Zina Should be Banned.

[ZBR]

Thats cos they don't use contraception

Zina isn’t a singular action, it’s a path, there’s things that precede it, like drinking, beautification, wigs, conversations, intentions and there are the things that emanate and develop from it.

Zina in of itself is based on following whims, they way people vet their partners becomes whimsical, their planning for the future is fanciful and fickle, their firmness of promises is also whimsical

Zina in essence is sex without commitment and people without firm decision making, and it’s just to believe relationships that formed on it to have the same attributes.

Why are children born out of wedlock raised in single parent homes ? They were born from whims, the man was unwilling to commit even after dating for months or years. Who bears the burden? Society at large, from cradle to grave, a child w grievances against the world, their parents, overburdening both the mother due to lack of support, to the father due to the perceived spontaneity , grandparents, etc etc

 

[Angelina]

Western culture isn’t Zina and it’s had very rigorous discipline even before Christianity

Also if you look at Islam, it’s the way of all the successful nations. We have the blueprint of what the Jews Christians Romans Arabs Egyptians etc used Allah has condensed all wisdom in it

False. I laughed when you used Romans and Greeks as an example. Zina along with homosexuality was very much tolerated.

Prostitution was rife and they were also taxed by the state. You’re right that adulterous unions were indeed illegal, but only for wives of free Roman citizens and obviously any man caught corrupting the wives and daughters of these free men would be punished along with the women.

Zina was rampant, prostitution was rampant as well. Much of world’s civilization was like that. They had a class of women who are usually the slave and poor class serving men for zina whilst the wives of the rich were deemed untouchable It was a world of double standards and clear hierarchy. The same attitudes prevailed with regards to homosexuality.

 

[jemappelle]

View attachment 248018
Zina isn’t a singular action, it’s a path, there’s things that precede it, like drinking, beautification, wigs, conversations, intentions and there are the things that emanate and develop from it.
Zina in of itself is based on following whims, they way people vet their partners becomes whimsical, their firmness of promises is whimsical,

Zina in essence is sex without commitment and people without firm decision making, and it’s just to believe relationships that formed on it to have the same attributes.

Why are children born out of wedlock raised in single parent homes ? They were born from whims, the man was unwilling to commit even after dating for months or years. Who bears the burden? Society at large, from cradle to grave, a child w grievances against the world, their parents, overburdening both the mother due to lack of support, to the father due to the perceived spontaneity , grandparents, etc etc

Thats got nothing to do with what I said

 

[jemappelle]

Romans

to be fair Romans became more and more adulterous over time, they were not as degenerate at the beginning of their reign as they were at first

 

[ZBR]

Thats got nothing to do with what I said

Akhi it’s not about access to contraceptives, it’s results of the structure and method

 

[Angelina]

to be fair Romans became more and more adulterous over time, they were not as degenerate at the beginning of their reign as they were at first

They were always degenerate. Romans were very strict with Adultery. The wives of free patriarchs were held to strict standards of not being allowed out without veils, being secluded, lack of property rights, lack of legal rights ect. However, prostitution was rife with the slave and poor classes of women and men were always free to solicit their services as long as they do not commit adultery with the wives of free citizens.

 

[jemappelle]

They were also degenerate.

Do you mean always?

 

[Angelina]

Do you mean always?

Yep. Same with the Greeks, same with most ancients. The idea of Zina never being rampant is a lie. Those societies had a class of women they could use and abuse (The poor who were sold into prostitution) whilst utilizing strict laws to keep their women chaste.

 

[jemappelle]

Akhi it’s not about access to contraceptives, it’s results of the structure and method

My point is the only reason they have babies is because they don't use contraceptives

 

[jemappelle]

Yep. Same with the Greeks, same with most ancients. The idea of Zina never being rampant is a lie. Those societies had a class of women they could use and abuse (The poor who were sold into prostitution) whilst utilizing strict laws to keep their women chaste.

My point is they became more and more degenrate as time went on. At the start zina in these societies were not as common as in the latter, having mass nudity everywhere and zina with everyone became very common towards the end of their reign.

 

[Angelina]

My point is they became more and more degenrate as time went on. At the start zina in these societies were not as common as in the latter, having mass nudity everywhere and zina with everyone became very common towards the end of their reign.

I’m not sure about that. I don’t think mass nudity would have been possible as like I said, free women had very strict policies governing them. Most of them couldn’t even leave the house without hijab. Unless you mean they started to have more prostitution? Maybe, because as time went by they started to conquer more lands which increased the number of lower class women.

 

[Nak-Muay-Femeu]

Do you mean always?

Romans were always degenerate as f*ck and stole each other's wives left right and center sxb lol. Octavian even made his wife Livia divorce her husband and marry him while she was still pregnant with her 2nd child. And bare in mind Augustus was the one who instituted morality laws like the "law of three sons"

 

[Psychologist]

If both parties agree to it, why you have problem with it? there is no harm to it, as long as both parties are responsible, and the family bs. it would happened regardless of the status of the parities relationship .

False. I laughed when you used Romans and Greeks as an example. Zina along with homosexuality was very much tolerated.

Prostitution was rife and they were also taxed by the state. You’re right that adulterous unions were indeed illegal, but only for wives of free Roman citizens and obviously any man caught corrupting the wives and daughters of these free men would be punished along with the women.

Zina was rampant, prostitution was rampant as well. Much of world’s civilization was like that. They had a class of women who are usually the slave and poor class serving men for zina whilst the wives of the rich were deemed untouchable It was a world of double standards and clear hierarchy. The same attitudes prevailed with regards to homosexuality.

i find it crazy, how they were more developed than many nations now. This people understood many things that people still argue over.

The greek had the most masculine men, who understood to show their masculine they had to dominate other men. AND Now we are stuck with soy boy who complain about gay marriage How has our society fall into this path we are in.

 

[ZBR]

If both parties agree to it, why you have problem with it? there is no harm to it, as long as both parties are responsible, and the family bs. it would happened regardless of the status of the parities relationship .

i find it crazy, how they were more developed than many nations now. This people understood many things that people still argue over.

The greek had the most masculine men, who understood to show their masculine they had to dominate other men. AND Now we are stuck with soy boy who complain about gay marriage How has our society fall into this path we are in.

Are you Amhara

 

[Psychologist]

Are you Amhara

IM FULL SOMALI, WHY YOU ASK YOU??

 

[jemappelle]

I’m not sure about that. I don’t think mass nudity would have been possible as like I said, free women had very strict policies governing them. Most of them couldn’t even leave the house without hijab. Unless you mean they started to have more prostitution? Maybe, because as time went by they started to conquer more lands which increased the number of lower class women.

Among the Romans, the status of the housewife was esteemed. The husband had only a mild superiority which constantly diminished. Corporal chastisement was sometimes recommended but rarely practised. In the conduct of the household the woman had equality. Even among the Roman Stoics there were exertions on behalf of equal education. All sexual intercourse either outside or prior to marriage was frowned upon. In marriage the physical union was for the purpose of producing good citizens. It was to be sustained, however, by the spiritual communion of the partners, who were fully equal. Grounds of divorce were the rise of the husband to a higher social class, childlessness, poisoning of the children or merely the desire for another marriage. The woman had almost incalculable influence, especially when she had sons and when she could act skilfully.5 With the advancement on the road to civilization, the status of the woman underwent a drastic change. Divorce became easy and wedlock was ended on flimsy grounds. Seneca, the famous Roman philosopher and statesman from the classical period, had severely criticized his countrymen for the high incidence of divorce among them. He says: “Now divorce is not regarded as something shameful in Rome. Women calculate their age by the number of husbands they have taken. ” 6 The Romans as a nation led a bawdy and sensual life. Visits to prostitutes were considered part of the education of young men in Pompeii. In this city there were about a dozen brothels and a Sin street to cater for the needs of a population of 20 000 souls. In these brothels were found many of the famous obscene frescoes of Pompeii. These works are so outrageous that today female tourists are not allowed to see them.7
The Roman Emperor Commodus valued nothing in sovereign power except the unbounded license of indulging in his sexual appetites. His hours were spent in the company of three hundred beautiful women and as many boys, of every rank and of every province; and wherever the arts of seduction proved ineffectual, the brutal lover had recourse to violence.

The victims died in torment. Some were nailed on crosses; others sewn up in the skins of wild beasts and exposed to the fury of wild dogs; others again, smeared over with combustile materials, were used as torches to illuminate the darkness of the night.8

As soon as public morality declined, the flood of nudity and sexual licentiousness burst upon Rome. Dwelling places were decorated with nude and immoral paintings; theatres became the scenes of moral perversion and prostitution became rife. Flora became a popular Roman sport in which naked women competed in race contests. Males and females bathed together publicly. Roman literature was brimming with immodest themes and episodes. When the Romans were completely overtaken by, amongst other factors, carnal desires, they faded into oblivion, leaving not a trace of their glorious past.

7)The Whispers of Pompeii, Fortnightly Life, October 3, 1966.
8) Gibbon, Edward, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (U.S.A.: Classics Appreciation Society, 1956) 391, 441.

 

[jemappelle]

If both parties agree to it, why you have problem with it? there is no harm to it, as long as both parties are responsible, and the family bs. it would happened regardless of the status of the parities relationship .

i find it crazy, how they were more developed than many nations now. This people understood many things that people still argue over.

The greek had the most masculine men, who understood to show their masculine they had to dominate other men. AND Now we are stuck with soy boy who complain about gay marriage How has our society fall into this path we are in.

Homo alert
you are the real soyboy

 

[jemappelle]

If both parties agree to it, why you have problem with it? there is no harm to it, as long as both parties are responsible, and the family bs. it would happened regardless of the status of the parities relationship .

Because God said so

 

[ZBR]

Another thing is the rise of Wigs, which are having a resurgence in the west are the cause of rise of marital infidelity and societal decline

You see it happen cyclically, a recent example is 18th century France, as wigs became popular, the old regime elites eroded as they got distracted by lust envy malice and neglected the serious matters of management, and cohesiveness which led to their destruction

This statement from Muwaiyah which he heard and remembered from the Prophet is remarkable

He was groomed to be king by his mother from a royal lineage , his father being the leader of the Quraish , who even was called to the court of the Cesar of Rome
His uncle was Uthman ibn Affan ‏رضي الله وعنه the third khalif, and Muawiya ‏رضي الله وعنه himself was the military and fiscal governor of Syria 20 years before he became khalif managing the nascent empire from it’s forefront

He saw Quraishs strengths and the weaknesses that caused them to be overcome, the strengths of the eastern Romans and their weaknesses A auste observer who didn’t speak much, for him to make this statement he mustve know the implications it has on the society he was responsible for

 

[ZBR]

the beauty of the Hadith narrated by Muawiya ‏وعلي رضي الله عنه said is that much after him there’s plethora of examples that show this ruin unfolding