[Pakistan] Vice Guide to Karachi

[Granville]

Originally Posted by stthomsfinest "If your wife is deliberately getting out of line/stirring things up/causing a rift in the marriage by being disobedient or hostile...(1) tell them to quit it, (2)refuse to lay in bed together with her, sleep with her and lastly (3) leave or separate from her (temporarily)." .

(4) Remind yourself that your wife is a woman and women thrive on

a. deliberately getting out of line
b. stirring things up
c. causing rifts in the marriage

And learn to live with it.

[s land balla]

Originally Posted by dmc89 Some translations of the Quran suggest something like this. However, in accordance with the idea of an omni-benevolent deity, I like to use this translation instead: Does the Quran Permit Men to Beat Their Wives? A famous (and controversial) passage in the Quran has brought about a great deal of misunderstanding about Islam. Pickthal's translation: Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for their support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then, if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted, Great. Edip Yuksel's translation: Men take care of women – since God has endowed some with qualities that differ in degree, and since men spend from their financial resources. The righteous women are obedient (to God), and during the absence (of their husbands), they honor them according to God's commandment, even when alone in their privacy. As for those women who bring about in you a fear of disloyalty, you shall first advise them. Then (if they continue), you may desert them in bed. Then, (if they continue), you may leave them. If they obey you, (however,) then you must not do any wrong against them. God is Most High, Supreme. – 4:34 See the difference? No beating allowed. It does NOT say it is okay to beat your wife. Granted some translators and other people believe that, but that's the problem with religion and its interpretation. One of the many problems in societies that are dominated by Islamic beliefs, is little respect for freedom of expression. A consequence of that is hypersensitivity to any criticism of Islam. I see this quality in my distant cousins and acquaintances very frequently, and most of them would not agree with Edip's translation for fear of something being wrong with the popular (sexist) ones. Also, I disagree with FranchiseBlade. A large percentage of terrorism is because of Islam; I think this has something to do with its power to focus on an afterlife rather than despair because of terrible 'quality of life' on Earth. I can understand an athiest's belief that so much being left to interpretation would not be a product of an omniscient god, but that is assuming that Allah/God doesn't want people to think critically and try to get along with one another regardless of religious differences. Life is a test of maintaining oneness with each other without losing one's humanity. Religion could take a backseat in Islamic countries without fear of society falling apart. The Quran says morality comes from within and is born with us, not externally from a book or a person.

Great post.

[adeelsiddiqui]

Originally Posted by s land balla Great post.

Sad that it won't be read.

[AroundTheWorld]

Originally Posted by adeelsiddiqui Sad that it won't be read.

I read it and repped it.

Of course, even with the "soft" translation, one can question from a modern perspective why the woman would have to "obey you" (I bet feminists would faint) and why it has to be only the man who makes money.

Again, I think all these texts (including the bible) were written by men (and possibly women) mostly with good intentions, and of course influenced by the time they were written in. Most possibly, hitting women was the norm back then, and the writer of this wanted to make it happen less, so he wrote some restrictive rules on ONLY when it would be allowed.

Taking a really old book literally is kind of silly anyway. I'm sure there are some wisdoms in it which can inspire people to live a better life, and be a better person, but trying to tweak a translation so it "looks better" seems like an unnecessary effort.

[BrownBeast99]

Originally Posted by AroundTheWorld BrownBeast99, I think you're a great guy from the posts I have seen, but I think defending that outdated and crazy wife beating permission from the Quran really doesn't make sense. I'd say that at the time that was written, it meant well because it was probably an improvement from the practice at the time. Mankind has fortunately, in most civilized countries, come a step further than that already. There is NEVER a reason to beat your wife, "extreme last resort", yada yada etc. or not.

Those 3 measures aren't really something that is evident in our times, I agree. It was more related to back then, when Arabs would beat their wives to no avail and get away with it. This was revealed to lessen what was very rampant back in those days, as you said. I understand beating is not civilized nowadays and the Quran isn't advocating beating as another poster mentioned.

I think a lot of the difference lies in how Muslims and non-believers view life in general. Life is revolved around religion for devout Muslims. Everyone strives to follow the principles and do good in order to gain paradise. So the "beating" or leaving of the wife is done if she isn't compliant with God's orders and acting in forbidden ways, to try to get her back on the "right path" as Muslims believe. It goes vice-versa as well, if the man is misbehaving, the woman can leave him and will be granted a divorce. I realize it's not something that's easy to believe for others. I understand your viewpoints though.

[BrownBeast99]

Originally Posted by DaDakota I appreciate your answer Brown, but what you typed is one of the reasons I could never believe. I just don't believe God would say that - and while I understand people needing something to believe in, and wanting to live a better life and religion can be good for that. I personally believe it is all made up by man, to serve his own needs at the time it was written. DD

That's cool if you don't believe any of that. I'm not the best at explaining things but I was just trying to offer an explanation. It's just sad that extremists are nitpicking the Quran to satisfy their own desires and in turn, giving the religion a bad name.

[Grandpappy]

Originally Posted by BrownBeast99 Not if they are implemented correctly. No, Saudi Arabia and Iran are not implementing them correctly. Currently, no one is and probably won't in the future.

Government and religion do not mix regardless if the underlying religious principles are implemented correctly or not. Separation of church and state is first and foremost to having a stable government. You cannot argue faith and a country cannot be governed by the principles of one particular faith. There will always be one sector or another that will be unhappy because they think their particular facets are more right than the other ones. This holds true to even different sects within a religion.

[DaDakota]

Originally Posted by Grandpappy Government and religion do not mix regardless if the underlying religious principles are implemented correctly or not. Separation of church and state is first and foremost to having a stable government. You cannot argue faith and a country cannot be governed by the principles of one particular faith. There will always be one sector or another that will be unhappy because they think their particular facets are more right than the other ones. This holds true to even different sects within a religion.

A - ****ING - MEN !

DD

[BrownBeast99]

Originally Posted by Grandpappy Government and religion do not mix regardless if the underlying religious principles are implemented correctly or not. Separation of church and state is first and foremost to having a stable government. You cannot argue faith and a country cannot be governed by the principles of one particular faith. There will always be one sector or another that will be unhappy because they think their particular facets are more right than the other ones. This holds true to even different sects within a religion.

We were discussing about Pakistan (which is what this thread was about originally). The situation is extremely unstable and if they had a true Islamic government, it would be a better situation. Not a perfect situation, not America, but better than it currently is. DD said eliminating religion would help solve the problem so I was just offsetting that statement since religion is not the main issue behind Pakistan's current troubles.

[AroundTheWorld]

Originally Posted by BrownBeast99 if they had a true Islamic government, it would be a better situation.

Do you see any current such government in the world, or one that comes close?

[BrownBeast99]

Originally Posted by AroundTheWorld Do you see any current such government in the world, or one that comes close?

Nope. They are Islamic governments by name but not by practice. Pakistan is actually "Islamic Republic of Pakistan" but the government is not religious nor do they run the country based on the religion.

[DaDakota]

Originally Posted by BrownBeast99 DD said eliminating religion would help solve the problem so I was just offsetting that statement since religion is not the main issue behind Pakistan's current troubles.

Not the main issue but it is one of the issues.

DD