[QUOTE=peacepakistan;445392][QUOTE=Hassan02;445317][QUOTE=peacepakistan;445162]


First of all, I didn't even say that today's world is entirely safe, just that it is safer than it was centuries ago. And saying that women should not out for fear of rapists is like saying men should go out in Karachi for fear of getting shot.

And men aren't sweet things? Why? Aap ko b sweet dish hona chahiye mere bhai.
Whatever caused these things, it was not the struggle by women for basic rights. Why are you so afraid of independent women bro?

Pardon me, sir, I did not know that you were from among the distinguished group known as "Zaid Ke Mureed".



Dear WWII didn't happen yesterday, that too was in the past. And yes, my argument still holds because there aren't as many wars now in the world as there were 1400 years ago.

You talk about chaos sir, that was the time when small kingdoms were springing up in Europe, vying for control. Sir, the majority of South Asians are rising up in the world. Do not restrict your view of South Asia to only Pakistan. And no one is being "defeated" as you term it by social degradation.

BTW, talking about South Asia, do you know that in the mid 6th century, the Gupta Empire in India was overrun by the Huns and chaos ensued. India today is much, much more stable and peaceful than it was at that time.


There probably isn't going to be a third world war.


How does that relate to the argument at hand?


The women in the Khalifa's harem were made to do chores? What a joke man!
And I've already said that the problem is with muslims, NOT ISLAM.


I should have said that there was a increase in slaves being brought from Africa under Muslims. I did not mean to say that slavery was started by the Muslims. The earliest evidence for slavery dates back to 2100 BC BTW.


Are you comparing robbery to a woman being raped? You have "uncontrolled freedom" to touch fire, but do you touch it. I say implement Islamic Law, lash every sex offender and people will stop harassing women. Do you agree?

And so have I.

In your efforts to highlight the faults of the west, you have given arguments to support my stance that the world is safer now than it was. Maybe I should have included more example of violence from the west, but I wanted to illustrate the fact the Muslims aren't angles either.

And so have I.

My Question: Whats Women freedom to you? Envisage your picture of Women in society
Where they are independent and do not live under constant fear of being harassed. Fair enough?

All most everything that you've said has already been discussed, but I'll reply to these arguments once again.

1) Nukes: US and USSR would have gone to war long ago, but for the fear of nukes. Similarly, both India and Pakistan would have shown a much greater restraint since they both got nukes.

2)Big investors and poor laborers: I don't know which country you ar talking about but the West is really well off, at least compared to Pakistan. Look closer to home and hundreds of people have been lifted out of poverty since the 1970s. In India, the middle class is estimated to be around 50 Million. Wake up brother, ordinary people are now more well-off than they were ever before (although there are some exceptions, to be fair).

3) Biased Media: Just because the media doesn't show what you want it to, it doesn't man its biased. And even if its a little biased, we at least have a media!

4) Energy Crisis: Well duh! The energy you are talking about didn't even exist in the past.

5) Extreme consumerism and materialistic approach: Whats wrong with being materialistic? If you don't want to buy things, its your choice, but why hate n people who like to do so?

6) Lossof moral and social norms: Loss of norms according TO YOU. Don't pretend you speak for the entire world.

7) increase in diseases: I actually lol'ed at this; life expectency is now the highest ever, in history!

8)underdeveloped and developed economies: what is this supposed to mean?

9) nation state theories: what's wrong with a nation state?

How can it be claimed World today is any safer or better than it was??? Rape is taking place at a very large scale in Western countries and even there most of the cases are not reported, only the reasons for not reporting rape in "Developed Western Society" is different than our "Developing Third World". And that reason is they don't actually bother about rape as much as we do, only feminists use rape statistics for their propaganda value but for those who have been offended, its like a everyday petty quarrel or something .

__________________
The precondition for existence of a higher humanity is not the state, but the nation possessing the necessary ability.

Yes, it doesn't. But they are your point of attention.


OK. Agreed. I'm not against woman rights. Your aim is that why a working or outgoing woman is sexually harassed and you're against those men who want women to stay at home just to be safe from that harassment. yeah ?

Same is my aim but slightly differing then yours' .


Look, I'm against those humanitarians who are demanding freedom of vulgarity for woman. That is totally out of Islam. And even it can't be solved by Ijtehad to give right of unveiling to woman. This is full stop in the book of ALLAH for a woman. But still we muslims are not obeying this order unfortunately.

No, compromise on vulgarity.



You're supposed not to pinpoint my English again. Understood ?



Yes, they were. But you said they were raped. Didn't you ? And I said such Questions are raised by Atheists, Christians, Hindus and pagans just because of their hatred towards Islam and specially Muhammad (s.a.w.w). The same way you questioned. That is shameful.


Now, Let me explain it how such questions are raised and what is their answer ?



Anti-Islamists often raise -as a point of contention- that there are several ahadith [traditions from the life of the Prophet Muhammad ~sallill'ahu 'aleyhi wa salaam~] and Qu’ran verses which seem to allow not only for men to take female captives in war, but also to have sexual relations with them, even against their will [i.e. rape]. They often point to Qu’ran verses such as the following:

“And all married women (are forbidden unto you -Muslims) save those whom your right hands possess.” [Holy Qu'ran 4:24]

The words that are translated into English in that verse as “those whom your right hands possess” is the Arabic phrase ma malakat aymanukum and in the classical Arabic it is a polite term for slaves captured in war. Thus the above verse is forbidding men to have an intimate relationship with married women, unless those women are war captives. The hot button issue here is that men are seemingly given the permission to have sex with slave-women, whether married or unmarried. It is easy to take this verse out of it’s context and say, “See! Islam doesn’t respect women rights and allows men to take them as slaves and force themselves on them! Boo Islam!“

A call to grasping the historical context of this Qu’ran verse is in order. We must understand that the first recipients of the Message of Islam, [which is the world as it was known in the 7th century] had a custom of taking women captives of war, and thus it should be noted that Islam did not invent this practice. This custom of having sexual relations with slave-girls was practiced by virtually every culture at the time. The wars in the Pre-Islamic Arabian Peninsula were on a tribal basis, and when the men were killed their women were taken and undoubtedly were treated quite inhumanely.
However, the Prophet Muhammad ~sallill’ahu ‘aleyhi wa salaam~ was sent to abolish (or start the process of abolishing) all of that which was inhumane and degrading to mankind. He [saas] has said in an authentic tradition that “I have been sent to make perfect the moral character [of man].” Having the task of eliminating this [and hundreds of other] evils, the Prophet [saas] could have taken one of two paths:
1-To abolish it at once.
2-To do the same gradually with wisdom.
Allah [swt] and His Messenger [saas] preferred the second path because if such a deeply ingrained practice had been abolished at once then thousands of women would have been left to provide for themselves, and the likelihood of Arab men taking “damaged goods” [as they are called] as their wives was unlikely. The first duty of the Prophet [saas], then was to establish a more humane and compassionate view of women in his society, and gradually teach people to respect and have mercy on the “lower class” as they are called, to forgive people for that which they may have had inflicted on them or for sins they may have committed in their past, etc. Once the hearts of his followers had reached this level of sublime morality, then steps were taken via Qu’ranic revelations and Prophetic instructions to discourage the practice of concubinage so much so that within 100 years of the death of the Prophet [saas], it had been wiped out of the Arab peninsula as a whole.
We have to consider what the condition of such women would have been had the institution of slavery not been in place. This was a time before homeless shelters, before women rights movements, etc. Imagine a woman whose male family members had all been killed on the battlefield in a decimated and war-torn city. After the intruding armies had left, what was she to do? How would she support herself? Islam first dealt with this problem by putting them under the guardianship of Muslim men and mandated that they should treat them kindly, provide them board and lodge and give them respect. Imagine what could have been their fate in that particular environment had things not been thus!





This is what I've explained above.


دو کشثیوں کی سواری مث کرو میرے بھائ ۔ ایک ثیر سے دو مخثلف اھداف پہ وار کرہے ھو ۔ پچھلے بیان میں آپ ن کھا کہ ان قیدی عورثوں ے زیادثی کی گئ اور اب کھ رھے ھیں کہ آپ [رسول اللہ] نے ان کے ساثھ اچھا سلوک کیا؟ کیا آپ کے بیان میں ثضاد نھیں؟




یہ بھی درج بالا بیان سے مثصل ھے۔




Rani Bai herself was responsible for that. And Qasim didn't took them captive rather Rani Bai after being encircled, surrendered and burnt herself along with other ladies.


And in the life time of we fools every place is safer ?


I'm taught by my Islamic values not to accept unauthentic narrations. Full stop !!

The incident of captive women is off course first mentioned inthe book of Ibn Ishaq the wroter of first biography of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w) and He has quoted even unauthentic Ahadiths.




Thanks for remembering.




OK. And muslims didn't have such reasons ? Even order by Allah in Qur'an is not considered by You ? That is mentioned and the verse stated above ?

Allah ki Hikmat nami lafz say waqif tu hun gay aap ?


Everyone will be judged. Also those raising unnecessary questions and those making Permissibles haram, and, Haram as permissible.
This is actually FITNA.





I've no conflict with you over it as it is also my point of view. Except safety of females.



Yes.

__________________
You've got to get the stage in life where GOING for it is more important than WINNIG or LOSING.

The Eastern countries aren't far behind. Anyways, returning to the actual discussion:

Kitos War: A Jewish revolt around 115 AD. Around 200,000 Romans were massacred in Cyrene and 240,000 in Cyprus (but this is disputed).

The Sack of Carthage: 149 BC. Almost 450,000 people were killed, only 50,000 survived.

Massacre of the Latins: 1182 AD, Constantinople. 60000-80000 people killed by mobs.

Yangzhou massacre: 1645. Around 800,000 killed.

AND NOW MASSACRES BY MUSLIMS:

Granada Massacre: 1066 AD. A Muslim mob stormed the royal palace of Granada, crucified the Jewish vizier and killed around 4000 Jews in the city.
Cyprus Massacre: After Ottoman forces took Cyprus. Around 50,000 killed.

Chios Massacre: Around 20,000 Greeks killed by Ottomans

Hamidian massacres: Around 100,000-300,000 Armenians killed by Ottomans

All the above involved rape and violence against women, but I’ll give two other examples just to drive the point home:

1) Nanking Massacre: 20,000-80,000 women were raped. 200,000+ people killed by Japanese.

2) Ottoman sack of Constantinople 1453: There was rape and looting for 3 days (although some say that this was stopped after 24 hours).

3) During the Armenian genocide (Armenian Holocaust), 1.8-2 MILLION people were killed. Thousands of women were raped by Ottoman forces.

4) Sack of Constantinople in 1204: Pillaging for three days. Ironically, the city was sacked by a crusading army! Even nuns in churches were raped.

Thousands of women were also enslaved in war and taken back home by the victors. However, it should be noted here that Islam has set severe penalties for rape, both during war and peace. As I said earlier, the problem is with Muslims, NOT ISLAM.


Brother I don't know about you, but very few people are raped often enough to consider it a petty quarrel. You life must be pretty hard :P

No, they are not.

OK. Agreed. I'm not against woman rights. Your aim is that why a working or outgoing woman is sexually harassed and you're against those men who want women to stay at home just to be safe from that harassment. yeah ?


It is not for you to decide whats vulgar and whats not. In fact, it's not for you or me to stop someone from being vulgar. You don't like vulgar people; ignore them. Every person should mind his or her own business.

As I said earlier, just because you don't like what history is telling you, it doesn't mean that it's not true.

I don't know if you are acting dumb on purpose or you really don't understand, but I never said Islam was wrong. Muslims don't follow Islam now and they didn't follow it back then. According to the Islamic rules of war, rape is not allowed, but few generals could control their soldiers and even fewer wanted to.


You are now presenting evidence for my argument that women are after now than in the past.

You say that the practice of concubinage was abolished, but there are mountains of evidence that hundreds of slave girls were brought home by Arab raiders as concubines.



She would prefer no guardianship to being raped. Anyways, as I've already stated, Islam is not at fault, Muslims are. Remember Karbala? The FOLLOWERS were responsible for it, not ISLAM. Please learn to draw a distinction between Islam and Muslims.




Please do your research before commenting again; Bai was Raja Dahir's wife. The siege of Debal happened BEFORE the battle with Raja Dahir. Qasim took captive the family of the king of DEBAL.




And in the life time of we fools every place is safer ?




I'm taught by my Islamic values not to accept unauthentic narrations. Full stop !!

The incident of captive women is off course first mentioned inthe book of Ibn Ishaq the wroter of first biography of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w) and He has quoted even unauthentic Ahadiths.


All my arguments are based on credible evidence, not emotions, like yours are.

When the beliefs of mullahs are questions, they blame the other person for spreading fitna.

And you said reporting of rape cased is not possible? Sister who else do you think breaks the story, Muhammad Bin Qasim Baghdadi Press?




Thanks for remembering.






OK. And muslims didn't have such reasons ? Even order by Allah in Qur'an is not considered by You ? That is mentioned and the verse stated above ?

Allah ki Hikmat nami lafz say waqif tu hun gay aap ?




Everyone will be judged. Also those raising unnecessary questions and those making Permissibles haram, and, Haram as permissible.
This is actually FITNA.







I've no conflict with you over it as it is also my point of view. Except safety of females.





Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics (read completely)

BTW How many Western friends (including girls) do you have??? and have you ever asked them what is their response to rape??? Are you aware how many rapes occur while partying and how many rapes are done by friends or acquaintances???

Stop using attacking lingo understand .

__________________
The precondition for existence of a higher humanity is not the state, but the nation possessing the necessary ability.

Did I say that there are no rapes today? No, I did not. Please read my post again.

Then what are you trying to prove, feminist theory is the solution of all women's plight??? is that so??? make it clear and stop bringing out of context references from history.

__________________
The precondition for existence of a higher humanity is not the state, but the nation possessing the necessary ability.

Also, in 2005, around 1000 rapes were reported and only 39 arrests were made. That comes to a arrest rate of JUST 3.9%. Go figure.