View Full Version : Iranians, Egyptians, Turks: Contrasting Views on Sharia, Sharia and justice
al Roumi
03-26-2010, 13:31
Following recent and older debates here on Islam and Muslims, I link below 2 fascinating sites listing results of attitudinal polling on Sharia, done by Gallup in Iran, Eqypt and Turkey.
Worth remembering they are polls and hence inherently subjective, but the two complement each other well.
Iranians, Egyptians, Turks: Contrasting Views on Sharia (http://www.muslimwestfacts.com/mwf/108739/Iranians-Egyptians-Turks-Contrasting-Views-Sharia.aspx)
Many Turks, Iranians, Egyptians Link Sharia and Justice (http://www.muslimwestfacts.com/mwf/109093/Many-Turks-Iranians-Egyptians-Link-Sharia-Justice.aspx)
I'm struck by how the grass may appear greener on the "other side" to this sample of Egyptians , Turks and Iranians. Also by how much of a timebomb (of discontent) Hosni Mubarak is sitting on...
Interesting stuff especially this
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/Fragony/080725ShariaMWF1_qnmj67vcd4.gif
Amazing how different we look at things. The last thing I would associate the Sharia with is women's right, quite surprised that they do.
al Roumi
03-26-2010, 14:43
The last thing I would associate the Sharia with is women's right, quite surprised that they do.
The Egyptian views on there are especially striking, Sharia is apparently the answer to everything for its advocates there.
gaelic cowboy
03-26-2010, 14:52
I Amazing how different we look at things. The last thing I would associate the Sharia with is women's right, quite surprised that they do.
Thats because to a lot of them sharia is about giving women there full rights under the particular version of Islam they practice. To them therefore asking for womens rights is anachronistic because "They have been given there full rights "
al Roumi
03-26-2010, 14:57
Thats because to a lot of them sharia is about giving women there full rights under the particular version of Islam they practice. To them therefore asking for womens rights is anachronistic because "They have been given there full rights "
Hmm. This is kind of the failing of these polls in that that don't really delve into what the categories mean, e.g. "what do women's rights constitute".
As Hax may be able to confirm (apparently having decent knowledge of the Qu'ran), Sharia actually places equal responsability on Husband and Wife. The chauvanism often apparent in Egypt, Iran etc is not actually Islamic but cultural...
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-26-2010, 14:57
Thats because to a lot of them sharia is about giving women there full rights under the particular version of Islam they practice. To them therefore asking for womens rights is anachronistic because "They have been given there full rights "
A fair point, Sharia granted women ritghts when Christian women were increaingly lsing theirs. However, that was 1,400 odd years ago and we have moved on.
al Roumi
03-26-2010, 15:02
A fair point, Sharia granted women ritghts when Christian women were increaingly lsing theirs. However, that was 1,400 odd years ago and we have moved on.
ahem:
Women's rights
Status of women under Islamic law prior to the 19th century
Until the 19th century, Islamic law granted women some legal rights that they did not have under Western legal systems until the 19th and 20th centuries.[71] For example, "French married women, unlike their Muslim sisters, suffered from restrictions on their legal capacity which were removed only in 1965."[72] Noah Feldman, a Harvard University law professor, notes:
As for sexism, the common law long denied married women any property rights or indeed legal personality apart from their husbands. When the British applied their law to Muslims in place of Shariah, as they did in some colonies, the result was to strip married women of the property that Islamic law had always granted them — hardly progress toward equality of the sexes.[64]
Women also had the right to challenge or oppose any laws proposed by a Caliph. In the 7th century, when the Caliph Umar proposed a change in Islamic marital jurisprudence at a mosque, he was challenged by an old unknown woman who stated: "You shall not deprive us [women] of what God gave us." The woman cited a passage from the Qur'an as support and thus Umar had no choice but to declare: "The woman is right and the Khalifah is wrong."[73] At the time of the Prophet Muhammad, he often sought advice from women in regards to political matters, and a delegation of Arab women once "extended the bay'ah to him," thus establishing "the right of Muslim women to participate in the political process."[74]
Status of women under Islamic law since the 19th century
Of course, since this point in history the aforementioned exploration of freedom is no longer true — that is to say that whilst it is arguable that women had more extensive legal rights under Islamic law than they did under Western legal systems in the past, it is no longer true today.[75]
Meneldil
03-26-2010, 19:18
Ahem.
Right, some more "Islam is an open-minded and tolerant religion that support women rights!" bollox :D
This whole wikipedia quotes sounds like hogwash.
Status of women under Islamic law prior to the 19th century
Until the 19th century, Islamic law granted women some legal rights that they did not have under Western legal systems until the 19th and 20th centuries..[71] For example, "French married women, unlike their Muslim sisters, suffered from restrictions on their legal capacity which were removed only in 1965."[72]
What rights? Which muslim sisters?
FYI, Turkish women were granted voting rights before french womens, specifically because the Turkish state rejected everything related to Islam (which oddly, was the same reason used to refuse to grant women voting rights in France: "they'd be influenced by the priest"). And I'd be more than curious to know any of these rights that made the life of Muslim "sisters" better than the life of French or British women.
As for mentioning the prophet and his life, it's kind of like mentioning Eleanor of Aquitaine and courtly love to explain that women were highly considered during the middle age.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-27-2010, 02:31
ahem:
Ahem nothing, all those laws date to around 600-800 AD, and have not progressed. europena law has progressed from 800 AD onwards.
Being the tallest midget is not impressive.
Being the tallest midget is not impressive.
Indeed, as small-people are impressive for being small. A tall small-person isn't impressive at all and they most likely not get to go to the cool conventions with all the babes and hunks, due to being so tall.
Cute Wolf
03-27-2010, 11:54
Stockholm syndrome..... women who had daily abused by hs husband, and largely ignored because his husband had another, younger wifes, refuse to divorce him on the ground of "she deserve it" in sharia..... :no:
The Wizard
03-27-2010, 15:09
The Egyptian views on there are especially striking, Sharia is apparently the answer to everything for its advocates there.
Not very surprising considering the popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood and the immense hatred for the corrupt Mubarak regime.
Still worrying, though. The Muslim Brotherhood does not accept peace with Israel, IIRC. Imagine what would happen if they tore up the 1978 peace agreement...
EDIT: As for sharia and women's rights, it's true that until 40-50 years ago, there were laws in the West that can hardly be considered modern (for instance, raping your wife was completely legal until roughly 1970). But the fact that we were just as bad a little while ago doesn't make sharia good now.
Besides, a country's laws shouldn't be based on religion. Ever.
EDIT: As for sharia and women's rights, it's true that until 40-50 years ago, there were laws in the West that can hardly be considered modern (for instance, raping your wife was completely legal until roughly 1970). But the fact that we were just as bad a little while ago doesn't make sharia good now.
I totally agree, however, that also means that we have no basis of saying that "Western civilisation is more advanced". What's 50 years in 1500? If we look at Turkey, we'll see that the rights of women are infringed due to secularist philosophy.
Sasaki Kojiro
03-27-2010, 22:45
I totally agree, however, that also means that we have no basis of saying that "Western civilisation is more advanced". What's 50 years in 1500? If we look at Turkey, we'll see that the rights of women are infringed due to secularist philosophy.
How so? At worst it seems like you are saying we could regress. But that isn't to say we aren't more advanced right now.
How so? At worst it seems like you are saying we could regress. But that isn't to say we aren't more advanced right now.
Excuse me, I should have said "better".
PanzerJaeger
03-28-2010, 00:27
I totally agree, however, that also means that we have no basis of saying that "Western civilisation is more advanced". What's 50 years in 1500? If we look at Turkey, we'll see that the rights of women are infringed due to secularist philosophy.
Would you rather be female in Saudi Arabia or France? Would you rather be gay in Iran or Britain?
Would you rather be female in Saudi Arabia or France? Would you rather be gay in Iran or Britain?
Picking extremes, that's good. Enjoy your generalisation.
Would you rather be gay or black in Turkey or Alabama?
PanzerJaeger
03-28-2010, 01:34
Picking extremes, that's good. Enjoy your generalisation.
Entire countries are "extremes" now? What about Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Lybia, Sudan, the UAE, etc?
Would you rather be gay or black in Turkey or Alabama?
That's easy... Alabama. What is it that you think happens to black people in Alabama in 2010?
That's easy... Alabama. What is it that you think happens to black people in Alabama in 2010?
Not so much in large cities like Birmingham, of course, that's where the entire civil rights movement started, but in the smaller villages?
Entire countries are "extremes" now? What about Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Lybia, Sudan, the UAE, etc?
Don't try to lecture me on the diversity of the Middle East. Saudi Arabia is not one of the best countries you could have picked to represent the Islamic world, however.
Sasaki Kojiro
03-28-2010, 02:24
Excuse me, I should have said "better".
So looking at the whole sweep of western civilization, taking everything into account, you say it isn't better. But why are we talking about that? The present is the issue right? And people who talk about the treatment of women in those islamic countries aren't bragging that western civ is better, it's not an ego contest. Don't you think they are really concerned about the lack of rights :inquisitive:
PanzerJaeger
03-28-2010, 02:47
Not so much in large cities like Birmingham, of course, that's where the entire civil rights movement started, but in the smaller villages?
Sure, pick any part of Alabama you like. Again, what is it that you think happens to black people in Alabama in 2010. I can tell you what happens to gay people in Egypt in 2010.
Don't try to lecture me on the diversity of the Middle East. Saudi Arabia is not one of the best countries you could have picked to represent the Islamic world, however.
Why not? If you are going to try and equate the social and legal systems of the Islamic world with those of the Western world, its sounds like you might need a lesson. ~;)
Speaking of extremes, if we're going to strike Saudi Arabia off the list, why not Turkey too? It is certainly the exception to the rule, both historically and now.
The Wizard
03-28-2010, 17:24
I totally agree, however, that also means that we have no basis of saying that "Western civilisation is more advanced". What's 50 years in 1500? If we look at Turkey, we'll see that the rights of women are infringed due to secularist philosophy.
No, I'd say we definitely are more advanced and are better. Whether we did it in the past 50 years or the past 5. Though I'm as yet undecided on the merits of a ban on religious symbols.
Strike For The South
03-29-2010, 06:30
Not so much in large cities like Birmingham, of course, that's where the entire civil rights movement started, but in the smaller villages?
.
Swing and a miss
France
al Roumi
03-30-2010, 11:52
This discussion about "what is teh best" is a little misplaced and abominably subjective. I (and I guess certain others here) have been brought up to respect secular values, gender and sexual equality -hence why I think a system preserving these rights/values is "better".
However, someone brought up to believe (or who has decided for themselves) that women belong in the Kitchen/should not partake in mixed society, religion should be a core part of the legislature and governance, and that gays are an aberrant evil is clearly going to think that a system that promotes these values is "better".
And then there is "tolerance", but that is also a value not uniformly held it seems...
Sasaki Kojiro
03-30-2010, 13:41
This discussion about "what is teh best" is a little misplaced and abominably subjective. I (and I guess certain others here) have been brought up to respect secular values, gender and sexual equality -hence why I think a system preserving these rights/values is "better".
However, someone brought up to believe (or who has decided for themselves) that women belong in the Kitchen/should not partake in mixed society, religion should be a core part of the legislature and governance, and that gays are an aberrant evil is clearly going to think that a system that promotes these values is "better".
And then there is "tolerance", but that is also a value not uniformly held it seems...
Are you criticizing people for saying gender equality is better than "women belong in the kitchen", and then chiding them for lack of "tolerance", which is something you are brought up to believe in as well? :dizzy2:
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either it's all subjective, which means you can't criticize, or it isn't, which means your criticism is senseless :coffeenews:
We should just get out of each others way. They have their views, we have ours. For westerners it's unthinkable that someone would choose such a life, but we shouldn't condemn them when they do. Different part of the world, and it's their piece of it.
al Roumi
03-30-2010, 13:59
Are you criticizing people for saying gender equality is better than "women belong in the kitchen", and then chiding them for lack of "tolerance", which is something you are brought up to believe in as well? :dizzy2:
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either it's all subjective, which means you can't criticize, or it isn't, which means your criticism is senseless :coffeenews:
:laugh: i was just commenting on the personal values that might be colouring the discussions in this thread on "what is the best system", at best I was hoping to draw attention to the subjectivity inherent in our appraisals of what we all think is best.
Edit:
The example of my own opinion in the post was meant to exemplify the genesis of the views I hold, not (shock horror) an attempt to trumpet them as "teh best".
al Roumi
03-30-2010, 14:00
We should just get out of each others way. They have their views, we have ours. For westerners it's unthinkable that someone would choose such a life, but we shouldn't condemn them when they do. Different part of the world, and it's their piece of it.
The difficulties certainly appear when meeting in the middle -either when migrants come west or business/strategic interests go east...
The difficulties certainly appear when meeting in the middle -either when migrants come west or business/strategic interests go east...
See, we don't disagree all that much.
al Roumi
03-30-2010, 18:24
See, we don't disagree all that much.
:shudder: :wink:
The Wizard
04-02-2010, 21:40
We should just get out of each others way. They have their views, we have ours. For westerners it's unthinkable that someone would choose such a life, but we shouldn't condemn them when they do. Different part of the world, and it's their piece of it.
I'm hoping this is sarcasm
I'm hoping this is sarcasm
No sarcasm, I don't care how they do things, as long as they don't do it here. What's it to me.
The Wizard
04-04-2010, 17:27
But you're Frags, this does not compute :cry:
But you're Frags, this does not compute :cry:
Why, I have always pleaded for a respectable distance. I don't think there is a place here for the Islam as it is now.
al Roumi
04-04-2010, 19:37
Islam is a NIMBY for Frags... Not In My Back Yard.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.