Islamic Sharia by the Quran/Hadith and the Muslim Woman
Rape by Islamist! Abominable atrocities against women enforced by Sharia Law. Time to take out more insurance.
Can we make a jump and state there is a connection to the Quran and Sharia Law one that compliments the other? Yes. Can we also make the jump that Sharia Law bolsters the acts of the men who commit the atrocity? Can we then follow that the Quran is a culprit as well. Yes I think that is a reasonable, correct argument.
Punishment of males who participate in violence against women, whether as a bystander or a direct participant, if punished for their act is lame at best. It is for the most part that the woman who was raped suffers additional punishment, is held accountable of course if she is still alive.
Men of Islam are a special, a privileged, class. Women well a class but certainly not a valued one. Is it fair to say the Quran is a guidepost, the rules, that the Islamist follows? Well yes. The teachings of the Quran, followed by interpretation of different believers a complicated one. Different sects believe one way or the other. Alawites who are Shia and considered part of the Twelver’s differ from that of the Five’er’s and so on. Sunni vs Shia it adds up to sectarian violence. It is far more complicated than I am stating. In fact my little mind is unable to comprehend all of its complexity.
Sharia Law, the institution of law of Islam, of one country versus another ‘may’ have some difference but a common thread it seems to me is the value of women by the law, seems not to value women at all. It backs up the notion that the class of male are supreme, can not be held accountable in any significant punishment or again not at all for male violence against women. If it is male violence against male well that could result in say having your hand or head chopped off, end of story.
However when Western countries and their institutions of law seem to favor the Islamist male over a Muslim female that is horrific. Are these Western countries acting out of a more liberal ideology, a bleeding heart reaction or one that believes by doing so the extremist of Islam (read male) will not commit an act of violence against us. Perhaps its once again fair to state the Western concern of male violence against males not so much male violence against women, women can be sacrificed, you be the judge on this theory.
I was taken aback when I read the following (and the reading of prompted me to write this commentary)
Western democracy law must value both genders.
Well do we need more laws to counter the growing Islamist community in America? Well certainly I think when it comes to Sharia Law, an outright ban, codified in legislation, one that restrict courts from using any laws of Sharia in determining a finding in a case.
Do we need more insurance. An insurance card if you will. As a woman I would gladly accept all such insurance.
Can we make a legitimate argument that there exist in our country a special class for women and men even children no matter their gender? Well yes. Is not gender a classification? Forms will ask are you female or male. At times they may simply ask you to choose under Sex M or F. An aside the term Sex when used, in my opinion, inappropriate. Gender should be used for obvious reasons. Sex is an act. An option for Other is not provided. Whatever classification is written all over it.
Therefore back to the notion of taking out more insurance to thwart Sharia Law, the individual (male) of Islam, the Islamist treatment of women. Well I think as I have stated already we need all the insurance we can garner.
With that in mind is it time to revisit the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution? Obviously I think so. Its an insurance card. Well the idea of taking out this insurance will be controversial among some circles other circles it may be a Duh?. I think in all circles it deserves revisiting and certainly thoughtful, in depth, consideration, not knee jerk reactions.
No matter your ideological beliefs in the political certainly rational thinking men and women can agree that treatment of women in Islamic countries is deplorable, unacceptable in the Western democracy’s. Then why not take out insurance that may send a strong message to the Islamist whose goal is to turn the Western democracies into Islamist states? Why not take out the best insurance, written in the constitution as an amendment? All I ask is for my Patriots is to give it consideration. Would it inflict harm [the ERA] to the non Islamist male? No. Would it send a strong message to the Islamist male? Well yes I contend it would.
You might think the Islamist view of women as second class citizens well it could never happen in America, the Islamist ideology taking hold in every facet of Western law and society. I think you would be naive in that assumption. Islam, I believe, is like a festering sore that untreated could become gangrenous.
Gan-green defined in the dictionary is defined to be
gangrene, gan·grene [gang-green, gang-green] Show IPA noun,verb, gan·grened, gan·gren·ing. Pathology . noun
1. necrosis or death of soft tissue due to obstructed circulation, usually followed by decomposition and putrefaction.
2. moral or spiritual corruption and decadence that pervades an individual or group: “This church body has been afflicted with a spiritual gangrene that is poisoning our relationship with the Lord,”the preacher expostulated. Synonyms:decay, rot; depravity, degeneracy.
I contend that Islam is afflicting our society now, its a festering sore, and by Islam’s belief system it is their duty to inflict Islam on the infidel. Support taking out more insurance my friends using whatever methods available.
Patriot think about it? Look forward to your Replay.
By-the-way, you can call me a feminist, a Libertarian, a social conservative. You however do not have my permission to call me a Democrat, a liberal, left-wing liberal nor a progressive for those are fighting labels. I will fire back. I do however believe in freedom of speech but there is the notion of respect, respectfulness.