Thursday, October 13, 2011

Muslim Man Knocks Out Frightened Bride with Chloroform in Order to Rape Her

But Kim says that a woman can refuse to have sex with her husband if she doesn't feel like having sex. Why do Muslim men keep following Muhammad's commands, rather than Kim's Westernized version of Islam? I just don't get it.

United Kingdom--A husband who knocked out his virgin wife with chloroform and raped her has been jailed for eight years.

The 35-year-old man tied the woman to a bed and knocked her out using the 'obsolete Victorian anaesthetic' on at least two occasions during their six weeks of marriage.

The woman, a Bangladeshi immigrant who was 21 at the time, had repeatedly refused to have sex with her new husband because she was too nervous.

The husband, who cannot be named for legal reasons, poured the chloroform onto a towel, pressed it over her face, then tied her up before raping her at his home in Poplar, east London.

Judge Timothy King said the rapist had regarded his wife as a 'chattel' he could use as he wanted.
He said: 'The victim was a vulnerable young woman, she had made her unwillingness abundantly clear and you would not take no for an answer.

'Her views were of no consequence as far as you were concerned.

'Given that you used chloroform to rape her, this was very much a contrived and premeditated act in which you subdued her capacity to resist.' . . .

The victim married her husband in a 'simple Islamic ceremony at his flat in Poplar' on 12 April 2009, the court heard.

'She says she was forced to marry him, and it certainly seems that the period of time between the defendant first meeting her and the marriage ceremony was extremely short,' said the prosecutor.

On the night of their marriage, the husband tried to have sex with his wife, but she refused, saying it was normal to wait two days before sleeping together.

When he tried again 48 hours later, she tried to put him off again with another excuse.

'The defendant would not take no for an answer,' said Mr Hearnden.

'On at least two occasions between the day of the marriage ceremony and 9 May, the defendant had sexual intercourse with her without her consent.

'The method, we say, was the same each time. He would tie her hands up with a scarf in the bedroom and he would make her senseless by putting some of the chloroform onto a towel, wetting it, and holding it against her mouth.

'It would make her totally helpless during the rapes,' he said. 'She could feel pain and burning.'
The situation continued until 9 May, when a blazing row broke out at the marital home and the woman was badly beaten.

Police were called to the flat, at which point the woman took them to her bedroom and showed them the bottle of chloroform, which was large enough to hold around a litre of the drug.

She indicated what had been done to her in broken English and sign language, the court heard.

When her husband was questioned, he initially said they had never had sex and then said they had slept together but it was consensual. (Source)

31 comments:

Kim said...

More sarcasm. Unfortunately I don't have the time to respond, I'm busy with University homework/lectures.

But really David? Do you really believe Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) taught us to rape women? Did he show us an example of this or did he show us an example of how to beat them when they deliberately refuse to obey their husband's commands over and over again?

Yes Muslim men are allowed to keep slaves both male and female. Yes Muslim men are allowed to have 4 wives.

But NOWHERE does it teach us to rape anyone or sexually assault anyone.

Again. If you have the time, prove me wrong on this subject.
Show me where the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) taught us to rape anyone.

Peace =)

Osama Abdallah said...

Chloroform?! Who was the wife? King Kong??? :)

Hemel said...

Kim ,this couple is from my country.Did you ever lived in muslim world as muslim?Not in the cities but in the rural areas where islam is strong?If you do then you will understand how indebted the islam you follow is to the west.The way you are speaking here if you were in a muslim village they would've sentenced you lashes for even talking with men as you are doing here

Hemel said...

But David,its our culture that women are shy.And as most marriages are arranged marriage that is why they cant get easy towards each other.Maybe that is why they were not able to sex.But I dont get why the husband was supposed to use chloroform.He could have punched her twice and that was enough..Maybe it is in UK thats why he was afraid.

Toll said...

Allah automatically anulled the marriages of females captured after a jihad operation, who where also automatically turned in to slaves, so the jihadists could rape them without comitting adultery. Allah was always very forthcoming.

simple_truth said...

Kim said...

"More sarcasm. Unfortunately I don't have the time to respond, I'm busy with University homework/lectures."

I assure you that it is not sarcasm.

"But really David? Do you really believe Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) taught us to rape women?"

He most likely didn't come out and say it explicitly; but, he left the groundwork for it to be done under the disguise of dealing with captives (right hand posessions) and beating wives for not complying with the husband's request, which could be one of not having sex with him. In some ways, the approval is implied and can be justified through such conditions. Don't forget that Mohammad taught that women are a tilth for the man.

"Did he show us an example of this or did he show us an example of how to beat them when they deliberately refuse to obey their husband's commands over and over again?"

A command to have sex would fit right in there as something that couldn't be refused. Couple that with the teaching that allows a man to demand sex with his wife whenever he wants except in very limited circumstances--one of which is if she is tending to her menses. The other instances involve her not being able to keep her duties to Allah. Other than, that, there is little or no room to refuse her husband's desire for sex. I could easily see the husband being able to use this reasoning to rape her without it appearing as rape. Don't you see that, Kim?

"Yes Muslim men are allowed to keep slaves both male and female. Yes Muslim men are allowed to have 4 wives."

From what I have read, male slaves were not really that popular. It was the women that were more valuable because their value was greater and that they could be used for sex (right hand possessions), exchanged for POWs, or traded for something of value. Given that most of the women slaves were kept for some kind of profit, what do you think the men did with their harems? I am sure that the captive women were just so eager to have sex with their masters. The women knew that if they didn't give in to their masters desires, they could suffer negative consequences. I am sure that they were worried about their master's abuse of power and gave in. Having sex with a prisoner is a form of sexual exploitation and is almost impossible to be classified as anything other than rape. It may not be the violent type of rape; nevertheless, it is still rape. It would definitely be more definitive than what we commonly call date rape. A lesser degree than violent rape is still rape.

"But NOWHERE does it teach us to rape anyone or sexually assault anyone."

As I said, probably not explicitly; but, the groundwork has already been laid by your prophet and his examples.

"Again. If you have the time, prove me wrong on this subject.
Show me where the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) taught us to rape anyone."

This is like the famous question of "Where in the Bible does Jesus says that He is God?" He didn't say it explicitly; but, it is so easy to see from his actions in many circumstances--two of which were when he didn't refused worship and when the Jews took up stones to stone him for blasphemy while claiming to be equal to God.

Mohammad doesn't need to spell everything out in order for him to either teach or condone an act. He only needs to not completely prevent it from happening. In other words, he just needs to leave the door open for others to extrapolate through logical deduction while using his examples and teachings to back it up. One of my criticisms with Islam is that it is so easy to support a specific point of view by citing the deeds and teachings of Mohammad. This is in large part to the various contradicting hadiths on almost any subject, IMO.

search 4 truth said...

@ Kim Yes Allah and Mohamed said you can rape women. How many times do I have to show you? You are delusional!

How else can you interpret this. It's clear, rape, adultery, kidnapping, ransoming and extortion! It is as clear as day and night! And you want repeated commands and examples? LOL! here you go.
And how about Mohamed raping Safiya the very night he slaughtered her husband and father and a guard watched outside because he was frightened for Mohameds safety. YOU TRULY ARE A CRAZY PERSON kIM.
Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)


* تفسير Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs
{ وَٱلْمُحْصَنَٰتُ مِنَ ٱلنِّسَآءِ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكْتَ أَيْمَٰنُكُمْ كِتَٰبَ ٱللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَأُحِلَّ لَكُمْ مَّا وَرَاءَ ذَٰلِكُمْ أَن تَبْتَغُواْ بِأَمْوَٰلِكُمْ مُّحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَٰفِحِينَ فَمَا ٱسْتَمْتَعْتُمْ بِهِ مِنْهُنَّ فَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً وَلاَ جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِيمَا تَرَٰضَيْتُمْ بِهِ مِن بَعْدِ ٱلْفَرِيضَةِ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ عَلِيماً حَكِيماً }

(And all married women (are forbidden unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess) of captives, even if they have husbands in the Abode of War


* تفسير Tafsir al-Jalalayn
{ وَٱلْمُحْصَنَٰتُ مِنَ ٱلنِّسَآءِ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكْتَ أَيْمَٰنُكُمْ كِتَٰبَ ٱللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَأُحِلَّ لَكُمْ مَّا وَرَاءَ ذَٰلِكُمْ أَن تَبْتَغُواْ بِأَمْوَٰلِكُمْ مُّحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَٰفِحِينَ فَمَا ٱسْتَمْتَعْتُمْ بِهِ مِنْهُنَّ فَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً وَلاَ جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِيمَا تَرَٰضَيْتُمْ بِهِ مِن بَعْدِ ٱلْفَرِيضَةِ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ عَلِيماً حَكِيماً }

And, forbidden to you are, wedded women, those with spouses, that you should marry them before they have left their spouses, be they Muslim free women or not; save what your right hands own, of captured [slave] girls, whom you may have sexual intercourse with, even if they should have spouses among the enemy camp

"O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.” (Bukhari 34:432)

"We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter" (Sahih Muslim 3371)

I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize. So we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: “Give me that girl.” (Sahih Muslim 4345)

"I have not yet disrobed her." Thats another way of saying raped her. DUH!Great example yo have Kim. WAKE UP!!!!

The Purple Marquise said...

@Kim: Kim said: "Yes Muslim men are allowed to keep slaves both male and female."

KIM, KIM! GIRL!!!! My heart goes out to you! You poor soul! Are you listening to yourself?!!!!! Forget about the issue of rape for a second! You have NO PROBLEM with your PROPHET allowing men to have SLAVES????????? Are you serious? I am on the verge of breaking into tears for you my sister! How can you be so heartless and blind? How can you support a man who teaches his followers that there is nothing wrong with making slaves out of people? Do you have no sympathy and compassion for those people whose lot in life is to be those men's slaves? Aren't those slave men and women like you and me? Don't they have their own hopes and dreams? Do you think they don't suffer pain of bondage?

Besides please explain to me one thing. If some women are slaves to the Muslims men are they allowed to refuse him sex? If not isn't that called rape when one party has no right to refuse sex?

Then another thing. David already amply proved that according to Islam the woman has to be sexually available always maybe except when she is having her period. So if she refuses the man is allowed to beat her. You even agreed with this proposition and said that it is a husband's "right" to receive sex from his wife. So what if she refuse to give him his "right"? Well... he will beat her until she is "compelled" (i.e. forced) to give him his "right" whether she wants it or not.

So Muhammad actually doesn't have to come out and say :"Guys go rape women!" His command to beat them if they refuse sex does the job. What do you call such a sexual act? Consensual? NO! After all what is rape if not forcing and unwilling partner to sex by means of violence? You Muslims may call it marriage or Nukah or what ever, but we civilized people call it RAPE!!!!

Face it Kim, we just have WAAAAYYYYYY higher standards of morality and conduct than you Muslims contrary to what your Imams and Mullahs have brainwashed you to believe!

The Purple Marquise said...

By the way I have an anecdotal example of this Islamic view of marital sex which sees it as this unshakable duty that woman has towards her husband.

One of my dear cousins who is a medical worker during her training was sent to work as a nurse in a remote village in the province of Isfahan in central Iran. One day when she came home for a visit she told us the story of a little 13 year old girl who was brought to their clinic with horrendous bleeding that needed emergency medical treatment. She said that the girls'd life was saved in the neck of time by the medics in that clinic and she told my cousin how she became so hurt! The reason for her bleeding was this:
A few months earlier she was given to marriage to an older man of about 30. Apparently from the beginning she refused to give any sex to her husband and said that she was afraid of it. The husband waited and waited and waited and waited, but every night she refused and several months passed. The poor little girl was still afraid! But then the husband's patience ended with her and he tried to force her to sex like it or not. But she again managed to escape from him and ran to her parents' house.

But guess what! Her parents took the side of the husband and lectured her about her "duty" to her husband and insisted that she go back and submit to her husband immediately. Meanwhile her husband comes to her father's house to find her and threatens to divorce her if she doesn't give him sex immediately. But the girl was still crying and defiant and begging them to let her go. But then her father and brothers had it with her and caught her hands and feet and put her on her back on the floor of their living room and kept her down on the floor by force and told her husband to enter her right then and there. Well... the result is clear. Her barbarian family had to bring her to the clinic the next day so that she doesn't die of bleeding!

Kim! I hope your conscience is calling you! It is not necessary for Islam and Quran and Muhammad to say outright "Rape her!" If he allows them to see sex as their "right" which should be given to them on demand and if not violence could ensue this formula equals rape! That is what the teachings of your prophet and your "holy" book leads to. these teachings are not conducive to love and harmony and compassion and understanding and caring for one another. It is conducive to harshness and violence and cruelty and selfishness.

No matter how many times your prophet said "Be nice to your wives" when he with the other side of his mouth said :"Beat them" and that sex is your right and she should give it to you anytime you demand it, then his commands are contradictory and guess what! His followers are going to understand that beating and raping your wife is not unkind, because it is permissible (Halal or Mubah) They will think they have done nothing wrong when their girl-wife screams in agony and cries and begs them not to enter her but they would do it anyway. They think they had the right!!! They were just getting their right from an evil wife who was cheating them out of their God given right!!! the fact that they even fed her all these months that she refused sex with them and the fact that they didn't divorce her on the spot was a sacrifice on their part and that means they have been kind enough to their wives already.

Your prophet was such and evil man that he didn't even know the meaning of kindness and therefore never taught its meaning to his followers.

Please sister Kim, open your eyes! You are better than your religion! You are better than what this evil religion is teaching you to become! You don't need it! Throw it away! Be free and fight for the freedom of your sisters instead of condoning their rape and subjugation! Throw Islam to hell and embrace the God of Love!

Osama Abdallah said...

David Wood and "The Purple Marquise",

David, after our Phoenix Debate, I'd like to suggest debating topics on women in Islam and the Bible. I think the women's topics are the least debated ones. Yet, they are very important.

The Purple Marquise, so now because some father and his sons forced their daughters into having sexual intercourse with her husband somehow makes Islam an evil faith? I can quote you many verses from the Bible where this is condoned. And for your information, Islam does not condone this at all. I can thoroughly prove this, but don't have the time, nor the desire (quite frankly), now to launch quotations left and right on you. It just amazes me how shallow many people are on this board. I mean, it is one thing to not accept Islam as the True Faith from GOD Almighty, but it is totally another to give ridiculous reasons as "proof" that the faith is false, especially when we can find things that are CONDONED in the Bible that are many many times worse.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

The Purple Marquise said...

Mr. Abdallah,

You wrote: "The Purple Marquise, so now because some father and his sons forced their daughters into having sexual intercourse with her husband somehow makes Islam an evil faith?"

I spend a considerable amount of time writing two long comments in order to show to Kim and Muslims here thoroughly how the ideological system of Islam with its contradictory and mishmash of commands and rules logically and naturally LEADS to the kind of actions that was seen in that father who allowed her daughter to be forcefully penetrated by her husband against her will on the floor of his living room instead of protecting her.

Even though ironically you accused us of being shallow it seems that you were too inept to see how I constructed my argument and I am hardly surprised by that. I have seen many of your debates with Christian apologist and frankly I found you sorely lacking in logical consistency.

So I make yet another (most probably in your case vain) attempt to make you understand my argument before you rush to say something totally irrelevant and non-sequitur in my answer as you did before. Here it goes:

Mr. Abdallah, your Islamic system is a very inconsistent and illogical one. But it is not the only inconsistent and shaky ideology in the world. We have seen the likes of it before. For example communism. When Carl Marx wrote his books he didn't envision a communist world with concentration camps and mass murder, and a bunch of corrupt people sitting on the upper echelons of the polit-bureau living in luxury when masses starved.

But his system was inconsistent and therefore any attempt at implementing it would inevitably result in nothing better than what we already saw in the last century in USSR, China, Cuba, Cambodia, North Korea, etc...

Even if they try to implement it again 1000 times still the outcome would be the same! Because it gives absolute power to a select group of people and put the rest of the society at their mercy and those people with way too much power in their hand always get corrupted and use it selfishly even if the one who gave them this much power wanted them to use it for good.

I say the exact same thing applies to Islam! It is an inconsistent system! Its different components don't match each other and inevitably they are going to conflict with each other. And the commands will never lead to intended results.

You cannot teach men that they are superior to women, that their wives are deficient in intellect and piety, allow them to beat their wives if they fear disobedience from them, tell them that getting sex from their wives upon request and at any time is their sacred right, tell them that they can have up to 4 wives and what ever their right hand possessed, make divorce extremely easy for them while rather difficult for women, and doing all these things which put the women in a serious disadvantage in relation to their husbands expect abuse and violence against women not to be the outcome!

Your prophet practically left poor women at the mercy of their menfolk!! With that much power invested in the hand of males what do you think will result?! Utopia? And that is still extremely charitable towards your prophet since I assumed that he really didn't mean to cause any pain and suffering to women.

No matter how many vague and meaningless injunction you give to husbands to "be kind to their wives" it will be useless because now they have learned your true message that women are less than them in value and should obey them and if not they have the right to beat them! What does kindness even mean considering all of the above!!?? And we see the results daily in the Muslims world. That is the culture that Islam created. Denying it is like putting your head in the sand! NO WHERE IN THE WHOLE WORLD women are as oppressed as in the Muslim world and that is no accident.

The Purple Marquise said...

@ Osama Abdalla:

Now coming to your threats that: "I can quote you many verses from the Bible where this is condoned."

I laugh and laugh hard when Muslims throw this challenge into the ring when ever they cannot defend Islam and they are in a checkmate position. If you cannot prove that Muhammad didn't command men to beat their wives and have sex on demand and sleep with female captives,etc.. and all the scriptural evidence is against you, and when you cannot convince the infidel that somehow doing all those above mentioned despicable things is in fact moral and good then what is the last resort? Attack the Bible!

They say the best defense is offense, right? Only in the soccer field, Mr. Abdallah, only in the soccer field! In a debate it is no defense AT ALL and it is high time you learned that. It is a tip that if you follow it will enhance your debating skills enormously!

You know what Mr. Abdallah fire away! If you successfully prove to me that Bible really teaches us Christians to behave like muslims toward women and condones a father's act who helps a husband rape his daughter, if you do it fair and square I will leave Christianity. I promise you!

But what makes you think by doing that you defended Islam in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM?!!? I still will say Islam is an evil religion and Muhammad a false prophet and Sharia a horrific law.

And since Christians in this day and age don't do any of these horrendous misogynist acts as Muslims do (whether their Bible teaches it or not) and frankly never ever even in the dark past did treat their women as bad as muslims do today, so even if I ever lose faith in Christianity I still wouldn't mind Christians at all. Christians are a harmless bunch.

But I will fight Islam and sharia till my last breath since you insist on imposing your misery-inducing and oppressive and frankly illogical system on everyone within or without your group by force or deceit!

taomeano said...

Osama Abdallah
said

"...CONDONED in the Bible that are many many times worse."

Show us anywhere in the NEW TESTAMENT where christian men are supposed to force sex on their wifes. We are talking about sex now not any other topic like you do in your debates. Don't switch the topic. And don't bring any issue in the OLD TESTAMENT because as christians we are not under the OLD TESTAMENT, we are under the NEW TESTAMENT.
If you quote anything from the OLD TESTAMENT then I would conclude that you are the shallow one not the people on this board.

taomeano said...

When I read of what Mohammed and his gang did to women of the Arabian Peninsula my heart just aches. I can only imagine the horrific sexual environment these women lived through.

what a pity Islam is.

curly said...

@The purple marquise,
Thank you for sharing the tragic story about a 13 years old girl. My heart was grieved to read the story.

Osama Abdallah said...

"You know what Mr. Abdallah fire away! If you successfully prove to me that Bible really teaches us Christians to behave like muslims toward women and condones a father's act who helps a husband rape his daughter, if you do it fair and square I will leave Christianity. I promise you!"

Response:

Exodus 21:7-11
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2021:7-11;&version=KJV


Your father can sell you as a slave girl to another man, who is even older than him. The verses even allow for the man to give you away to his son (FURTHER PROOF THAT THE MAN CAN BE A GRANDPA). You are to be obedient to your master, since you are now his "Property".

Do you want me to quote you the Biblical verses that say a slave is the master's property?

What choice does the girl have? Can she refuse to be sold as a slave girl? Want more from your sacred Scriptures?

As to your points on Islam, all you've given us is open and vague statements that can be said and used on any scripture. Please give me specific examples from Islamic Scriptures. Show me where Islam allows for me to take part of raping my own daughter. I AM DESPERATELY WAITING FOR YOU ON THIS ONE!

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

curly said...

I think Osama Abdallah is very interesting guy. It seems the mind of Kim and Osama Abdallah are similar.
I can tell christian, who read the context in Exodus 21, will laugh at Osama Abdallah.

The Purple Marquise said...

Mr. Osama,

As I was anticipating you did NOTHING to defend Islam by means of showing that any of the evidence from various Islamic books or Hadith and Tafsir, etc.. that was already AMPLY presented on this blog by David and others were somehow false or wrong. You did absolutely ZERO to show that my argument about Islam's misogynist laws naturally leading to the oppression of women was not logically correct. Basically you did absolutely NOTHING to address the many points that we have already raised to make our case against Islam.

All you did was flatly ignore them and pretend that we never said anything and didn't bring any proof, You just wrote :

"As to your points on Islam, all you've given us is open and vague statements that can be said and used on any scripture. Please give me specific examples from Islamic Scriptures. Show me where Islam allows for me to take part of raping my own daughter. I AM DESPERATELY WAITING FOR YOU ON THIS ONE!"

I am not going to waste ONE MORE SECOND of my precious time dignifying your self-indulgent demand for EVEN MORE EVIDENCE! You say "Show me where" as we have not been doing just that for the past 48 hours on this blog? We have already "showed you where" several times! Are you unable to read?

I think I and David Wood and many others on this blog have already brought you enough material for you to engage with and respond to if you have any response. I made enough arguments to show you how exactly because of Islamic teachings that Muslim father thought that by helping the husband rape her daughter he was doing the right thing because he was helping the husband get his God-given right to have sex with his wife on demand! The matter is clear to even a small child I don't know why it is not clear to you!

Now UNTIL you show me that I was wrong (Show me, not just declare me to be wrong) I will refrain from bringing any evidence and consider our case against Islam to be unchallenged and unrefuted and firmly standing!

And NO it cannot be used against any scripture. This kind of oppressive and horrendous stuff are unique to Muhammad and Islam!

You may comfort yourself by reading a few verses TOTALLY out of context and misrepresented and twisted from other scriptures in order to bring those religions down to the level of your awfully barbaric Islam and then pat yourself on the back and say: "Well, this is just as bad as Islam, so we are OK!" But you are deluding yourself!

The Purple Marquise said...

@ Mr. Osama Abdallah:

You brought up Exodus 21:7-11. This verse has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with our topic here since It has nothing to do with rape and having sex! I don't know why you even thought to bring it up in this discussion. But since you insist on misrepresenting it I will enlighten you as to what it says so that next time you don't make the same silly mistake of bringing up in such a situation. I here by apologize to every body else on this comment forum for wandering totally off topic. But Mr. Osama left me no choice.

Here is the verse in question: Exodus 21:7 “If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. 8 If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself,[a] he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. 9 If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. 10 If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. 11 If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money."

First of all as I said this verse is not about making anybody have sex with anybody. The selling a daughter or son into being a servant was a practice amongst Israelites in order to pay their debts. It was not slavery as we know it (i.e. involuntary work for free). It was a form of pre-paid employment.

If a poor man would acquire a lot of debt and couldn't pay it back he can sell his own or his son's or daughter's laboring services as a domestic worker instead of paying the money in cash. All that Exodus 21:7-11 does is regulating that kind of contract exactly so that the person who takes someone's daughter to work as his domestic worker would respect her rights just like today an employer has to respect the rights of his employee and not violate terms of his or her contract.

Here it says if his master is displease with her work he should let her go. He can fire her just like a boss today can fire a bad employee but the employee's family have to compensate her boss for the fact that she was not a good worker and their debts as a result are not yet paid.

Then it says that if the employer or his son decide to marry her they should treat her like a true wife with all the rights of the wife and NOT A SEX SLAVE! (See! Up until this point about marriage there was no talk about of having sex with her AT ALL!)

And of course an Israelite must never send her to work for a foreigner. Why? Because the foreigners are not bound by these same rules as Israelites and might not give her her rights. For example if there were any Muslims back then and an Israelite would sell her to one of them the Muslim master might have wanted to force her to have sex or put her in a harem or 1000s of concubines as we know from history that Muslims did and still do in many places. and they might not have let her go if they were displeased with her but bit the heck out of her instead! So an Israelite is banned from selling her to them to get the cash that her father owes him quickly back.

Then it says that if her boss doesn't respect all of her rights and doesn't fulfill all of his obligations towers her he should allow her to go free without any compensation. It means her family's debts will be null and void if her debtor boss mistreats her. He will lose his right to his money as punishment! See? A female domestic worker in ancient Israel had more rights than a Muslim wife has today.

And last but not least no where in this verse tells or implies that the daughter was forced into this arrangement.

...to be continues

The Purple Marquise said...

@Osama Abdallah: ...Continuation

In fact a little bit down the road we have Exodus 21:16 which says: " 16 “Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession." So that makes it practically impossible for anybody to force anyone against his will to slavery especially in combination with the injunction not to return fugitive slaves to their masters. Imagine! In that barbaric world several thousand years ago these are the liberating commands of our GOD! So who ever says that the Bible promotes or supports sex slavery or any kind of slavery frankly is an ignoramus!

Contrast that with Islam where it says that you can sleep with your female captives. According to our Exodus 21:16 Muhammad and his gang of Jihadist slave-traders must be PUT TO DEATH FOR ENSLAVING PEOPLE!! These are the standards of our God, Mr. Osama!

Mr. Osama, do you still think that the point that we brought up against your barbaric religion can be used against any scripture?!!


Besides I would appreciate that next time IF you chose to write a response try refute our points by ENGAGING them not shrugging them off and subjectively calling them "vague". If you think that they are vague you HAVE to prove it to us. If you think we misunderstood them you have do bring reasonable evidence and try to convince us that is so and not decreeing that it is so! Just like I engaged in responding properly to your rather silly mention of exodus 21:7-11 point by point. If you are incapable of that please hold your silence for ever and don't call yourself a debater! A debater debates, he doesn't decree his opinions as facts!

MalbecMemoirs said...

It's always so funny that in order to "prove" a point, the muslim must take a Bible verse out of context and say, "hey! this means you do it, too!" never once actually answering the charge against the Muslim. Stranger still, Islamic verses IN context continually prove that the killing of apostates, beating and raping of women and sexual exploitation of children. This site does awesome work continually proving the logical and moral problems with Islam. Please keep it up and educate the West.

curly said...

@The purple marquise,
"As I was anticipating you did NOTHING to defend Islam by means of showing that any of the evidence from various Islamic books or Hadith and Tafsir, etc.. that was already AMPLY presented on this blog by David and others..."
Hey Purple Marquise, please do not think that I challenge you. I want to tell you something that I do not understand. I do not understand: why some Islamic Scholars are women and also that group called "Islamic feminism" like Asma Barlas, Amina Wadud, Ingrid Mattison, and more. David Wood and other prove the amply evidence that Islamic system men oppress women. I am wonder what mind of female Islamic Scholar in America... I do not understand them. Do you understand them?

John 8:24 said...

Well said, 'The Purple Marquise'!

Another point for you, Osama: it seems your English reading comprehension and critical thinking aren't all that good and maybe you should work on them a bit!

You said: "Your father can sell you as a slave girl to another man, who is even older than him. The verses even allow for the man to give you away to his son (FURTHER PROOF THAT THE MAN CAN BE A GRANDPA)"

You are taking verse 8 and 9 to talk about one particular person! And you say he can be a grandpa because he has a son and applying that to the earlier verse. Your inference is based on your faulty reading. There is no "the man"! i.e. (so that you can understand) it is not talking about a particular person or even the same person! The verses 8 and 9 are stating general rules and are talking about two different cases and NOT about the same man. You are confused - perhaps due to lack of English reading comprehension skills. In the first case the master is young enough to marry his slave girl and in the second case the master is old so he selects his son to marry her. Further, you are reading into the text by implying that the girl does not have any choice! The text does not say that nor is it inferred. Marriages are not forced in Jewish traditions unlike in Islam.

taomeano said...

Osama Abdallah

I am glad the Purple Marquise has exegeted on Exodus 21:7-11.

Really Osama, you are an intelligent person but when I watch you on your debates you totally misrepresent the quotations you bring from the bible, just like you just did with Exodus 21,7-11. Anyone reading that passage will understand that it has nothing to do with forcing anyone to have sex as your prophet and your religion teach.

Your inability to refute the points we raise on this blog just shows that you are basically arguing for arguments sake.

Please try to be logical and consistent. Admitting you are wrong is not going to make you less of a man, so please man up and admit that you cannot refute us but you are still not leaving Islam and that will be fine with us.

Osama, folks on this blog are not trying to get you to leave Islam, because I believe you posted one time saying that you will remain a moslem forever so we know we cannot change your mind, but when you are debating with us please remain logical and consistent and we all can have intelligent discussions, that's all.

When you get cornered, don't start attacking the bible, it shows that your arguments are weak. If we are debating the bible you will have ample opportunity to unleash your attacks on the bible.

To conclude, I will say, bringing up a verse or a passage from the OLD TESTAMENT does not make our assertions regarding Islamic teachings on the topic wrong, what it does show is that you are unable to refute our assertions so you have resorted to attacking the bible. It is called NON-SEQUITUR.
So please stay on the topic and be consistent.

The Purple Marquise said...

@curly: I am not familiar with these people that you named. I will look into their ideas and get back at you. But I can say that the word "Islamic Feminism" sounds like a laughable oxymoron!

In my country of Iran before the so-called Islamic revolution which established the current thuggish Mullah regime we had a very common fad amongst our intellectuals to be "Islamic Intellectuals". They were a kind of Marxist/Islamist hybrid.

It meant that actually some of their values were very Western and totally inspired by Europe, their economics were marxist "distribute the wealth"/ "class warfare" stuff but they clocked all of this in a Quranic and Islamic language and pretended that the Prophet was the champion of welfare and Medina under Muhammad was a egalitarian welfare state and that his fights against unbelievers was on behalf of the "oppressed masses" and "slaves" and they made a big deal out of him having some women followers and teaching them in the mosque and they tried use this to paint him as some champion of women's rights....

They paddled lots of nonsense like this that had absolutely NOTHIG what so ever to do with the actual recorded history of Islam.

So lo and behold this type of Intellectual Islamism or islamic intellectualism if you will took root in Iranian academia and amongst the youth and the student population in the 60s and 70s and guess what, when the revolution of 1978 culminated the Mullahs harnessed that pro-Islam energy and brought themselves to power.

But instead of saying thank you to these guys they mostly imprisoned and killed them since they were not after the "intellectual" part of the equation but after "Islamic" part of it ONLY. They were the most orthodox and reactionary faction and therefore more thuggish and less inhibited in their violence so even marxists stood no chance against them.

I still see some of these "intellectual islamist" types sometimes talking here and there on Western TVs and I don't wonder if some of them claim to be Islamic feminists. But all these attempts to try to mix Islam with intellectualism will inevitably fail since as an Iranian proverb says: "The house is in ruins from its foundations!"

Islam is such an illogical and incoherent, ad hock system that nobody can base yet another system of thought on top of it. It will inevitably collapse. Unlike christianity of course that for centuries has been the basis of many other intellectual movements and sits really comfortably with Greek philosophy and all other thought systems that are based on logic.

SGM said...

I must say one thing in favor of Osama and that is, he is keeping this debate humerous. He is bringing in examples of oranges against apples.

I do have one question for you Mr. Osama. For a moment lets say that Ex 21:7-11 does speak about rapping women (these verses absolutely do not speak of anything close to rape), are you then implying that since it is found in the Bible, therefore it is true in Islam and in the teachings of your quran, Muhammad and Haddith? I have not seen you refute anything, instead you are attacking the Bible, falsely if I may add.

If you want to refute rape teachings in Islam, then provide exegesis of all the material that has been provided in the above posts just like “The purple Marquise” has done in regards to Ex 21:7. Hopefully, you will provide a logical and sensible exegesis and not a humorous one.

The Purple Marquise said...

I want to say one last thing when it comes to Muslim apologetics before this thread looses its currency.

Have you guys noticed how these muslim apologists don't understand the difference between positive and negative apologetics? In positive apologetics you go after the opposing ideology and presenting your case against it and it is your opponent's duty to answer your points before he can move on to other issues. You are on the offensive. But negative apologetics is when you hear the opponent's criticism of your ideology and you try to make a case to defend it and show that their criticism doesn't hold.

But in case of Muslims they ALWAYS think they are doing positive or offensive apologetics. Even when they come to a forum like this that has presented a challenge to their view and their job is to convince US that our criticism is wrong.

But look what someone like Mr. Abdallah do? He comes here and writes: "As to your points on Islam, all you've given us is open and vague statements that can be said and used on any scripture. Please give me specific examples from Islamic Scriptures. Show me where Islam allows for me to take part of raping my own daughter. I AM DESPERATELY WAITING FOR YOU ON THIS ONE!"

You see what he is doing? He thinks we are the ones who have to convince him not the other way around. We gave our arguments against Islam, he comes to our forum to defend Islam and instead of defending it he goes like: "Hah! non of what you said convinced ME! You failed!"

No!No!No! He is the one who should bring reasons for us to dissuade us to continue holding the views that we hold now about his religion! Unless and until he does that it is he who failed, not us!! To merely say "I am not convinced by your reasons" is no kind of defense for his view! It is non-engagement really! It is having no real answer.

But more than that he goes on to attack the Bible. Regardless of how wrong and out of topic the verses that he quoted were, they didn't have any bearing on our arguments about Islam one way or the other! Because now we are doing offensive or positive apologetics against Islam and it is Osama's job to defend. It is NOT his prerogative to attack before he has disproven our points about his religion, because even if he successfully attacks the Bible our points against Islam still stand unanswered and unchallenged!

The Purple Marquise said...

continue....

We can see this also in the debates that they have with Christian apologists on the topic "was muhammad a prophet of God". Instead of bringing any argument to show why we should believe Muhammad was a prophet they just stand there and try to shoot down our reasons for why we think he was not. As if by doing that they automatically prove that he WAS a prophet! And then they gloat and unilaterally declare victory!!

It is they who make the positive claim that Muhammad WAS a prophet and thus it is they that have the burden of poof to convince us that he was indeed who he claimed to be so that we can believe in him. We don't have to do anything and show anything! If we even silently sit there and say nothing our position is for granted because no one is a prophet until it is proven otherwise! But they act as if it is our job to convince them that he wasn't a prophet in order to make them leave Islam. I don't know if I am being clear or not, but I hope you get my point. They totally disregard their burden of proof and take their position for granted without justification.

I don't know why muslims are SO incapable of doing or even understanding how to do defensive apologetics. Maybe it is because due to the fact that that Islam was spread by the sword they never had to develop a really cogent method of convincing outsiders to accept their claims through logic and reasoning. Why bother arguing when you can put a sword on their neck and tell them to recite the Shahada or else...! No fuss, no mess, no intellectual entanglement!

Or maybe it is because for centuries due to the oppression of Sharia law Islamic apologists never had to deal with true challenges because they could just execute you for apostasy if you challenged them seriously.

But now that Muslims apologists live in the free non-Muslim world my advise to them is to learn the rules and canons of logic and understand when in a debate it is their prerogative to attack and when it is their duty to defend.

curly said...

@The Purple Marquise,
You mentioned Iran Revolution of 1978 and how Mullah take advantage of the Islamic intellectual. I was surprise and disgusted . Mullah is very cold heart ! So, thank you so much for answer my question, Sister The Purple Marquise.

search 4 truth said...

I am anticipating the complete destruction of Abdull uh and Islam.


Islam can only survive by lies, ignorance, and denial. It's a powerful force Satan has in Islam. I think God I have the ability to think!

Xiao-Fury said...

What a pig