dentist said:
Well, this is a two week old article, but decided to share with you all here and to see what your opinions on it were.
In other words, Christianity teaches a husband to treat his wife with honor, respect and restraint, and never to use his superior physical strength to impose his will on his wife, who is his full equal in worth, value and dignity.
Not so in Islam, where husbands are explicitly taught that they may beat their wives into submission.
The woman was told by her husband every time non-consensual sex took place, “This is according to our religion. You are my wife, I can do anything to you.”
http://www.themoralliberal.com/2010/07/ ... c-grounds/
What the hell is this article talking about? Christianity teaches that men should have sex slaves. I don't recall there being any part where it says to treat the wife with "complete honor and respect". Please show me that verse. Even the verse on the site you showed says the following:
“[L]ive with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman
as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life” (1 Peter 3:7).
Hope that size is large enough for everyone.
The judge's name, nor any specifics aren't even listed on either one of these sites, nor is any proof behind this case.
And if we look further into the case, if it is real, and has any merit, and not read the spew on this conservative crap site, one can easily see that this case was primarily about the judge issuing a restraining order, which he did not issue, because the Judge found that the defendant would not violate the wife again in the future (restraining orders are for the future protection of the person who took out the order, not for the past protection (ie, the judge didn't see any reason that the man would reassault the wife in the future) and his reasons were culture. The man was married to her, therefore, under Islam, he had the right to rape her. However, they became divorced. Thus, after that point, the woman is off limits under the religion, and they no longer have contact, therefore the judge's ruling was right inline with the law. Restraining orders are not just thrown to anybody. It's not like on Law and Order where the character walks in and walks out like he/she is buying something at the convenience store.
Oh, and further, this wasn't a criminal case. It was a civil case. The judge was not deciding on whether or not to send the man to jail. Therefore the notion that he "allowed spousal rape" is false.
That's again, if this is true.
