Re: Athesit Thread (For non-believers only)
Respect,
Do you honestly believe that Islam promotes beating your wives? There's wisdom in that verse, and if you took the time to understand what the revelation is actually saying with proper context, you'd be surprised to know that Islam says you can't beat your wife.
I would love to hear that context because a straightforward reading of the text clearly says that men can physically discipline their wives if they are disobedient. The source Respect77 linked to (
http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=34) provides several translations of this verse by Islamic scholars and every single one mentions the 'beatings'. The most liberal interpretation I have heard is that men aren't supposed to literally beat their wives, a light tap on the wrist is sufficient. But that doesn't excuse the deeper reason for why this verse is problematic, which is that it describes men and women as fundamentally unequal. Men are in charge of women and women are supposed to be devoutly obedient lest they be 'punished' in some way. I wonder if you would still see the wisdom in this verse if the gender roles were reversed. It's degrading to be treated like a child who needs a caretaker and who can't be trusted with her own opinions. No man would settle for that.
Also, Sharia Law varies from country to country. For exmaple, Women can't drive in Suadi, however in Yemen they can, under Sharia Law. Nothing to do with Islam. Sharia Law in Saudi Arabia should not be the representation of Islam.
It's true that Saudi Arabia has a particularly strict version of Islamic law and not all their laws are derived from the Quran, as you pointed out with the female driving ban. That doesn't mean that there aren't some objective aspects of Sharia law that are universally agreed upon and that would be considered deeply unethical from a Western point of view, such as:
* Punishment for adultery ranging from 100 lashes to stoning to death
* Amputations for theft
* Murderer can be forgiven by victim's family and walk free, which is how honour killings often go unpunished
* Homosexuality is illegal and punishable by imprisonment or death
* A man's share of inheritance is larger than a woman's (typically twice as much) even if they have the same degree of relation to the decedent
And so on. In many Islamic countries, I would be put in prison or even sentenced to death just for speaking out about my views regarding atheism and Islam.
Saudi Arabia considers atheists terrorists by definition.
"Sharia law was deveoped within a clear historical context, that evolved in response to specific historical circumstances, and that it was privy to the same social, polititcal, and economic factors that have been infleunced all legal codes in all cultures and in every part of the world."
Yes, it made sense in the 7th century but I would hope we have made some progress since then.
Nonetheless, a lot of those laws are not contextualized and just looked at in face value. Ayaan may think she knows all about Islamic history and the Qur'an, but she only hears what she wants to hear because of her own biased misrepresented views of Islam.
Ayaan's perspective is just as valid as yours. She grew up in a devout Muslim family and lived in several countries with a large Muslim presence (Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Kenya). If her view of Islam isn't quite as rosy as yours, perhaps it's because she suffered FGM as a little girl, had to flee abroad to escape an arranged marriage and has lived in fear of her life for many years now. When she lived in the Netherlands, she made a documentary called Submission about the treatment of women in Islam. The film director she made the documentary with, Theo van Gogh, was assassinated on the street by a Dutch Muslim and a knife was stuck in his chest holding a letter with a death threat to Ayaan.
That aside, "context" is the favourite excuse of any religious apologist, whether they're Christian, Jewish or Muslim. Somehow anyone critical of the plain text doesn't understand the context, unless the literal interpretation puts the religion in a more favourable light, then by all means ignore the context.
[youtube]PK7P7uZFf5o[/youtube]
Edit: oh dammit, I had dinner and came back to finish my post but now you've already responded. I"ll get back to you later
