway.

We give priorities to these cases and it is just you don't have the knowledge and by the way that's the job of the govt and we pay taxes to them to do their job instead of the citizen just worrying about the issues of the governance. But if you want that we should not even discuss these issues and rather focus on fashion and TV serials..then I must say your compass is totally messed up and you need throw it in the trash and a get a new one if you can afford.

 

[TMA]

No of course not. Priorty. Maybe we ought to give more priorty to these caes of "forbidden" and less about any stray cats that are in awe of the grass on other side of the fence.

Seems to me we have a very skewed moral compass. We need to reserve our indigignation for those things that are eating up our societies. Not stray women. Once their minds stray they are "lost" anyway.

But always remember Men are protectors and maintainers of their womenfolk. It is a sad reflection upon the Men...

In terms of domestic policies and the organizing of their respective societies, they at least extract and try to implement the laws based on religious texts. They don't allow music, immodesty, lewd behaviour,unnecessary gender mixing, alcohol etc. in public. Saudi Arabia had quite a strict control over their television as well and what kind of things were shown...though that's drastically changed now. The laws regarding adultery and fornication are also based upon the religious texts. These countries also enable their population to perform the ritual prayer by mandating prayer breaks. There are many other examples as well. They're largely a traditional, conservative and family friendly society.

By no means there are no shortcoming in Iran or Saudi, but a lot of these shortcoming are due to the human factor rather than due to the religious texts. After all, it is a fallible human who is trying to implement the law.

Although Pakistan is a Islamic Republic in name, anyone who has ever visited Pakistan or lived there know what's what. Even though there are some Islamic laws, there is absolutely zilch implementation. The rest of the country allows or tolerate things which goes against the Islamic principles.

I would also like to add that regardless of school of thought or any sect, the guiding principles in Islam are the same. For instance the capital punishment for murder, adultery, rape etc or the banishment of alcohol and the concept of Hijab, obligation of ritual prayer are identical and corresponds without any difficulty.

The punishment for adultery is no longer capital, it used to be in Sharia - e - Musa.

 

[mike2000 is back]

In terms of domestic policies and the organizing of their respective societies, they at least extract and try to implement the laws based on religious texts. They don't allow music, immodesty, lewd behaviour,unnecessary gender mixing, alcohol etc. in public. Saudi Arabia had quite a strict control over their television as well and what kind of things were shown...though that's drastically changed now. The laws regarding adultery and fornication are also based upon the religious texts. These countries also enable their population to perform the ritual prayer by mandating prayer breaks. There are many other examples as well. They're largely a traditional, conservative and family friendly society.

By no means there are no shortcoming in Iran or Saudi, but a lot of these shortcoming are due to the human factor rather than due to the religious texts. After all, it is a fallible human who is trying to implement the law.

Although Pakistan is a Islamic Republic in name, anyone who has ever visited Pakistan or lived there know what's what. Even though there are some Islamic laws, there is absolutely zilch implementation. The rest of the countries allows or tolerate things which goes against the Islamic principles.

I would also like to add that regardless of school of thought or any sect, the guiding principles in Islam are the same. For instance the capital punishment for murder, adultery, rape etc or the banishment of alcohol and the concept of Hijab, obligation of ritual prayer are identical and corresponds without any difficulty.

Interesting, it's good to know that KSA and Iran are closest to what an ideal Islamic state should look like. Since many members here gave the imoimpress they were not, especially regarding the former

 

[Hassan_Ishtiaq]

In the case of SRK's family, the Muslim-ness is prominent. Even in case of Shahid Kapoor ( father is Punjabi Hindu ) it is mostly his Muslim-ness that has stood out ( as much as I can see ).

Though I don't know much about Hrithik Roshan's family :

What the hell are you talking about?

And what is "Muslim-ness"?? There is only such a thing as Muslim.

 

[Metanoia]

Interesting, it's good to know that KSA and Iran are closest to what an ideal Islamic state should look like.

Far from ideal but closest as per the current times we're living in

 

[Hamza913]

When Islam allows Muslim men to marry the women of completely different culture, then what is wrong if Muslim women also marry with men of different culture?

And Men are even allowed to BUY the slave girls of any culture and religion from the slave markets and have sex with her.

Issue is not different culture, but issue is "LOVE".

Who said boy and girl of different cultures could never fell in love with each other? If any one says so, then he is talking against the NATURE.

These are only the obstacles created by narrow minded Traditions and religions that LOVE could not take place between boy and girl of different culture/religion. All such claims are against the Human Nature.

People do fell in love with people of other cultures and religions, and overcome the obstacles through broad mindedness and love.



This mentality exists only among the narrow minded people where they want to dominate the women and want to impose their Ideology over others including their children, and snatching the rights from children to do the freethinking and decide their path themselves when they are old enough to think about it.



No majority has the right to take away the "Basic Human Rights" of any person or minority.
Choosing a life partner comes under this very Basic Human Right.



Have you ever thought about it why NOT a single Muslim country in whole 1400 years succeeded in having Sharia?
Does it not automatically proof that Sharia is not a practical system which could be implied?

When Maulana Moudoodi was trying to bring back Caliphate System in Pakistan, then a Hindu wrote him a letter and asked him why he want to bring back that 1400 years old system which was not even able to last 30 years and the presence of the best Muslim generation of companions and ended within 30 years causing the blood of thousands of Muslims at the hands of each other?

And Maulana Moudoodi had no answer for this question.

It's haram for a Muslim woman to marry a non-Muslim, end of story. Even without the ruling, non-Muslims and (practising) Muslims have two very different cultures, marriage doesn't work out unless one of them ends up completely dominating the family sphere with their specific religious ideology. It's more likely the man would occupy that position, than the woman. So she cannot marry a non-Muslim.

When I say culture, I'm talking about the different cultures of (practising) Muslims and non-Muslims, not Muslims from different ethnic groups. Mixed race marriages are definitely haram and (in my opinion) preferable.

The issue is whether or not it's halal. It's not. It's haram. Therefore, Muslim women are not allowed to do it.

Sharia has implemented properly numerous times, with the best examples being the lifetime of Rasulullah (Peace Be Upon Him), the Rashidun Khilafah, the Ummayad Khilafah, and the (first 100 years of) the Abbasid Khilafah. Afterwards, Muslims did start to deviate slightly but you still had many Islamic states ruled by Sharia, such as the Ottoman Khilafah, the Mughal Empire under Aurangzeb, the Shah Mir dynasty under Sikander Shah Mir, Islamic Spain, etc. I can name numerous examples where Sharia has worked for the Muslims, and every time, we were on top.

So if Tunisia is an Islamic state like say Pakistan or Iran then this move will be illegal /wrong, but if the country is a secular state then there's nothing controversial /wrong about this.

Please don't insult Sharia by calling Pakistan or Iran Islamic states. As much as I love my country, it's far from Islamic, same goes for Iran.

No country in the world is truly run Islamically.

With due respect. As far as I know, marriage is a matter of personal choice irrespective of Nationality and religion. Let those who get married decide for themselves, why do others have to impose their wish/choice on these poor souls ???

The state in a Muslim-majority nation is to ban the haram and permit the halal. We have every right to be furious at this ludicrous decision to allow Muslim women to marry non-Muslims.

I will only personally impose the ban on women in my own family.

 

[mike2000 is back]

No country in the world is truly run Islamically

Hmmmmm... How come? I thought countries like Pakistan, Iran, KSA are wuite religious and conservative of some sort, esprcespec regarding their laws and the fact that religion is part of the government and shapes the country's laws