Muslim Feminism
 

Sounds impossible?
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/shadya/film.html

Nice to see muslim youth trying to advance in things traditionally considered impossible.:yep:

"Christian" and "femanine" used to go together as badly as "muslim" and "femanine" do these days.

Because most organised religions are based on texts that do not change, religions change very slowly compared to society and culture. That siad, they do change and evolve to suit the world they are in, given time.

Yes but based on what obligatory commands from the bible? Do not confuse religious obligation with changing cultural and historical norms, as you shall soon see....
No. Islam doesn't. Neither does Judaism. Both have a common code of religious obligations, some claimed divine in origin, which can never be retracted, some decreed by religious scholars with varying degrees of obligation.

Nothing can ever retract Allah's words, as conveyed by Mohamed, as in the following example:

YUSUFALI: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).
PICKTHAL: Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.
SHAKIR: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.
- Qur'an 4:34.

I don't know of any "Obligatory commands", but it's very easy to find bible quotes that attack feminism. ((1 Corinthians 11:3-10) is a nice example, but far from the only one).
This is probably a result of the patriarchal societies in which the Christian bible was written in.
Female preachers are forbidden by several texts in the bible. There have been female, christian preachers for a long time now. This is a good example of religion changing to suit society and culture. Even when the change directly contradicts the religious texts.


Bunkum!
Google link
Judaism has changed, branched off in to other religions and adapted to cultures and societies like any other religion. Granted, it has been less progressive than some other religions. What about the haskalah? Now thats a perfect example of judaism adapting to society/culture.

Islam has also been changing since it was founded. If you want evidence of this then look no further than the first post in this topic!

Thank you for that correction. I was not aware how engrained in the new testament such concepts were. Actually there's some similarity in concept between those verses in Corinthians and Quran 4:34.
But that is not Judaism. That is Jews neglecting Judaism to suit their fancy.
Here, too, the question is whether they are violating Islamic law or not. You use the word "tradition" very loosly. I am referring to binding laws versus non-binding traditions and customs.

I don't believe for a second that a Jew from 2500 years ago would not be a little surprised by even the most orthodox Jewish teachings of today. Not least in the use of sacrifice and prayer that occurred in 70AD.
All religions change with time, even if the texts and/or "binding laws" don't.

Is it still the same religion after change? Well, Hinduism has changed almost beyond recognition from its origins, but it is still Hinduism.


Empowered, feminine women have been a part of Islam for a very long time and continues to be so.
A good modern example is the election of Turkey's first female head of state in the 1990's. 99.8% of Turkish voters where Muslim at the time. There are other examples of empowered women throughout Islamic history.
As for Karate....check out "Nasibah bint Ka'b al-Maziniyyah, Umm 'Umarah" !

Yes, some Islamic states have poor human rights and ever poorer rights for women, but this is because of their culture against women, rather than their religion. When the culture changes, the religion will slowly adapt as it has done in Turkey or, as with Christianity, in Western Europe.


:up:

Please elaborate.
Please elaborate.
The only disagreement I have with your statement is the use of the word "all". :nope:
How many were secular, non-practicing, or elementary traditional at the time?

Would you say there has been a change in religious trends in Turkey over the last several years?
Are there more examples of empowerment or subsurvience? What are the norms and what are the exceptions?
In Islam's case, as in Judaism's case, the religion doesn't change. The religiousity of its adherants can, however. A big mistake to mix the 2 up. :nope:

iiiiiieeee! Here comes the big break down, quote-by-qoute.......

In what direction would you like me to elaborate here?
Jewish practice has changed in countless and radical ways since it's formation. I give one example below.

My (limited) understanding is that after 70AD the Jewish religion and race became scattered in the "The Babylonian exile"; in part because of the destruction of the temple in jerusalem and the fall of the Mitzada fortress.
Judaism was forced to leave behind the highly structured religion it used to have.
Without authoritarian structure, land and large centers of worship Judaism underwent some big adaptations. These adaptations included the formation of the first synagogues (as opposed to temples) and the replacement of the physical sacrifice of animals with "lip sacrifice" (prayer).

Mosque attendance in Turkey increased by a lot in the 1980/1990s. In the early 1990s many new mosques where built in urban areas to deal with the increased attendance on Fridays and on religious holidays.


Absolutely! Since the mid 1940's ideas about Turkey's political secularism have changed in many ways. In recent times the change has been limited by the indirect intervention of the, highly secular, Turkish army, which still holds a lot of power in Turkey because of several military coups in Turkeys history.
Current topics of debate in Turkish politics include the current ban on head scarfs in public office and the government funding of new mosques.
The changes in political secularism reflect the constantly waxing and waining religious conservatism in Turkey.


As in the history of Hindu, Jewish and Christian cultures, empowered women where very much the exception rather than the rule in Islamic cultures.


I disagree. Judaism and Islam have both slowly changed with out changes in adherancy.
Post-haskalah European Jews are just as adherent to what they perceive as Jewish law. In fact, they may well have a better understanding of Jewish law and so are better able to adhere to it, but that's a matter of opinion and not something I have an opinion on.

The laws that caused the cessation of offerings are part of the Torah, as handed down to Israel by Moses from G-d at Sinai. Jews from earlier times would have had difficulty accepting the fact that the Temple was destroyed. Once the change of situation is taken into account of, they would have understood why the changes were made and how they were based on already existing Torah laws.

Try again. ;)

BTW, established prayer existed at the time of the Temple and offerings. It was not introduced only after the Temple's destruction. It was only more specifically established and compiled.
That doesn't accurately answer the question. A mosque-goer does not necessarily a devout Muslim make.
Not a peeps out of you in all of those words of Erdogan's clear veering towards Islamisization.

For the record, woman PM Tansu Çiller served from 1993 through 1996. Turkey's trends towards Islamisization have been much stronger since then.
Then what was your point?
Yes. So are adherents of Jews for Jesus. We're playing games here.
Yes. Opinions abound.

I don't understand. The torah pre-dated 70AD doesn't it? If the laws that caused the cessation of offerings where a exsisting part of the Torah then why where these laws not followed before 70AD?


You can't really Islamisize a Islamic country.

Like I said: "The changes in political secularism [in Turkey] reflect the constantly waxing and waining religious conservatism in Turkey."
There have been sevral periods of increaced Islamic conservatism in Turkey and sevral periods of increaced progressive Islam.

Gahh! Ive got lost in quotes here....wich quote do you want to know the point of? :doh:

The laws were followed. Many Torah laws are dependent on the presence of the Temple and/or of the majority of Jews worldwide residing in the land of Israel. Hence major changes in law application took place when the Temple was destroyed and the Jews went into exile.
Tell that to Iran. Tell that to Lebanon. Tell that to Egypt (just ask your local Muslim Brotherhood member). And if you haven't noticed, tell that to Iraq.

Chow-time at the zoo. Ciao! ;)

So Judaism changed and adapted to the lack of temple?

Gah, my bad. Of course you can Islamicize the politics of a politically secular Islamic country. Iran, Turjekistan and Egypt are good examples.
Turkey, and some other western governments are leading the world in secular politics at the moment, despite attacks to Turkey's it's secularity. Hopefully it wont be too long before Iran, Egypt and Israel drop religious law & politics all together in favor of fully secular rule.

No. Circumstances changed and existing laws kicked in. There was already a scenario in Jewish law of the lack of a Temple.
Hopefully, it won't be too long before we witness a world perfected under G-d’s kingship - “Letaken Olam beMalchut Shaday” - as we Jews say at the conclusion of our prayers 3 times daily.

Can you please provide evidence for this "Plan B" in the event of temple destruction?

:huh: Count me outta that one! I may be Jewish by race, but that's firmly the limit. I don't want to be ruled by anyone, god or not, unless they are democratically elected and capable of reactionary decision making.

*munches popcorn and watches* :up: