marriage and polygamy

format_quote Originally Posted by - Qatada -

A Muslim woman has a right to her own property (her husband has to earn for her as a duty even if she's richer than him). This still isn't the case in Europe today. Just over a century ago in Europe, a woman had to give all her property to her husband, he owned it - once she was married to him. In Islam, the woman's property is independent and she can spend it how she wishes.

Not the case in Europe today? But you're talking about a century ago.

Women can obviously have their own property in Europe today.

She has a right to keep her own surname (something which has only lately been introduced in Europe.) In the past she had to keep her husbands surname, as if she was his property.

Again, not the case in Europe today

In Islam, a woman has certain rights which still aren't given to women in different parts of the world. A simple one being the sexual rights. If her husband does not fulfill his rights to her, then she can get justice for that. This will be something laughed at in Europe and not taken seriously. Whereas these issues are taken seriously in Islam since that is a big part of marriage.

Really? Can you explain this to me? Are you saying that Muslim wives have the right to refuse husbands sex? I'd like to see some jurisprudence on this subject.

Islam gives a severe punishment to the adulterer, especially if the adulterer is a married person. So the Muslim male will fear a heavy punishment if he commits adultery whereas a woman in Europe whose husband cheats on her can't do anything at all. She can't get justice and he laughs, enjoying himself while she stays at home [maybe even working overtime], so she can support his child. Is that human rights?

Western women might not see "justice" for adultery as killing them. Western women can also simply leave their adultering husbands if they choose to.

Also, isn't it permissible for Muslim men to have sex with slave-girls and concubines? In the West, this would be considered adultery, but it is explicitly allowed in the Quran and the hadith, right?

And finally, a man can have sex with multiple women in Islam—his wives and his concubines—but a woman can only have sex with one man.

So if Islam is so backward, then Europe, supposedly the most 'advanced' of civilizations who we should all take is role models as even more backward. Maybe these people can correct themselves first and then tell us what is right and wrong?

Europe was certainly more backwards than Islam for much of Christianity's history. However, I fail to see what anything you said has to do with modern Europe.

And frankly, I think this whole "Islam was more advanced than Europe 500 years ago" argument is just silly. Who cares? We Westerners don't live in the past; we're ashamed of it.

format_quote Originally Posted by - Qatada -

If a woman who has many husbands has a child, how does she know who the father is? Since Islam is for all times and all societies, then some science of today [i.e. DNA testing] in some parts of the world won't fulfill that condition for all times.

I guess I don't see why this is so important. Adopted children can be raised without knowing who their parents are. Gay couples can raise healthy and well-adjusted children. Why would this be any more of an issue for polyandrous couples?

I mean, I realize that you religious people might have a problem with such arrangements, but it seems like you're arguing that the people themselves would have a problem. I don't see why that would be the case.

Since its the mans responsibility to bring up his children and provide for them, how will he know who his child is?

Why is it solely a man's responsibility to bring up his children? Islam teaches this, but many people don't believe in Islam, and many single mothers and lesbian couples raise perfectly healthy kids.

I also reject the notion that all romantic relationships exist for the purpose of producing children. We have birth control now.

Besides, like mentioned before - there are more women in the world than men, so it is natural that more women would be married to one male than alot of males having to get married to one woman.

There are barely any more women than men in the world. Certainly not enough to justify male-only polygamy.

format_quote Originally Posted by - Qatada -

If a woman who has many husbands has a child, how does she know who the father is? Since Islam is for all times and all societies, then some science of today [i.e. DNA testing] in some parts of the world won't fulfill that condition for all times.

Since its the mans responsibility to bring up his children and provide for them, how will he know who his child is?


Besides, like mentioned before - there are more women in the world than men, so it is natural that more women would be married to one male than alot of males having to get married to one woman.

There are several countries in the world where there are more males than females, China for instance has a surplus of several million men and the capacity to conduct DNA testings.

format_quote Originally Posted by Qingu

Not the case in Europe today? But you're talking about a century ago.

Women can obviously have their own property in Europe today.

Read my post;

format_quote Originally Posted by Qatada

it gave women rights which Europe has given lately to its women (due to the Suffragettes' in the early 20th century.)

Again, not the case in Europe today

format_quote Originally Posted by Qatada

it gave women rights which Europe has given lately to its women (due to the Suffragettes' in the early 20th century.)

Really? Can you explain this to me? Are you saying that Muslim wives have the right to refuse husbands sex? I'd like to see some jurisprudence on this subject.

First of all, don't avoid the point;

format_quote Originally Posted by Qatada

In Islam, a woman has certain rights which still aren't given to women in different parts of the world. A simple one being the sexual rights. If her husband does not fulfill his rights to her, then she can get justice for that. This will be something laughed at in Europe and not taken seriously. Whereas these issues are taken seriously in Islam since that is a big part of marriage.

Meaning they have the right to sex from their husband and can seek recompense for it if they're not given it.

Tell me any legislation in the world right now apart from Islam which gives a woman this right? If it does, it would be good news.

Western women might not see "justice" for adultery as killing them.

That's because this concept might be psychologically drilled into their mind. i.e. that its the norms for someone to be a 'playa' so you just gota get used to it. Islam isn't like that, its more professional.

Western women can also simply leave their adultering husbands if they choose to.

format_quote Originally Posted by Qatada

If her husband does not fulfill his rights to her, then she can get justice for that.

Why should she leave him? What if she loves him? She should have the right to stay with him and get her rights at the same time. Not for him to just run away and leave it all.

Also, isn't it permissible for Muslim men to have sex with slave-girls and concubines? In the West, this would be considered adultery, but it is explicitly allowed in the Quran and the hadith, right?

And finally, a man can have sex with multiple women in Islam—his wives and his concubines—but a woman can only have sex with one man. [/quote]


Is it for a wisdom? Let's see;

Islam actually gets rid of slavery around the globe in an amazing manner that the woman is free, and her child is free - when he dies. Causing more people to be set free instead of tied to slavery even after their owner dies [try reading about how the Abbasid kings were arab, greek, africans, turks, and all sorts of races!] This is why you'll see in our islamic history that slavery decreased at a drastic level because the woman had a child, so when the male owner died - her and her child were free people.

You may say 'why didnt they reject the concept of slavery altogether when islam came?' Its not that simple because most of the time, these people were slaves only because they fought Muslims and they would have done the exact same to them if the Muslims were caught! This concept was so common in the world at that time - the same way its so uncommon in the world at todays time (- its Islam that actually removed the concept so much that we find it strange today.)

So something practical had to be done about it to slowly set people free. If Muslims said, you can go back home now after fighting us - then wouldn't the Muslims always be at the disadvantage? So by making them slaves - but respecting them, giving them similar rights - Islam changed the concept of slavery altogether in the world (but again this changed when queen Victoria came to Africa.)



What did Allah's Messenger say about slaves? [translation of meaning];

" Those slaves are your brothers, only God gave you an upper hand over them. So let that who has his brother (i.e. slave) under him give him the same food he himself eats, and the same clothing as he himself wears. The master may not give his brother a task that is beyond his ability. If he does give him such task, let him lend him a hand."

Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29

Marriage is encouraged more in islam though.


Sahih Al Bukhari Volume 1, Book 3 [book of knowledge], Number 97:
Narrated Abu Burda's father:

Allah's Apostle said "Three persons will have a double reward:

1. A Person from the people of the scriptures who believed in his prophet (Jesus or Moses) and then believed in the Prophet Muhammad (i .e. has embraced Islam).
2. A slave who discharges his duties to Allah and his master.
3. A master of a woman-slave who teaches her good manners and educates her in the best possible way (the religion) and manumits her and then marries her."

Child Marriage



So maybe now you can tell me, what benefitted humanity more - adultery and fornication, or getting rid of slavery at a mass level to the extent that we hardly have slavery at all in the world right now?

Europe was certainly more backwards than Islam for much of Christianity's history. However, I fail to see what anything you said has to do with modern Europe.

And frankly, I think this whole "Islam was more advanced than Europe 500 years ago" argument is just silly. Who cares? We Westerners don't live in the past; we're ashamed of it.

I don't care, Islam is still more advanced in its morals and standards than Europe today. So we take pride in that, and we have more of a right to take pride in Islam since it still raises the standards for goodness against falsehood.

I say this with full confidence because a great deal of societies problems are at a high level within Europe today, alot of it is due to issues such as adultery, children without fathers and much much more. This isn't helping society, but breaking it down into crumbled pieces. Whereas Islam did the exact opposite and brought advances in ALL matters of life.




Peace.

format_quote Originally Posted by - Qatada -

So maybe now you can tell me, what benefitted humanity more - adultery and fornication, or getting rid of slavery at a mass level to the extent that we hardly have slavery at all in the world right now?

I'm sorry, are you suggesting it was Islam that brought end to slavery??

format_quote Originally Posted by Qingu

I guess I don't see why this is so important. Adopted children can be raised without knowing who their parents are. Gay couples can raise healthy and well-adjusted children. Why would this be any more of an issue for polyandrous couples?

I mean, I realize that you religious people might have a problem with such arrangements, but it seems like you're arguing that the people themselves would have a problem. I don't see why that would be the case.

Some people argue that homosexuals should be allowed to adopt children, this isn't fair and it is immoral. The main reason is because it causes Psychological issues for the child - a person without a father is more likely to have psychological difficulties, aswell as a person lacking a mother. This is why homosexuals adopting children will not ease the child's situation. Rather, a child requires a mother and a father to have a good balance, the caring treatment of a mother, and a role model figure as a father. If this is lacking - the child may have psychological difficulties

Drug And Alcohol Abuse: The absence of the father from the home affects significantly the behavior of adolescents and results in greater use of alcohol and marijuana.

Source: Deane Scott Berman, "Risk Factors Leading to Adolescent Substance Abuse," Adolescence 30 (1995): 201-206



Fatherless children are five times more likely to live in poverty, compared to children living with both parents.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, Survey on Child Health, Washington, DC, 1993.



Fatherless children are at dramatically greater risk of suicide.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, Survey on Child Health, Washington, DC, 1993.



In 1988, a study of preschool children admitted to New Orleans hospitals as psychiatric patients over a 34-month period found that nearly 80 percent came from fatherless homes.

Source: Jack Block, et al. "Parental Functioning and the Home Environment in Families of Divorce," Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 27 (1988)



Kids who live with both biological parents at age 14 are significantly more likely to graduate from high school than those kids who live with a single parent, a parent and step-parent, or neither parent.

Source: G.D. Sandefur (et al.), "The Effects of Parental Marital Status..." Social Forces, September 1992.


43 percent of prison inmates grew up in a single-parent household -

39 percent with their mothers, 4 percent with their fathers - and an additional 14 percent lived in households without either biological parent. Another 14 percent had spent at last part of their childhood in a foster home, agency or other juvenile institution.

Source: US Bureau of Justice Statistics, Survey of State Prison Inmates. 1991


Much more continued here:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/S...ly%2FFYELayout

http://www.manslife.com/family/fatherfacts/

If one was to respond that it is better for a child to be adopted by a homosexual couple instead of remaining in an orphanage, then the response to this is that another harm should not be caused because of a previous harm.

Rather, it should be encouraged for a couple (husband and wife) to foster children whose parents may be unknown. However, it should not be done through a harmful method.


Children need a caring mother figure, and a role model father to look upto. That's the perfect healthy design and balance which Allah has made us in. It should remain that way to help society as a whole become a better place.

Why is it solely a man's responsibility to bring up his children? Islam teaches this, but many people don't believe in Islam, and many single mothers and lesbian couples raise perfectly healthy kids.

Islam was for humanity, humanity benefited from Islam.

I also reject the notion that all romantic relationships exist for the purpose of producing children. We have birth control now.

Children can be a product of marriage. So Islam provides answers for this situation.

format_quote Originally Posted by Talha

Men and women have been created different. I believe men crave sex more than women do, thus perhaps that is one reason that there is an allowance for men to have multiple wives, but not the other way round.
I can't help but chuckle at gay couples being able to raise perfectly well-adjusted children. Suree, no kids will eveeerrrr pick on a guy who has gay parents, thus ensuring a healthy and happy upbringing. Aww, bless.

That certainly isn't true for all women and men.
Well, many children get picked on, immigrant children for instance, should they be prohibited from raising children?

format_quote Originally Posted by Talha

I believe that it is true for the majority. "Men think about sex every 6 seconds". You must have heard such a saying, right?

Besides, just look around, you don't see much porno aimed at women do you? It's mainly a man thing. Obviously it's a reflection of the amount lust men have for sex, compared to women.

Yes the majority, but does that mean the minority should be left behind?

During wars, many men die in comparison to women. Usually women survive and if there are many male losses, they will have to get married to fulfill human needs. Since there are more women, polygamy takes place. Its also well known that women have longer life spans.

format_quote Originally Posted by Talha

WTP, Islam tells us women aren't allowed to have multiple husbands, so yes, the minority that do have a lot of lust should be left behind.

I believe that Allah creates men with more lust than women. It is in their nature. Any discrepancies can be accounted for by the kind of upbringing an individual has, IMO.

Besides, if men and women both were allowed to have multiple partners, you could end up with a scenario where a guy is married to four women and each wife in turn is married to three other men. Imagine if you will that each husband of each of the wives also has another three wives. Imagine if it continued further? That would be quite the ludicrous state of affairs... therefore it makes sense to restrict it to only one party being allowed to have multiple partners. Since men have more lust, they're the winners.

It makes sense to ban it outright.

Many people are satisfied with doing Poligamy before marriage. They lost it to their girlfriends, not to their wifes. So many people are becoming "Divorce agents," but they resist Poliginy. So too with people who might be able to do Islamic Poligiy but their knowledge do reach the perfectness of it. Poliandri will cause sickness, but not with Poliginy.
Poligamy did not come from Islam, Poliginy did.
Rasulullah said that in Poliginy are forbidden to marry two sisters at once and also forbidden to marry her auntie.

1. Not the idea of choosing 1 after feeling the best of all women over 1 shot.
2. Not the idea of “not marrying with woman,” because of becoming a celebrity, but instead to “marry the fans,” so that you could make many women happy.
3. Makes man more mature in Din, and enhancing the ability to lead people.
4. After the husband feel the pleasure created from Poliginy, he will create better leadership in his life and this make his life better.
5. Man learn by leading the women where man will use his intellect and justice in his Poliginy marriage.
6. Poliginy marriage praises Allahu Ta’ala and Islam
7. In Islam there is this idea that man must marry minimum 2 wifes. That man is for 2 women to 4. And firstly that must be marry is an orphan:

QS.An Nisa (4):3. If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans marry women of your choice two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them) then only one or (a captive) that your right
hands possess. That will be more suitable to prevent you from doing injustice.
8. Verse in Al Qur’an about Poliginy:

An Nisa(4):129 Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women even if it is your ardent desire: but turn not away (from a woman) altogether so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding and practice self-restraint Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful.
9. When a man marry women he will find that in women, the characteristics that will lessen his arrogance as a man, because he needs them as in this verse:
QS.Ar Rum(30):21 And among His Signs is this that He created for you mates from among yourselves that ye may dwell in tranquillity with them and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts); verily in that are Signs for those who reflect.
10. Because 1 man needs 2 women till 4 and becoming loyal to them, while women only need 1 man and becoming loyal to him.
11. The idea of splitting love doesn’t exist in Islam, because Islam does not allow twosome, threesome or foursome.
12. Islam really teach husband to do Jima’ only when his wife is pure, not when she is on Haid and Nifas. And allows the husband to do that by every ways, as long as it is still on the hole for child birth.
13. The solution for men who have a special liking to women. Rasulullah said “Women are married because of 4,… marry those because of her religion.”
Choose women as your wifes, those who have good Akhlaq and sound Aqidah.

format_quote Originally Posted by - Qatada -

During wars, many men die in comparison to women. Usually women survive and if there are many male losses, they will have to get married to fulfill human needs. Since there are more women, polygamy takes place. Its also well known that women have longer life spans.

and

format_quote Originally Posted by - Mezzein

In my opinion, it is irrelevant whether or not a man can have multiple wives, or a woman can have multiple husbands. What is relevant is that additional spouses have to be treated equally, which is a pain in the backside whether you're male or female.

.....are, so far, the best arguments in support of plural marriage that I've read in this thread. Back around 1860 or so, the Mormons also adopted the plural marriage view for the same reasons. The were persecuted and driven from state to state by angry mobs. Many of the men perished in those wars and, thus, polgamy was necessary.

Today, in the Middle East, you still have much the same situation where the wars are raging and leaving women and children to fend for themselves. Marrying a Sister (with or without children) who has been widowed by the war is about as close to an act of humanity and charity as there can be. Granted, there are many different reasons why one would wish to marry, but this one holds as much weight as the rest.

As to the second comment, I know of an older man in Saudi who has four wives. I've become friends with two of his wives and chat on line with the third one (the fourth one travels alot) and they are in total support of plural marriage. Two live in the same household with him and two live in different housing. They enjoy the "break" that they get when he is with the other. He is able to care for all of them both financially, physically, and emotionally. He is a devout Muslim and as far as I can see, and from what they tell me, treats all his wives fairly. The wives all love him, calling him kind and genourous. They certainly don't have any complaints.

I think when people who live outside of polgamy view it from a distance, they make judgments on a situation that they have no life experience of. You can sit and analyze the pros and cons academically for eternity but until you live the life yourself or interact with those who do, you will always have a somewhat skewed perception.

Just my two pence..............

format_quote Originally Posted by Lawerence

The Quran, as far as I know, does not offer those reasons for polygamy. The passage I know relating to this issue is Surah 4:3 "And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans marry of the women who seem good to you, two, or three, or four..."

The least you could do is post the whole verse! :enough!:

And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess. Thus it is more likely that ye will not do injustice.