Roach Clips

I'm in a discussion with a Muslim about the womans role in islam and I brought up these couple passsages to show the mistrust Islam has against woman. He then tried to argue... I'll just quote him.

He then linked me to http://www.answering-christianity.co..._witnesses.htm which tried to claim that there is a scientific reason for this. Like they have menopause, and sometimes suffer from post-partdom depression... What do you think of this article?

premjan

So women may be smart but are more prone to being feeble minded. That could be true in some respects, but isn't the incidence of alcoholism greater among men? Maybe that's why Islam also restricts alcohol.

gstafleu

I think the attempted distinction between brain and mind is a diversion: with any luck the discussion will now veer of trying to figure out what, if anything, that distinction is. It really doesn't matter what you call it, a woman's witness still only counts for half a man's. That is the discrimination, irrespective of what name you give it.

Gerard Stafleu

Malachi151

Ask him to cite where the distinctions between brains and minds are discussed in the Koran.

neilgodfrey

Not quite. If that were the arithmetic then 4 women would be an allowable substitute for 2 men as witnesses to the contract in question, and that is not even implied. One of them still has to be a man.

The reason for including the women is so that they can support the man's testimony in cases where a second man is not able to be found for the purpose.

And why 2 women? Not because the a woman's word weighs only half the value of a man's word. The reason is made plain. One of the women is likely of course to be a forgetful dear so the other woman is there to correct her memory in order that the man's testimony is supported.

But it is nice (sometimes) that both moslems and christians have historically been revising their interpretations of their respective scriptures in order to conform more a bit more closely to acceptable changing social norms. That's progress too, sort of.


Neil Godfrey

http://vridar.wordpress.com

ynquirer

Not only Moslems and Christians, truth to be told. In this, they just followed the oral Torah. The origin of the quibble probably lays in this verse of Deuteronomy:

This is the written Torah. Now, the oral Torah sought for a clarification of the odd phrase “two witnesses or three witnesses.” It was clear enough that one witness fell short of the requirement, but - why two witnesses or three witnesses? Surely the verse meant “two or more witnesses”? Yet if so, why did it not say so, straightforwardly?

Until someone found a solution: two witnesses, if they are men; three witnesses, if they are one man and two women. The necessary inference is that the testimony of a woman is worth half the testimony of a man. R. (Rabbi) Nehemiah explains it in the Talmud Bavli:

Tangent

Not that it makes much of a difference, but does the original text use a word that could be interpretted as "mind" over "brain"?

neilgodfrey

Even if there were such a difference it would make no difference to the demeaning of women. It's of the same mindset as found in Ecclesiastes 7:28 and I Corinthians 14:34-37 and 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and such.

All that the argument "the woman's brain, but not mind, is equal to a man's brain" achieves is to substitute the woman's character or essential nature ("mind" under the influence of menopausal influences etc) as the element which decides her inferior status!


Neil Godfrey

http://vridar.wordpress.com