story time with Mrs. Selim
or women discover the Koran.
The Koran in the hands of women
http://www.kath.ch/index.php?PHPSESSID=q247n3f9c7je5fkv7k06h916a2&na=12, 0,215,0, d, 16 277
not the religion is hostile to women, but the men who interpret
Both are staunch feminists and devout Muslim women. The Iranian Shirin Ebadi and the Egyptian Nahed Selim talk about amazing discoveries in reading the Koran: It is not the religion is hostile to women, but the men who interpret them.
Three times must a man who wants to divorce his wife exclaimed: "I'll get a divorce from you," This interpretation of Islam that prevails in Iran, can divorce a man at any time from his wife. Conversely, it is different: For the resolution marriage a woman needs the written permission of their wed spouse. It must also demonstrate that this mentally ill, is likely infertile or unsuitable in any other way.
Source: Article by Sibylle Stillhart in NZZ on Sunday, 21/05/2006
___________________________________________________________________
Under the title "The Koran is in the hands of women", the "NZZ am Sonntag" reported in a bona fide products by Sibylle down hard on religious Muslim women, the "convinced feminists" are. They have allegedly been "amazing discoveries in reading the Koran" is not the religion is hostile to women, but "The men who interpret them." The warranty
women (and others) for this "amazing discoveries" are favored by the Western Islamic lobby Iranian Shirin Ebadi and the Egyptian Nahed Selim.
We present the merits of the women who enter such Ebadi in Islamic countries for human rights and Islamic reform, not by no means in agreement. But what is to be a no alternative strategy under the conditions of the murderous persecution of all opposition seems to be justified in the Koran that can be used for the dissidents in exile and all Islamic enemies who want nothing to do with the Koran and that are not cosmetic Koran correction and new Hairstyle of the Prophet provides a perspective on women's rights, do not prevail.
women's rights and Islam, as well as all human rights and Islam or democracy and Islam are the quadrature of the circle dar. The same Galubwürdigkeitsanspruch could make the "amazing discovery" that anti-Semitism has nothing to do with Nazism, but only with the Nazis, who interpreted it that way. "Mein Kampf" can not even describe, and the Nuremberg Geetze not be human if you explain that the Nazis did it "interpreted" just wrong. Of course, between being convinced Islam agent and forced Muslims is distinguished. The latter have in Islamic countries have no chance to come out without a death threat. But what is the cosmetic Islam mean for us?
that "Religion" "interpreted" not only by men, but was created from A to Z by a man and his male and female supporters is, these reformers not Debabbte, they stay in the cage around their head caught, the only talk of the Korankritkern the plaintext is broken up like Ali Sina.
Shirin Ebadi, Islam is in principle do not ask, received the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize, a Apostatin from Iran could hardly get him by Dhimmiseliten. Ebadi advocates for women's rights, which can be "compatible" with Islam. Because we believe so little as to the compatibility of the human rights of Jews to the Nazis. The system is the problem.
Otherwise, they would have in no way theocracy Iran, as she wrote herself and how the NZZ aS referenced. And because women's rights in Islam have no chance, we should understand the Islamic apologia as women's rights? The forced-Islam, which does not allow basic Kriti may well be a benchmark for Islamkritikir.
Also, the "magazine" (supplement of the left-ilamophilen Baz and Tages-Anzeiger) interviewed the apologist, not a dissident. (News Apr 15, 06), which declares there, female circumcision is a Christian tradition, not Islamic. Sort of like Farhad Afshar by the "Council of Religions" in Bern told the stoning is not Muslim, but Jewish.> Afshar
http://reginevancleev.blogspot.com/2010/02/arena-mit-afshar.html
There is no Christian scripture or scriptural interpretation, which legitimizes the female mutilation, the pre-Christian as well as the stoning. If a barbaric archaic "practice" until now only legalized by the Islamic legal system, such as stoning or flogging, which in none other than the Islamic law- and practice law until today, or such as genital mutilation, which is nowhere so common and legitimate, we under Islam (until very short with legal opinions of the Al Azhar), for which there is no Christian equivalent, which would justify such "customs", the degradation of the Islamic woman to meet Koran, then these barbarities for Islamapologetin Ebadi "Christian", not a pre-Christian "tradition" are - but not something Islamic, but older. Sibylle Stillhart also moves in the narrow context of the apology.
in Côte d'Ivoire 79% of women are mutilated Muslim - the Muslim Christian traditions practice, we would be brand new. Ms Ebadi does indeed astonishing discoveries. In Nigeria, even Christian women are victims of circumcision. However, claim the Muslims in Nigeria Schariarecht for the whole country. What right is dominant is still undecided.
For Ms. Ebadi, the Koran is not a message of hate. Assuming you read only what you want. Perhaps Shirin Ebadi Ali Sina explain why the Koran is not what it is - for all those who critically and all who read it believe. But since faith freedom does not exist in Islam, one can speak of reforms that recognize this religious system, expect only embellishment.
(Note 2010: Ah, the woman's rights activist Nawal el Saadawi from Egypt forbade after the Iranian revolution under Khomeini any interference from Western women, feminists, in the internal affairs of the Islamic revolution. She now lives in exile in the United States. With lower haste by Western feminists)
The Egyptian Nahed Selim, who wrote a book with the illusory title. "Take the men of the Koran," argues even more dubious than Ebadi, who advocates probably against their better knowledge among the blood regime for the Koran as Woman with the law. Nahed Selim polished or shiny.
What motivates these women, with the Umfrisierung of misogynistic men concoctions to make creating, in which they are downgraded as inferior. What is the devotion of the women in the man's handiwork? They have grown up in it. Had the Nazis won, then wild and millions of Europeans conquered it be better and there would also always people who wanted to reform the Nuremberg Laws, because they found them exaggerated ... The idea that women could reject the whole swindle, lies far away in this environment. If they did, they would escape the consequences and pull. This, of course, no one who is / not in their situation, expect the women around, and we do not. We could talk easily. But what we can expect is a minimum of intellectual honesty that would refuse to handle any other persuasion of Islam threatened the fundamental work of religious terror against women, unbelievers, Jews and Christians from the perspective of the apologists.
Where the dissidence is mortally threatened, can be no apology for the scale of the criticism of religion. There are, as I said, no human version of "Mein Kampf". Those who can not be disloyal can and must, therefore those who are not selling the Koran as a work of women's liberation. Maybe well intentioned, but absurd. If the "prophet" are also a woman liberator?
It is also called the Stockholm Syndrome the prisoners hostage. But what do the forced Muslims, is a critical reading, not a pedicure in the wake of the Koran believers> also a Fatima Mernissi (> see review), which is considered Islam critic, can not like like the prophet, like all apologists in the West as " critically apply "if they are active only as a hairdressers on the prophet's beard.
http://reginevancleev.blogspot.com/2010/02/egalitarian-islam-and-misogynist.html
Nahed Selim then finds out that in addition to the texts which they interpret as a woman not in the least just or humane " "can - and it is the relevant and momentous - still others exist, where could rumdeuteln woman. Since refers to Islam beauticians who seem on Quranic beatings and violence right of men to disturb the main text is less out, that could be in the inheritance case, the legacy of the woman by a testamentary disposition of the man also "distributed differently." It allowed to laugh. The woman can inherit something that is more than half of men share if the deceased shall have it graciously. She herself has not the slightest influence on even a right! Selim is based on the legality of de Koran and Sharia law and is looking for "loopholes" through which the woman if she's lucky to escape, or a blue Eye away with it. What the Koran cosmetic has to do with women's rights?
The beautification experiment are not only harmless, because they offer the Western Islamic friends who want to make us the Sharia palatable to find wonderful opportunity, gaps and holes through which the Islamic law is introduced to us. it is supposed to be quite compatible woman!
H $ tte d Selim close to a concept of women's rights, könntesie these suras hairstyles do not pretend to be women's rights. In the Koran, the woman is not only half-value, as Mrs Selina thinks and sees that it is hardly viertelwertig: The Harem Men can have four wives. Selim draws no conclusions from it but on the Status of Women to Koran. The man can plow and as often as he wants.
Not everything is well meaning, is also tolerable.
Even though Islam women "discriminates", was, doubted the two "intellectuals" but not a moment in their faith. What do believe the two "intellectuals" for? We doubt only to their intellectual competence. But after the Sybil Hart Still does not ask first, she must qualify to represent Islam and the example of the Prophet. Or keep both the harem not credible and exemplary?
What fits the two women do not really call them "misinterpretation." As the wife beating instructions of the Quran to "interpret" is correct, we know not. Or polygamy, or a declaration that the woman is without his mind at the man. It lacks the Koran compliant women lack the necessary intelligence that denies them the Koran? If women believe in the Koran, then he just has rights. Ebadi now says the proverb that all apologists by heart and that is no less absurd when it is echoed in the West of islammfrommen women.
"Not the religion but patriarchal traditions rule curtailing the rights of women."
Islam therefore would not be a traditional patriarchal domination. Is he invented about women been and we have not yet discovered it? But what comes directly from the Messenger of Allah, may indeed not men (right) are traditional, that must be divine. The "intellectual" believing women sit fully on the men veröttlichten law.
If we like hearing from a chronic representatives of the local Islamic lobby in the media, we know that we are dealing with the worst Dhimmiverdummung, the most hackneyed mantras of Islamapologie If this says a woman in Iran who is not with the mullahs' religious will destroy them and can, then it is the Stockholm Syndrome. She explains the religious terror masters in the face, that their religion is a religion of law men , but have made only the men from a men's rights. What these men as men should be of law against women created their religion without male violence legal foundation, can not explain Shirin Ebadi. For the dissidents lack the Islam-critical skills. And that is precisely the reason why she received the Nobel Prize. Not Ibn Warraq as it gets, but a safe for the Western lobby Islam Islam believers who believe in the democracy-compatible Islam or so when she does believe in him. No persecuted Islamic apostate, the plain text speaks for Islam and the West would have to confess to the color. Apology is fatter than apostasy.
Besides Ebadi smiling woman Selim from the NZZ. A believer of the true Islam, which is to be so, as women are rightly puts it. The brutal truth will not admit, but bends and umdichtet in a little more pleasing, Islam light that exists nowhere but, even in the EU, where Bassam Tibi invented him, but he is nowhere to be found. The femininity of the Prophet would miss not easy. As it is with Aisha's age? How would women cope tweak the marriage of the prophet for children? Perhaps the type of Kindesschänder all countries, who say whatever, the girl looked even older? Did the Prophet perhaps fallen in love?
The Beautiful dyers and spread lies about Islam, women, how they like to hear in the west, where the truth about this religion only bothers face the persecuted ex-Muslim women who were in the NZZ 2005 already presented as liars. They are also mentioned in this article, at least in part: So Necla Kelek, Chahdortt Djavann and Hirsi Ali, all living in exile and with a different relationship to the truth and a different understanding of criticism as the Islamic hairdressers. The dissidents are the author, but not quite uneasy, - Hirsi Ali explains in her "Pamphlet" (showing the Kush culture accessible to the courage with which they distanced themselves from the so-called "pamphlet" that she does not quote,) "does. the exit from Islam. " This is reminiscent of the Pamphlert the NZZ of 2005 by a dhimmi called Amman Hirsi Ali laments, be apostates is! Therefore not credible! As a dhimmi wrote before dissident what they had to believe that if she wanted to be credible!
A woman says to leave the woman slave-religion. Even waste from fascism must be quite frightening. Vgl.Ludwig Ammann in the NZZ v. 7.7.2005, they are dissidents verdäüchtig,
(Hürriyet and NZZ>) However, Ebadi and Selim called for a "dynamic Islam." What is this? An Islam without Sharia? Stone or dynamic with internal changes, eg, less stones? What remains of the Islamic law in a "contemporary context"? If the Koran is the context and the human rights declaration, one can forget the love's of women around the Prophet's beard.
To Mrs. demonstrations in Tehran, women are beaten, so abroad a false picture of the human rights situation in Iran is produced. There, the exact image is üdermittelt by the Koran, Islam is peace, Frauenversklavung is women's rights. The name changes do nothing to change,
(Note 2010: In England it is already forbidden to describe Islamic terrorism as Islamic, he is now called "anti-Islamic terror." This is as meaningful as the renaming of the misogynist Koran. in a women's rights declaration. It is not even particularly in the west, where the antifeminist phenomena are declared as "feminist" and the brothel is being sold as sexual liberation.)
Similar to women's rights, which are to be Islamic compatible, Ebadi has with democracy, which should not be achieved by inciting a riot. Maybe by talking to the mullahs? Or a dialogue with Ahmadinejad?
(Note in 2010 this may now be different in Iran, where the uprising against the regime accepts Aussmasse that Ebadi perhaps did not foresee, which is also terrorized. It now has her Nobel Prize medal beschlagt also loyalty Confessions the religion of Islam does not benefit more if the City of God shows his bare head, too. As well as all reformers are in sight).
In her autobiographical book "My Iran - A Life of Revolution and Hope," she admits that with a forward by mullahs opposition, "said the man on the street" in a familiar tone, more public had with the Shah- regime, at his court "romped around American movie star." Now the starlet really no argument for the Mullahherrrschaft. Any more than the cholera plague of the talks.
(Note; 20101: We should be familiar with the conversation with the man on the street do not forget, that women in Iran do not like the man can move on the road. There were many women are on the road that their husbands have run away and fled from the violence at home, so that the ayatollahs have been given to the establishment of "houses of decency" that the man is not on the street approached too familiar.)
that they exchanged a regime of torture prisons for the next one with no less brutal methods of the theocracy, it was then felt as if a judge who had believed in democracy, was deposed. (Khomeini's program was not known? For the leftists in the west it was sacrosanct because it confirmed their enemy USA. The nature of the new revolutionary regime was immediately when the women were put in the sack.
Even Khomeini romped way with a girl about 18 and allowed the romp of the Muslim men with nine-year-olds, and even with a baby can the Muslim men frolic sexually by the scholars of Qom, with an indication of how the infant should be treated then! Whether the lawyer this is not the mitbekam Essentials of the revolution?
For the Egyptian Nahed Selim, Islam is not responsible for the re-Islamization and the increased oppression of women in Egypt, not the Muslim brotherhoods, but: the Six Day War. Oh.
It is not Islam, which suppresses the women, it is actually Israel?
Islam it should not be. At that time, she explains, turban-wearers were to blame for the defeat by Israel dealt the women who "with their bare arms and legs blasphemy" operated. The women would have to withdraw from public life. (Though but the men of war were lost. But the worst enemy of the Muslims were clearly the women had to be punished.)
were a result shot fanatical organizations like mushrooms, "says Selim, members of the Muslim Brothers were from custody been dismissed.
"Is it God's Judgement, that half of his subjects - the women - on earth, a dog's life leads and with the aid of his texts practically discriminated against the world and despised, "
she says almost simple, and comes not only at the idea that these men God is so male-interest shaped like his? inventor. Mrs. Selim is on a naïve pre-critical stage and religion does not come up with the idea that Islamic law men by men for men was created, whose power over women, it guarantees a "divine willen2. Disbelief is the Islamic compliant woman brain not even a conceptual option, persecution and murder of an apostate is not to think, but seems to strengthen the faith. The article by Sibylle Stillhart concludes with the sentence:
"For them (Selim) is established. It is high time that women are beginning to read the Koran itself"
would be there, and read while critical as Ali Sina does, the reading of the Quran explained exemplary for those who did not know what's in them. For Muslims and non-Muslims. From the first, he says, if they knew what it was, they would have to be disloyal. But that seems not to be the case. Even the most sexist piece of work by men to female lightweight believers who reject not embellish it, but want. Was it not women who wove the first clothes for the worst of men?
0 comments:
Post a Comment