women to be banned from Mecca?

[habernac]

http://travel.sympatico.msn.ca/Study...etect=&abc=abc

in a society where woman can't drive and must seek permission to do pretty much everything, they are looking to restrict their actions even more. Saudi Arabia continues to be a bad joke. The only reason they're tolerated on the world stage is because of their oil reserves.

[Eastern Girl]

To solve overcrowding?! I am sure there are lots of other ways they could solve overcrowding, if that were really the issue.
It really disheartens me when I hear these kinds of things. They sound so aloof and casual when they suggest denying women another of their rights. I really hope this doesn't happen for the sake of those women.

[CrusaderPi]

I can't see how the Saudis doing this would shock anyone.

[HOZ]

What a incredibly sad and backward society.

[Table 5]

I think the bar i went to last night was also converted by the Saudi's, cause damn if it wasnt the biggest sausage party i'd ever seen in my life.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I think the bar i went to last night was also converted by the Saudi's, cause damn if it wasnt the biggest sausage party i'd ever seen in my life.

Are you sure it was a Saudi bar.

I'm just saying, if everyone was well dressed, and drinking Zima, there may be an entirely different reason for the lack of ladies.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by habernac

http://travel.sympatico.msn.ca/Study...etect=&abc=abc

in a society where woman can't drive and must seek permission to do pretty much everything, they are looking to restrict their actions even more. Saudi Arabia continues to be a bad joke. The only reason they're tolerated on the world stage is because of their oil reserves.

I guess it's safe to assume that you hold the Catholic Church in similar disdain for their refusal to allow women to be priests.

I'd also say that you didn't even come closer to providing an accurate synopis of the article. Quotes such as these clearly show that it is not a position, if it is even implemented, that is widely supported:

Many Saudis say the proposal, released two weeks ago in the form of a study, violates the spirit of Islam.
"The prophet, who is the first leader of Muslims, didn't do it," said Mohsen al-Awajy, an Islamist lawyer and cleric. "Those who are proposing the change after him have to come up with legal justification for it."

"I'm sure the proposal won't be implemented because this is a matter that's of concern to all the Islamic world and not only Saudi Arabia," said al-Fassi.
The plan has started causing ripples outside the kingdom.
The Washington-based Muslimah Writers Alliance, an organization of Muslim women writers, is sponsoring an online petition drive against the study.
"At no other time in history, either before or after the time of the Prophet Muhammad, have women been relegated to lesser advantageous positions within the (mosque)," Aishah Schwartz, the group's director, said in a statement.
"The proposed plan is no more acceptable today than it would have been when the teachings of Islam began to be delivered over 1400 years ago," she added.


And finally, considering that dozens of people are killed annually in the crush of humanity during the Hajh, an unbiased person may not be so quick to portray it the way you have chosen.

[habernac]

yep, it is pretty stupid for the Catholic church to not allow women as priests. It's also stupid that they don't allow priests to marry. But we're not talking about Catholicism here.

Saudi Arabia's interpretation of Islam is ridiculous. You say that restricting women in Mecca is not a popular position. How about women's restrictions on what they wear, who they can be with, the fact that they can't drive. With a female population that's probably close to the male population, those things probably aren't 100% popular either. But that's still the way things go.

How is my view biased? Because I don't think women are second hand citizens?

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by habernac

yep, it is pretty stupid for the Catholic church to not allow women as priests. It's also stupid that they don't allow priests to marry. But we're not talking about Catholicism here.

Saudi Arabia's interpretation of Islam is ridiculous. You say that restricting women in Mecca is not a popular position. How about women's restrictions on what they wear, who they can be with, the fact that they can't drive. With a female population that's probably close to the male population, those things probably aren't 100% popular either. But that's still the way things go.

How is my view biased? Because I don't think women are second hand citizens?

I am assuming you asked the question genuinely, so I'll answer genuinely.

"But we're not talking about Catholicism here." You're right we're not, but we rarely if ever talk about the double standards that exist in our own 'civilization' or culture. And they do exist.

Is the double standard wrong? Absolutely. But it's wrong in every instance it exists; in Islam, in the Catholic Church, in the legal system (and I mean rich/poor, not white/black), etc.

"How is my view biased?" I suppose I think its biased because it seems that your starting point, your base assumption is that Islam is bad and I believe that is too broad a generalization. Moderate Muslims outnumber radical or fundamentist types by a huge margin (guesstimate - 50 - 1, probably higher) but when I read your post I assumed (and I know what happens when one ass-u-mes) that you lumped them all into the same pile, judging the religion as though it was a single entity.

If I've interpreted too much into your post, I do apologize. I enjoy your post on the hockey forum and I haven't noticed you diving into many of the super-heated off-topic threads.

Cheers!

[habernac]

no, I don't assume that Islam is bad. I have many Muslim friends, and they disagree with the radical beliefs as well.

No apology necessary, threads like these are good, they bring out different viewpoints. My original one probably should have been a little more detailed.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

I am assuming you asked the question genuinely, so I'll answer genuinely.

"But we're not talking about Catholicism here." You're right we're not, but we rarely if ever talk about the double standards that exist in our own 'civilization' or culture. And they do exist.

Is the double standard wrong? Absolutely. But it's wrong in every instance it exists; in Islam, in the Catholic Church, in the legal system (and I mean rich/poor, not white/black), etc.

"How is my view biased?" I suppose I think its biased because it seems that your starting point, your base assumption is that Islam is bad and I believe that is too broad a generalization. Moderate Muslims outnumber radical or fundamentist types by a huge margin (guesstimate - 50 - 1, probably higher) but when I read your post I assumed (and I know what happens when one ass-u-mes) that you lumped them all into the same pile, judging the religion as though it was a single entity.

If I've interpreted too much into your post, I do apologize. I enjoy your post on the hockey forum and I haven't noticed you diving into many of the super-heated off-topic threads.

Cheers!

I dont agree with your post at all. habernac's thread is about Muslims period. We could start another one talking about the plight of women in all religions...but the FACT is Islam is not very kind towards women, especially when compared to the rights and freedoms of women in the secular West. Unfortunately, even Muslim women in the secular West experience great difficulty and are sometimes too afraid to speak out on issues that are important to them.
If women who speak out are afraid and getting threats, not only are their fears and criticisms completely validated, but there is something very deeply and even pathologically wrong with Muslim communities. The question is, what is wrong? Is the problem to be found within Islam, elsewhere, both? That's something that Muslims themselves will have to deal with — and quickly, too.

Whenever anyone points out to the dreadful treatment of women in Muslim countries, apologists are quick to point out that women in pre-Islamic Arabia had no rights and that Islam elevated their status. Pre-Islamic Arabia was inhabited by many different tribes with diverse cultures. In some tribes women were mere chattels, unwanted baby girls were buried alive and widows were inherited by male relatives.

The Sharia law favours men and is highly biased against women notably in matters of marriage, divorce, sex and custody of children:
The husband is the head of the family, and wife is expected to be obedient at all times. Husbands are permitted to beat wives.
http://www.hraicjk.org/punishment_of_muslim_women.html Men have easy access to divorce. For a woman to divorce is very difficult. If a woman wishes to divorce she has to give back the dowry/gift to the husband even if the husband has tortured her - see Hadith: Sunaan Abu Dawud Book 12, Num.2220. No alimony for divorced wives. http://www.domini.org/lam/stories.html
Children belong to the father and his family. Upon divorce the father gains custody and if the father dies the children go to his family.
See stories http://www.domini.org/lam/COM/childabduction.html and http://www.hraicjk.org/kidnapping_of_children.html and http://www.patroush.com/index.htm Women are always regarded as minors: under sharia they need their father's, husband's - or any other male relative's who owns them - permission to marry, travel, study, work, obtain medical treatment etc. Muslim apologists tell us that this is for the woman's protection.


Theres no double standard in habernacs post.
Islam...scraping off the whitewash

[Eddie Bronze]

Scratch one more spot of my list of places to visit.


Hey fotze, I know you meant that!