Freethought & Rationalism Archive

hinduwoman · 10-20-2006, 10:44 AM

http://in.news.yahoo.com/061019/211/68n3i.html

Quote:

…
After a year of humiliation, Imrana can finally hold her head high. Last year she grabbed headlines when, raped by her father-in-law, the local panchayat nullified her marriage.

She was told she was now the mother to her husband. And it didn’t stop there. In June 2005, the Darul Uloom of Deoband went one step further. A fatwah was slapped on her and 28-year-old Imrana told, that she cannot live with her husband, Nur Illahi any more.

…
AIMPLB member Kamal Farrooqi says, “I am very happy that he is being punished and he should be given the serious kind of punishment. There is no doubt about it that any culprit of this nature must be handed over serious rate of punishment.”

…
Even though Imrana can now legally return to her husband, a Shariat court last Thursday said that if her father-in-law was found guilty of rape, then Imrana cannot live with her husband.

It may have been a huge victory for Imrana but voices within the Muslim community are not speaking the same language.

They say this judgement even though it’s a criminal case, goes against the tenets of Islam.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/106102...ry_6895151.asp

Quote:

Some Muslim scholars said it was up to Imrana, 29, to decide if she would stay in the marriage or walk out of it, since the various schools of Islamic jurisprudence offer a variety of options.

But some local imams said the conviction of Noor’s 66-year-old father Ali Mohammad now decisively rules the Imrana-Ilahi marriage invalid.

“Since the court has convicted Ali Mohammad of rape, under Islamic law this would be proof enough to declare the convict as husband of the victim and her husband would now be treated as (her) son,” said the state president of the Association of Imams, Mufti Mohammad Zulfiqar.

It has now come out that there had been cases like this before and the shariat verdict had always been the same. The rape victim is now the rapist’s wife and her children are now also her grandchildren. Imrana was the first woman courageous enough to complain to the police.

But nothing happens to the man under community law. To punish the head of the family for raping a female member of his own family is apparently unislamic. :huh:

But criticize it and you are cruelly trampling down diversity and imposing majority rule because you are Islamophobic.

EarlOfLade · 10-20-2006, 10:51 AM

No Islamofobi needed.

This is inhumane treatment, no matter what fucking religion you wear out your knees for.

premjan · 10-20-2006, 11:58 AM

What if it wasn't the father-in-law but someone else? Any convicted rapist becomes a husband automatically? What if she chooses to divorce the rapist? Can she remarry the son?

Sad that dishonor is treated as pretty much similar to death.

Cynic of Mammon · 10-20-2006, 12:26 PM

Just another example of how Islam is applied to suppress its female members (cf: the row over wearing the niqab in GB). Christianity tried this too- at one point the Vatican declared that women had no souls- but later reinterpretted their holy book. Correct me if I err, but in Islam reinterpretation is impossible (the Qu'ran being the literal word of Allah, and all). This case also has interesting reverberations for the secularism debates- how theocracy imposes lunacy...:banghead:

Pavlov's Dog · 10-20-2006, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynic of Mammon

Correct me if I err, but in Islam reinterpretation is impossible (the Qu'ran being the literal word of Allah, and all).

You erred. The OP explains how there were a bunch of different interpretationsin this case.

Somebody needs to force secular laws on these nut jobs and then their religion will eventually become a quaint hobby, just like Presbyterians.

Chili · 10-20-2006, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynic of Mammon

Christianity tried this too- at one point the Vatican declared that women had no souls- but later reinterpretted their holy book.

For what it is worth, wo-man is the soul of man and cannot have a soul of her own. Woman was taken from man to be his flesh of flesh and bone of bones and remain in betrothal to him until his (sic) return to Eden.

You may have females mixed up with woman, or even women with woman in which case woman is the soul of women.

Clivedurdle · 10-20-2006, 12:57 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/st...925699,00.html

Maybe all this sharia rubbish is step one in the attached ten point plan.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-20-2006, 10:51 AM	#2
EarlOfLade Banned Join Date: May 2006 Location: Orlando, Fl Posts: 5,310	No Islamofobi needed. This is inhumane treatment, no matter what fucking religion you wear out your knees for.

10-20-2006, 11:58 AM	#3
premjan Obsessed Contributor Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 61,538	What if it wasn't the father-in-law but someone else? Any convicted rapist becomes a husband automatically? What if she chooses to divorce the rapist? Can she remarry the son? Sad that dishonor is treated as pretty much similar to death.

10-20-2006, 12:26 PM	#4
Cynic of Mammon Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: A small hole in England Posts: 114	Just another example of how Islam is applied to suppress its female members (cf: the row over wearing the niqab in GB). Christianity tried this too- at one point the Vatican declared that women had no souls- but later reinterpretted their holy book. Correct me if I err, but in Islam reinterpretation is impossible (the Qu'ran being the literal word of Allah, and all). This case also has interesting reverberations for the secularism debates- how theocracy imposes lunacy...:banghead:

10-20-2006, 12:57 PM	#7
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/st...925699,00.html Maybe all this sharia rubbish is step one in the attached ten point plan.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.