You should ask that question to @anonimo. I’m sure you’ve seen our interaction. The last part, no the guys here will simply accuse you of tugging on their conscious when you frame it close to home. Strange really when the very topic is about a social issue that can happen to any woman.
Most Famous Somali Sheikh is in Hot Water again against Somali Female Politician
- Thread starter Qeelbax
- Start date
Reer you know that when I argue I provide secondary sources and with clear points. You don’t agree with me granted, but don’t lie about me.
If you have an issue any point I raised, simply tell me why and provide your reasoning. Childish diggings isn’t doing you any favors. One of thing I’ve noticed on this forum is the amount of guys that can’t present their points against me so then resort to petty insults.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
From what I just read, he is more interested in the technicalities of the Shar'ia, I don't think he is too invested in this issue which is fine.
However the comments by the other users are more concerning.
Last edited:
Because the premise of your argument is weak and shallow. This is what you wrote:
Firstly, just because there is Qur'anic injunctions that prohibit something doesn't mean you cannot introduce add on laws or bills to strengthen those prohibitions especially if they are violated on a constant basis.
Should a Muslim parliament strike down an anti narcotics and human trafficking bill simply because we already know it's haram?
The reason why this bill helps is because of oversight, unfortunately most of the clan filled Somali leaders back home care more for where their next check comes from that what any Qur'anic verse says. So they will attempt to implement this bill for fear of being sanctioned. I say good.
You’re right. They don’t understand how Sharia or Islamic legal law works. Leaders can add and implement as long as something isn’t haram. Also, Islamic fiqh isn’t static and it can and does evolve based on any new issues society has. Examples are Islamic banking, workers rights ect.
He wouldn’t ever be against any sort of bills about narcotics and other social issues. We have new fatwas about Islamic banking due to the fact that the world has changed with regards to this. You’ll hardly see them debate against this but anything to do with women is challenged. You’ll not see them have issues with Somalia adopting bills about paid holidays, sick leave ect which are modern concepts but modern concepts that impact women are shunned and we’re meant to deal with 9th century attitudes whilst they enjoy all the rights of the 21st century such as workers rights, benefits and various other ultra modern rights that scholars of old certainly wouldn’t see as a ‘right’.
Last edited:
There wasn't ever a generational period in Islamic history that didn't revise many of the legal rulings of previous generations in light of an issue making public discourse. Even issues that were novel and conspicuous aswell. There is a reason why every Islamic school of law is over-represented by the newer later additions introduced into those traditions in most cases surpassing the authority of those who established the legal school in the first place. 70%+ of the Hanafi Madhab isn't even attributable to Abu Hanifah. The same with all the other schools. Most of these pseudo experts wouldn't have a clue because it would mean you'd actually have to read/study instead of making wild affirmations to suit personal objectives.
Did you hear any controversy about the anti corruption bill? Yeah, I thought so too. It only seems that when the issue challenges a social wrong against a significant part of the population (women), an issue that serves the interests of many of those seeking to preserve the status quo and hierarchy, that it is stifled and masked as un-Islamic to suffocate it out of the pubic sphere.
Exactly, 16 pages of people arguing over a strawnan that's not even related to the legislation. Truly 68 IQ behavior
It means that these legal systems don’t recognize a man coercing his wife to have intercourse to fall under the classification of “rape” and a man who has intercourse with his wife without her consent simply simply committed coercive intercourse but not “rape.”What the hell is the difference between "marital rape" and "forced marital sex" in that picture?
It says "forced marital sex punishable", so what exactly is being punished here then?
It means that forced sexual intercourse within marriage is still punishable under the law of those specific countries. I don’t know how exactly they would punish it and what types of punishment they would use but i’m simply going by the apparent reading of that picture.
Does Marital Rape even exist? The Prophet pbuh said play with your women. Which means arouse her before any sexual encounter. Because obviously rape in todays context is a strange male forcing his way in. Without arousing a woman you are harming her private parts and that goes against the responsibility of a muslim to preserve the lives and health of whoever is under his care. Outside of menstraution, illness and any excuse possible etc would you say it is wrong for the woman to reject her husband's "advances".
I’m not a sheikh but from my knowledge
You cannot force a women into having sex and if a women says no you can’t do nothing .
The best option between those two is divorce because both of them are different answers which won’t go together.
So yes you can’t put your hands on her but if she refuses then you might as well divorce because you’re not going to get your answer from her .
You cannot force a women into having sex and if a women says no you can’t do nothing .
The best option between those two is divorce because both of them are different answers which won’t go together.
So yes you can’t put your hands on her but if she refuses then you might as well divorce because you’re not going to get your answer from her .
I forgot the statement said by the prophet (Saw)
Where if a women says no to a men (having sex) without excuse then the angel will curse her .
So if the prophet (saw) haven’t said to force yourself upon her then it doesn’t matter what the sheikhs says .
It's wild that believing marital rape is fine, or believing it's not real, is now within the Somali Overton Window. This is not the way of thinking our parents' or even much older siblings grew up with. Despite the few normal voices on here, it's clear they are in the fringe minority. This conversation is no longer about marital rape but rather the continued path of the community rejecting basic morality. New implications of solidifying Somali groupthink led by mentally ill violent-loving people, educated elites fleeing the civil war, and unbridled religious extremism in the diaspora and in Somalia like this are coming into fruition all the time. Somalis will not see a problem even if it is hitting them in the face, which explains why yet another famine looms or why terrorists can walk freely across Somalia, including Godane in liberal Hargeisa. This is a huge problem and it requires a bold solution. The government needs to be taken over by revolutionaries and jail or even execute people like this sheikh to send a message that this is unacceptable. Its preferable for transgender people to have rights in Somalia than for the majority of the population to find marital rape acceptable or to not exist. Somalis need to be dragged towards the other direction. It's clear at the very least aggressive online psyop is required. You can only fight extremism with extremism from the opposite side because moderates who are pushing against this in this thread will fail on their own. Its very concerning what has happened to the Somali people and no one sees the bigger picture.
There is no such thing as marital rape in Islamic legitimacy. This is the disgust of white gaal
“If a man invites his wife to his bed, and she refuses to come, the angels curse her until morning.”
«إِذَا دَعَا الرَّجُلُ امْرَأَتَهُ إِلَى فِرَاشِهِ، فَأَبَتْ أَنْ تَجِيءَ، لَعَنَتْهَا المَلاَئِكَةُ حَتَّى تُصْبِحَ»
There is no such thing as anal sex. The Qur’an told us where we should have sexual intercourse
نِسَاؤُكُمْ حَرْثٌ لَكُمْ فَأْتُوا حَرْثَكُمْ أَنَّى شِئْتُمْ
But most women with little education are feminists it's a sad thing
“If a man invites his wife to his bed, and she refuses to come, the angels curse her until morning.”
«إِذَا دَعَا الرَّجُلُ امْرَأَتَهُ إِلَى فِرَاشِهِ، فَأَبَتْ أَنْ تَجِيءَ، لَعَنَتْهَا المَلاَئِكَةُ حَتَّى تُصْبِحَ»
There is no such thing as anal sex. The Qur’an told us where we should have sexual intercourse
نِسَاؤُكُمْ حَرْثٌ لَكُمْ فَأْتُوا حَرْثَكُمْ أَنَّى شِئْتُمْ
But most women with little education are feminists it's a sad thing
are you a retard? marital rape is a man forcefully entering his wife. it is a form of abuse similar to a husband punching the teeth out of his wife. a woman who is raped will suffer trauma and ptsd, and will likely get genital injury. It has nothing to do with feminism, but basic human rights.
