Dr. Hayat Sindi is a Saudi Arabian medical scientist and a woman who has earned respect for extraordinary accomplishments in a country that denies women basic liberties. She is not only an award-winning scientist but one of the first female members of the Consultative Assembly of Saudi Arabia. Ranked by Arabian Business as the 19th most influential Arab in the world and the ninth most influential Arab woman, it is not surprising that Harvard University has brought her to the country as a visiting scholar. However, a nasty lawsuit in King County has raised deeply disturbing allegations about Sindi’s efforts against women who she accuses of hacking her emails. According to counsel for one of those women, Sindi worked to have another woman flogged for writing on Facebook that she had had an affair with her husband. On the other side is Samia El-Moslimany, a women’s activist and photographer who lives in the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, who is fighting to keep Sindi from forcing the disclosure of the women, who would face medieval Sharia justice in Saudi Arabia.
All of this began when El-Moslimany posted statements on social media in 2012 alleging that Sindi had had an affair with her husband. Sindi responded with a Saudi defamation case and, according to an affidavit submitted by El-Moslimany’s lawyer, she wanted El-Moslimany flogged. The effort backfired. A Saudi judge decided last year that El-Moslimany should spend four days in jail for the public defamation while Sindi should spend two months in jail for forming an illicit relationship with El-Moslimany’s husband. Neither has served their sentences.
Sindi however has continued to try to force disclosure of the names of the women commenting on the Internet under the claim that she was hacked. A King County Superior Court judge decided Friday not to sentence a Burien woman to jail or to levy a $500 fine for each day of withholding the names in light of the danger to these women.
Judge Mariane Spearman denied Sindi’s request to hold El-Moslimany in contempt of court because Sindi’s new lawyer could not specify which Facebook comments might be a basis for investigating any of the women.
The idea of a Harvard academic fighting to have women flogged for alleged defamation is deeply troubling. The fact that Saudi Sharia law allows for medieval justice does not excuse a demand for such justice over the exercise of free speech. Even if such speech was defamatory, it should not be a criminal matter subject to flogging. Whatever the truth of the adultery, it should not be relevant to Harvard or anyone else other than those involved in these families. However, flogging for posting matters on the Internet raises significant issues of due process and free speech.
Should Harvard be involved in such dispute when one of its faculty seeks to have women flogged under Sharia law or this is simply a private matter under the laws of another country?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/02/18/norwegian-muslims-will-form-a-human-shield-around-an-oslo-synagogue/?tid=hpModule_04941f10-8a79-11e2-98d9-3012c1cd8d1e&hpid=z10
Norwegian Muslims are speaking out! This is a wonderful and brave thing for them to do. I think it may start something good.
Paul, are you saying that any Muslim is a perfect Muslim?
Are you saying that Muslims behave exactly as the quran requires them to?
If some free their slave and others don’t, what does it prove, that the quran and sunnah are wrong or that people will simply do what they want in spite of what their ultimate reference may require of them?
Are you saying that because Michelle Bachmann believes a good woman should be a submitted woman, all Christians are patriarchal? Obviously not, right?
If Allah says forgive is better, and I choose not to forgive, what does it say about Allah, what does it say about me?
It’s your turn to reply.
By the way, why not address the points in that quote? The focus on the missing link (hehe) makes it seem as if you just don’t have an answer.
As usual!
Paul C. Schulte
po – I am sure your slave appreciates the fact you gave them up. Did you sell them or manumit them? And why did you have a slave to begin with?
However, our discussion started about slavery and Islam and you gave me a lot of backing-and-hoeing about Islam not having slaves. Which is why I raised the issue of the Christian slave army of Islam. You put yourself forward as a scholar of all things Islamic, so I was sure you would be able to explain away this rather glaring problem.
——————————-
Paul, since one of the best things one can do in islam is to free a slave, I obtained a slave just so i can free him. I wanted a cute girl slave but they only had dudes at the slave store:)
The great thing about the written word, Paul, is hat i is rather easy to retreive.
Here were my words above, in response o your non-question:
Po said:
“Islam makes it part of the requirements of faith that one treats his slave fairly. The sunnah says that the Prophet made people feed their slaves and clothe them the same as themselves.
Most great sins one does in Islam can be absolved with the freeing of a slave.
From wiki:
Muhammad restricted the traditional means of enslavement, and urged compassion and moderation as the general rule for their treatment. He enforced emancipation as the necessary atonement for having assaulted one’s slave without just cause,[1] and he deemed manumission as either meritorious or as a means or requirement for Muslims to earn forgiveness for serious transgressions.[2][3] He also established the principle that slaves may have authority over free men in Islamic government and religious and military affairs.[4]
Many early converts to Islam were the poor and former slaves like Bilal ibn Rabah al-Habashi, and Muhammad would send his companions like Abu Bakr and Uthman ibn Affan to buy slaves to free.[5][6][7][8]
Muhammad’s pronouncements regarding slavery simultaneously reinforced the principle of a slave’s loyalty to his or her master and the master’s circumscribed duty of reciprocation. By their fiat a master could sell and trade their slaves, and although the Qur’an frequently encourages the ransom or mukataba of slaves as a pious practice,[9][10] the act of emancipation was not incumbent upon believers. Female slaves could not marry without their master’s consent, but the Qur’an also made it clear that it was forbidden to compel female slaves to “prostitution” if they desired chastity.[11] Sexual intercourse with a female slave was permissible, [12] but only following the normal conditions of Islamic marriage.[13]
Let me know if further explanation is needed. Something about no dumb question, only stupid ones 🙂
po – first, I have to say I have the utmost sympathy for your brother Ali. Second, this is the same stuff you cut-and-pasted before without linking the the reference to. Third, if, as a good Muslim you are supposed to manumit your slave(s) how do you account for an entire army of Christian slaves used to protect the Muslim empire?
Did saying bray like a donkey offend donkeys?
PR
I’ll start with what is shariah law, and I can’t believe I am doing this but will quote Choudary , from the article Edward posted “said Sharia has been misunderstood because of its incomplete application by regimes such as Saudi Arabia, which does behead murderers and cut off thieves’ hands. “The problem,” he explained, “is that when places like Saudi Arabia just implement the penal code, and don’t provide the social and economic justice of the Sharia—the whole package—they simply engender hatred toward the Sharia.” That whole package, he said, would include free housing, food, and clothing for all, though of course anyone who wished to enrich himself with work could do so.”
The quote above does offer a glimpse into what shariah law is, a comprehensive jurisprudence that covers every aspect of a muslim’s life, IF that muslim lives under shariah law. It is akin to having every single US code that regulates public, legal, societal, financial, commercial, marital and familial interactions under the same umbrella.
The issue is, depending on where one lives, and the structure of that shariah law in application there, shariah law and its expression actually changes.
Now, if you do a search online, you’d see that most muslims do not live under shariah law. there are only a few places where shariah law is widely applied, and those places are generally of an extremist bent. So being Muslim is not tied to applying shariah law.
However, if I live in the US, I can choose to apply shariah law to some aspects of my life here, as do Christians, mormons and Jews. But, it is an accepted rule in Islam that one must subject himself to the rules in place wherever he lives, unless those rules are downright unfair and oppressive (such as laws being passed denying one right to practice his faith.)
As I said before, islam is not homogeneous. My brother and I , who were raised together and learned the same religious education do not agree on all aspects of the faith. There are 4 major sunni schools, and among those there are subtle differences. How one school responds to one issue is not necessarily how another would.
So it does make sense that a patriarchal view of Islam might blame the woman for her rape. Just as it does when some of our public officials blame the woman for her rape, or hindus blame the woman for her rape. Or Joe at the local bar blames the woman for her rape.
The fact that one person blames a woman for her rape doesn’t negate the fact that traditionally, muslim communities would kill the man who rapes a woman. And that the Quran prohibits rapes, and the Prophet prohibits rape.
And also, you are asking me to explain something that is a fringe aspect of the religion. It is akin to asking someone to explain the speaking in tongues in respect to the whole of Christianity. Some women don’t shake hands with men, other women do. Some for they choose, some for they must.
The bottom line is that the moment you are discussing a theocracy, you are discussing an extreme case. That extreme case however does not determine the larger majority that is not subject to those theocratic laws.
Additionally, there are two jihads, the greater jihad against one’s own soul, and the lesser jihad which is to fight for the cause of Allah. That jihad is ranked from helping the poor, to seeking knowledge to actually fighting against oppression. In his last sermon, the Prophet said”…the small jihad (as in fighting)is now over, what is left is the greater jihad, where you struggle against your own soul and its desires.”
But, to summarize, the Quran is a book that guides humanity to peace and harmony. People however, have agendas, and they will use whatever they must to fulfill that agenda. That is humanity at play.
However, Islam is a personal journey, and in that, doesn;t require a state. So yes, most of Islam exists outside of the duality of church and state.
Two examples, Senegal and Nigeria. Senegal is 92% Muslim, yet their constitution is secular.
India and Indonesia, both have a great number of Muslims, while having a non-muslim constitution.
I have no troubles Paul, it’s YOU who may have troubles if you can’t prove your accusations.
Don’t you dare tell me what to do Paul. Now prove your accusations against Po.
Thank our founders that they saw the error of combining church and state. Muslims here can practice their faith in a less harsh environment. Millions work, play, worship and live peacefully.
Po,
“The Sharia we see in the news too frequently is one that stones people, cuts off people’s hands, threatens apostates with death, requires people to dress a certain way, and forbids music and dancing.”
The other more positive and un-newsworthy stories you shared are valid. That is off-point, though, to the portions of Sharia that are concerning (punishments including stoning and whipping). Highlighting the positive elements of Sharia does not diminish or negate the concerning elements I noted.
What of those elements? Should such things be stricken from Sharia law? Can they be?
As far as I understand it, these concerning elements are part of Sharia in most Muslim countries. Based on your description it sounds like Islam cannot be effectively followed without Sharia government (the Quranists still end up needing it). Do I understand you correctly? Can Islam exist outside of a theocracy for most believers?
You wrote that Muslims believe the sunnah to be fair. I have concerns on this point, considering the list of problematic Sharia rulings and punishments I listed. That, and the top site I got when I googled “payment rape virgin sharia” was islamqa.info–a Muslim site.
“Islam forbids women to wear clothes that are not modest and to travel without a mahram; it forbids a woman to shake hands with a non-mahram man. Islam encourages young men and women to marry early, and many other rulings which close the door to rape.”
http://islamqa.info/en/72338
To travel without a mahram, forbidden to shake hands with a non-mahram man? To have a government require this is not fair.
The same site discussed jihad in this way:
“the basic principle of fighting as prescribed in sharee’ah is jihad, and its purpose is that all religion should be devoted to Allaah, and that the word of Allaah should be supreme. Whoever tries to prevent that is to be fought, according to the consensus of the Muslims. With regard to those who are not involved in resistance and fighting – such as women, children, monks, old men, the blind, the chronically ill, and so on – they are not to be killed, according to the majority of scholars, unless they fight in word or deed… because we are to fight those who fight us, if we want the religion of Allaah to prevail, as Allaah says (Interpretation of the meaning):
“And fight in the way of Allaah those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allaah likes not the transgressors”” http://islamqa.info/en/27180
This discussion expressly violates the First Amendment. If an individual is devoted to Allah, and within him or her, the word of Allah is supreme, that is fine. But to have a government require that is not right.
It is these sorts of things that have people concerned about Muslims. People do not want these things brought to the United States. You say that leaders twist the haddith to suit their perspectives. Is this what causes so many Muslim countries to have harsh Sharia laws? For Islam, can there be a separation of church and state?
Paul, blah, blah, blah. Now prove your accusations against Po.
Is Professor Turley also an ISIS apologist? Hmmm?
No, Fundamentalism baaaaaad.
And if Po were to be a representative from CAIR, SO WHAT? Do you know CAIR backed Dr Sami Al Arian, that Professor Turley represented?
Inga – as I said at the time, even the most horrendous serial killer deserves a defense. JT was defending him against the government holding him longer than they were supposed to. I can see both sides of that argument.
As I remember, Inga, you, the respectful one, answered that you heard that and much worse in your former Pentecostal church. Oh, but that was ok, since it came from you, about Christians. Right.
Again, Islam, gooooood and Christianity, baaaaaad.
Paul, you keep making accusations regarding Po. Why don’t you prove them instead of shooting off your mouth?
Inga – stay in your own fights, you have enough trouble without adding to them.
Paul C. Schulte
po – as our representative from CAIR you answered for the questions about Mohammed and slavery, although you bobbed and weaved your way through the issue. You made this big point about manumission and using freed slaves for the corps of Islam. So, what is the excuse for enslaving Christians to do the fighting for the Ottoman Empire. This is the same empire that ISIS is trying to resurrect?
——————————–
Paul , Paul, Paul…
I am about to take back my previous compliment that you were intelligent. Reminds me of my brother, so eager to play dumb in order to confuse people that he has become just that. (Love you, Ali.)
Like super, you put not only the burden of proof on me, but also the burden of asking the question to myself!!!!!!
What’s going on here today?
Again, why are you asking me about the ottoman empire? I spoke historically, for the Quran and the sunnah. I never claimed to speak for the whole of Islam since the beginning of time.
I told you what the quran said, and what the Prophet said and did. As to what every single other muslim did, you might wanna ask them. I know I did what was asked of me and freed my slave. You can’t ask any more of me.
po – I am sure your slave appreciates the fact you gave them up. Did you sell them or manumit them? And why did you have a slave to begin with?
However, our discussion started about slavery and Islam and you gave me a lot of backing-and-hoeing about Islam not having slaves. Which is why I raised the issue of the Christian slave army of Islam. You put yourself forward as a scholar of all things Islamic, so I was sure you would be able to explain away this rather glaring problem.
on 1, February 18, 2015 at 11:20 pmtellingitlikeitis
Inga
I truly believe in freedom of religion, but Islam, is like no other religion that you or I have been raised to accommodate, respect or appreciate. We have been raised to relish in diversity and to show respect to all. Islam commands its adherents to kill all infidels and to wage a Holy War. That is not an exaggeration; that is a basic and fundamental precept in Islam. Islam is, unfortunately, incompatible with a civilized society. . .or at least the type of society in which I would choose to live. My faith does not demand that I kill others who practice a different path; Islam demands it. It is not the BAD Muslims who kill and destroy with abandon. . .to the contrary. . .Muslims who follow the Koran and its teachings. . .GOOD MUSLIMS. . .kill infidels. . .men, women and children. . .wherever they are found. Those of us, who choose not to face Mecca five times a day and bray like a donkey to Allah, need to fight against this evil, not make excuses for it and try to placate its adherents. I’ve grown attached to my head; I’d like to keep it, if that’s ok with you.
**********************
Here is the first really DISRESPECTFUL comment. “Bray like a donkey to Allah”.
super star
Po is still not naming all the despicable and violent phrases found in his holy books and texts. Lol! Guess the cat has got his tongue. How refreshing. Oh no, wait until he suggests that we just don’t understand enough. Notice, when he is backed into a corner, he does not provide the requested damning phrases.
——————————–
Let me try to understand what you are saying, super. You want me, to provide you, with the evidence you claim you have against me?
What????!!!!!
Why not just show your evidence? Isn’t that easier?
Darren
Any comment, which tries to show Islam in its true light, is met with name calling and derision. Read this site from the start and see who started this disrespectful tone. You will see it is the usual cast of characters, who call others Islamophobes for merely stating facts, as they see them. Do you expect others not to respond in kind? We are bombarded, on a daily basis, with terrifying images brought to us by adherents of this faith, yet the very mention of that fact is countered with name calling and disrespect. There are no defenses for this horrendous behavior, including the Saudi prof at Harvard retreating to her savage background in demanding that another woman be flogged. If one dares to mention the barbaric dictates of Islam, that person is attacked.
Please read from the beginning. Perhaps the only articles posted should be those singing the praises of Islam. Anything which does not comply with that will be seen as an attack on Islam. The articles should state that the men, never terrorists, were only present at the scene where people died. Cause of death? The victims ran into the bullets, which mysteriously came out of the guns. This way no one can call the article discriminatory.
Yes Darren, perhaps you should “out” these sockpuppets for who they really are, like you did to me. Or would that be too much to ask for you as someone with administrative duties to be equitable? Why don’t you try to emulate the proprietor and use a modicum of fairness when dealing with commenters here. You Darren in my opinion are not well suited to give anyone advice here on how to behave, nor to have any administrative duties. You have proven yourself to be biased.
Inga – YOU put Darren between a rock and a hard spot with your multiple sock puppets, taking advantage of JT’s absence. Darren made a decision, forced on him by you, and now you have the temerity to call him biased. Really???? That is just rude!!!!