Islam honours and Respects women

Readers, my opponent claims I have "brought verses out of their original meaning" and "misinterpreted commentary." Further, she accuses my answers of being copied from "anti-Islam" sites. Ironically, I introduced no text whatsoever that was not from a document of Islam. If these documents support an "anti-Islam stance, that is not my problem. Also, my opponent claims that there are some topics we will disagree on, stating that I "might say some practices are barbaric while I'll say they're justified and vice-versa." I assure you readers that there are very few practices of Islam I consider justified that Muslims would consider barbaric, while there are many, MANY practices of Islam that the world considers barbaric and Muslims consider "justified." So in this vein, I will seek to find my opponent's "justification" for some of the issues we discuss. As a side note, introducing "co-authored" responses (http://answeringchristians.blogspot.com...) as a rebuttal is a poor and dishonest debate tactic because it involves far more material than can be reasonably responded to in 8000 characters. Further, referring to full-text articles lets the articles do your work for you. If that was a legitimate debate strategy, both sides would simply post a series of links to rebut the other. As such, I will ignore her sources and focus on her own summations of them (which I DO accept as valid). Let's begin: >> "He's [a husband] suppose to sacrifice his freedom for her [a wife]" I suppose this sort of sacrificial freedom has something to do with the prohibition placed on women concerning talking to non-related males. What freedoms is the man sacrificing, and what benefit do they provide the wife that she would otherwise not be provided? Unless there is a specific example to set this apart, this is not a salient point at all. >> "Quran verse 4:34 refers to specific women." That must be the part where it says "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other..." which certainly sounds like ALL men excel above ALL women - not anything about specific women. >> "The verse [4:34] doesn't say to beat those who aren't listening to their husbands. It speaks of women who are rebellious and acting in an ill-conduct way" Oh. THESE women. So I suppose that if they get a little rebellious (perhaps seeking to wear jeans in public?), it's OK to begin corporeal punishment? We aren't concerned with the fact that they have done something considered "wrong," we're considered for finding a justification for corporeal punishment, a practice that has long since gone by the wayside as barbaric. >> "Now if we backtrack to verse 4:19, men cannot be harsh to women unless they're openly lewd which means sexually open. A modern day example is Las Vegas. Women are pole dancing in the public, there's people handing out cards with nude women on it" So you would say it's perfectly OK to "honor and respect" these women by lightly beating them and refusing to sleep with them? >> "There's 3 steps for a husband to take which MUST be followed in order... The first is to talk to her, if she keep's doing it then don't sleep with her and the final step is hit." Again, where is the "honor and respect" shown to a woman by lightly beating her (or hitting, tapping, smacking, etc...)?? >> "All scholar's and all commentaries say this is a "light" and "symbolic" tap meant for humiliating." Oh I see - you "honor and respect" women by humiliating them. >> "The West leads the world in rapes and harassments of women. Skimpy outfits won't help" Completely immaterial. And highly suspect depending on your definition of "harassment." >> "the laws of inheritance have rules on them as well. Again whatever a woman recieves is for herself only while whatever a man recieves is for supporting the family. Women in Islam don't have to work while men do. Also dowries are paid by men to women. So in the end women who don't inherit the same amount as men, still are getting supported. I don't see anything wrong here." So when property from parents is divided upon their death, you don't see anything wrong with the male child getting 2/3 of the property and the female child getting 1/3?? >> "You have totally screwed up verse 4:19. It speaks of women who's husband's have died, brother's of the husbands can't take them in." Unless they are flagrantly lewd... Then they ARE inherited. >> "You brought up verse 33:36. All it says is follow the messanger and the Quran." It says: "And it becometh not a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His messenger have decided an affair (for them), that they should (after that) claim any say in their affair; and whoso is rebellious to Allah and His messenger, he verily goeth astray in error manifest." Then 33:37 clarifies that it applies to marriage (and divorce) as well. >> "A man can't divorce his wife for any reason." From your own source: "Caliph Umer legitimized this form [the triple Talaq] of divorce as an emergency measure." So... yes, he can. Though it's frowned upon. The wife, however, cannot do so - she has to meet certain standard concerning impropriety in the marriage. >> "If men do take more than one wife, they have to treat them all equally with kindness. Anything less and there's consequences." That's not the issue - the issue is of equality. How many husbands can a woman take? >> "I'll ask my opponent once again to not take verses out of context. You only posted part of 2:282. This verse actually refers to finances..." I think you need to reread the verse. Sure it is talking about finances, but then it very clearly states that you must have as witnesses to a contract two men, or else, one man and two women. Again - the issue has nothing to do with finances, but whether or not a woman's word is equal to a man's. >> "I'm a med student and women have more psychological problems than men. And these cases can fall at the wrong time (like if a woman's pregnant). So the Quran call's for 2 women just in case if the woman forgets something." Right. Because the woman's memory is inherently inferior to men's? Despite this article (http://www.britannica.com...) that says, "Women have the upper hand in storing and recalling verbal episodic memories" - Men do better at spatial memory, but then again, a contract is more like a verbal form of storage than a spatial one. Also, from (http://news.softpedia.com...), "Women clearly outperformed men in verbal episodic memory tasks, like remembering words, objects, pictures or everyday events." >> "Quran 5:6 refers to ablution. Please read the full verse." I suppose that in the course of praying, you quite often come into contact with women - so much that it's mentioned specifically as an instance where you need to wash. >> "I doubt the Prophet Muhammed would insult women, especially on the day of Eid." So while not being insulting... the Prophet Muhammed honors and respects women by joking disparagingly about their genitalia... >> "Back before Islam women weren't seen as human. They were seen as useless men-making machines." This is actually VERY incorrect. I encourage you to take a course in the beliefs of ancient world peoples. Before Islam and Judaism, the focus was on GODDESS worship, not GOD worship. Females were sacred. Not property. >> "When Islam came it gave women rights and freedoms to the same level as men." See divorce, social interactions, inheritance, testimony, movement, property ownership... the list goes on... *********************************************************************************** NEGATED