>>>>>>>>>> I do not recall having any issues with the moderator/s. That was never an issue.
I don't understand why you are upset. You said some good words (you always do)about Islam. Personally I did not disagree. I simply said that these good words do not apply exclusively to Islam. Do you disagree?
>>>>>>>>Upset is not the right word. Surprised. If I am a student of Bangla literature,I should not be commenting about Physics (At least study physics a bit BEFORE I pass comment). I have NEVER asked anyone not to criticize Islam. However it is common sense that, you should have at least primary knowledge of Islam.
If you never been to Alaska, how would you solve issues with native Alaskans and settlers?
Don't you agree that one man-one woman union is the most progressive rule
>>>>>>> Yeah but we have more women than men in this world. So Islam does leave the one man and one women option on the table (Qurán actually says marry only one in one verse!) and gives us couple other options for uncommon situations.
Therefore, Islam embraced this most progressive choice and leaves up couple more options for special situations. If you do a study on Muslim families, you will find over 98% families are consisting of one man and one woman.
that no religion has accepted as a principle or law?
>>>>>>>> This speaks volumes about "Other faiths". While Islam does endorse this model and gives us more choices for special situation. For example: Germany after the second world war faced acute shortage of men and too many women. Islamic ideals could have ideal for special situation.
That is why it is VERY important to read a topic with proper context.
Don't you agree that in case of marriage women are discriminated as a man can have multiple wives while a woman cannot have multiple husbands?
>>>>>>>>> If naturally there was an oversupply of men, this could have been an issue but this is not the case. Also women can have multiple husbands, just one at a time. For Example, prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was Khadija's third husband. If he was not liberal, this was not possible 1400 years ago.
Lastly I'll repeat that, you are welcome to comment about Islam. If you have some knowledge of the topic, it will be more credible.
Shalom!
From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Fri, Sep 6, 2013 7:05 pm
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Saudi Arabia Passes Domestic Abuse Ban For First Time
Sent from my iPhone
Last two posts below demonstrate the fundamental problem of Mukto-Mona.
These pundits want to comment on Islam but do not have even primary idea of the subject.
Even a child will tell you that do not buy something you can't afford. You pulled out a completely vacuous statement, which tells everything about you.
>>>>>>>> Actually it speaks volume about YOU. As per Islam marriage is not only about money. In this case a man is expected to treat (If he has more than one wife) equally. Which includes how much time he spends with one. So if one spend one day with one wife, it is expected to spend the next day with the other wife. Same condition goes for housing, expenses etc. If there is a dispute, one has to judge them equally.
It is far beyond money. The noble Qurán stress this point and says a man will be accountable in front of God for this. So if a God fearing person is unsure about being fair to more than one wife, it is better to marry ONLY ONE.
it is important to mention. Since NO other religious book has this codified law in them. NONE!!
It shows that either you don't see the other side of the argument or you don't give a damn about the other side.
>>>>>>>>>> If you had an open mind about my opinions, you could have said, it shows that I have studied other religious books to know this for a fact. Based on your opinions, it appears you are not aware of Islamic values but sadly too eager to say ugly things about Islam and attack anyone who dares to disagree with such absurd point of views.
I don't know – how you see "fairness" in a totally unfair statement. It amazes me every time you say something; it gives me a glimpse of the mindset of a religious person.
>>>>>>>>> Fairness is an unfair statement?? Please explain yourself.
---Do you realize that you are speaking on behalf of all religions, all moralists, and even all socio-economic systems that want to give a woman dignified position in the society. The restriction is not exclusively Islamic.
>>>>>>>> I ONLY explained what Islam says (That is why I started by saying, as per Islam....). I have NOT said anything about any other faiths. Don't know why you even bothered to reply?
-----Look at the condition "if you cannot deal with more than one wife FAIRLY)". Why do you think the prince who spent $13 million in one night for a dancer (his woman for the night) cannot deal with more than one wife fairly? A more progressive view should be not to allow a man to have more than one wife. The "if" clause has to be dropped. If a man can have multiple wives and women, a woman should be allowed to have multiple husbands and men.
>>>>>>>>> brother dealing with one wife fairly is not easy. Ask any married man. So if one decides to marry more than one, it is even more difficult. The Qurán is a progressive book (My opinion), so even 1400 years ago it spelled out the obvious. If you still doubtful, ask any married man anywhere in the world. It takes a lot of work to make marriage work.
Those who want to be safe in the day of judgement, it is better to marry only one.
As the society is progressing, all religions are found to be interpreted as allowing a man only one wife and a woman only one husband. Even in ancient India this used to be emphasized on.
>>>>>>>> Not always true. What if a couple want to have kids and the wife is not able. what if the wife have other physical problems? Islam allows to have more than one wife without abandoning the first wife. Also there are so many cases of extra marital affairs. It is better to marry someone than treating a lady like a prostitute (and depriving her for her rights over husband).
If you refer to the Koran or Islam on every issue, you simply make things more misleading as the half-educated and illiterate mollahs will advocate for the dogmatic views of a religious book. And this will make transition to one man-one woman union very difficult as basically no religion has accepted this as a strict principle.
>>>>>>>>>>> If half educated people (about Islam) get over their obsession about blaming Islam for everything, I do not need to speak about Islam so much. I refer to the text of Islam to offer references and to add quality (And credibility) to our discussions.
I have NEVER said anyone has to agree with me. I simply want to share factual information about Islam (when we discuss Islam here).
Therefore, I am NOT advocating Islam to you but explaining it to this forum. Since most people (Even with Muslim sounding names) do not know about Islam. Hopefully my effort will make lives of half educated mullahs even more difficult. They cannot get away with bluffing people about Islam anymore.
Lastly, I have tried to use religion to bring people closer ( I have quoted from Veda, Bible as well). That is the fundamental difference between my approach and those who want to sell Islam for worldly gain.
Shalom!
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Sep 2, 2013 3:25 pm
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Saudi Arabia Passes Domestic Abuse Ban For First Time
"The Qurán is the ONLY religious book that says, Marry only one (If you cannot deal with more than one wife FAIRLY)."
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, September 2, 2013 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Saudi Arabia Passes Domestic Abuse Ban For First Time
__._,_.___
****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration:
Call For Articles:
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68
http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585
****************************************************
VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/
****************************************************
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
-Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
Saturday, September 7, 2013
Re: [mukto-mona] Saudi Arabia Passes Domestic Abuse Ban For First Time
Muktomona is run by a group of rationalists and yet publish pieces based on purely blind faith.
-----Original Message-----
First thing first. You do not need to be a pundit to comment on an issue. You comment on while varieties of issues. For such behavior you cannot say that Muktomona has a fundamental problem. Muktomona is run by a group of rationalists and yet publish pieces based on purely blind faith.
I don't understand why you are upset. You said some good words (you always do)about Islam. Personally I did not disagree. I simply said that these good words do not apply exclusively to Islam. Do you disagree?
Don't you agree that one man-one woman union is the most progressive rule that no religion has accepted as a principle or law? Don't you agree that in case of marriage women are discriminated as a man can have multiple wives while a woman cannot have multiple husbands?
Dear all,
Let us analyze....
-----Original Message-----
This is a no-brainer argument; why is this so valuable to you, Mr. Rahman? Even a child will tell you that do not buy something you can't afford. You pulled out a completely vacuous statement, which tells everything about you. It shows that either you don't see the other side of the argument or you don't give a damn about the other side. I don't know – how you see "fairness" in a totally unfair statement. It amazes me every time you say something; it gives me a glimpse of the mindset of a religious person.
Thank you.
Jiten Roy
"As per Islam, it is illegal to visit erotic dancer. It is immoral to spend that kind of money while so many hungry people around us all over the world."
-----Do you realize that you are speaking on behalf of all religions, all moralists, and even all socio-economic systems that want to give a woman dignified position in the society. The restriction is not exclusively Islamic.
"The Qurán is the ONLY religious book that says, Marry only one (If you cannot deal with more than one wife FAIRLY)."
-----Look at the condition "if you cannot deal with more than one wife FAIRLY)". Why do you think the prince who spent $13 million in one night for a dancer (his woman for the night) cannot deal with more than one wife fairly? A more progressive view should be not to allow a man to have more than one wife. The "if" clause has to be dropped. If a man can have multiple wives and women, a woman should be allowed to have multiple husbands and men.
As the society is progressing, all religions are found to be interpreted as allowing a man only one wife and a woman only one husband. Even in ancient India this used to be emphasized on.
If you refer to the Koran or Islam on every issue, you simply make things more misleading as the half-educated and illiterate mollahs will advocate for the dogmatic views of a religious book. And this will make transition to one man-one woman union very difficult as basically no religion has accepted this as a strict principle.
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional