Oct 13, 2009

Questions About Women In Islam (Hijab)


Why are Muslim women wearing a head scarf?

According to Islamic Sharia, there is a dress code for both men and women which serves the purpose of protecting their dignity and modesty and giving them respect. Both of them should not wear cloths that accentuate the shape of the body in such a way as to attract the attention of the opposite sex. Therefore clothing should not cling closely to the body, nor should it be transparent. As hair and hairstyle of a woman is an important part of her looks and may also add to her attractiveness, women avoid displaying this area by covering their heads. According to a saying by prophet Muhammad, nothing of a woman should be publicly visible except her face and her hands. Her intentions, personality and presence are best ascertained, in fact, from these areas of the body.

These rules are applicable only in the presence of non-kin men whom the woman in question could marry in theory. Within the family circle and in the company of some of her kinsfolk a woman may appear without covering her head. These kinship relationships are mentioned in detail in Qur'an, Chapter 24, Verse 31. At an older age a woman may discard the head-cover partially. However, as she also sets an example for the younger generation, it is better for her to continue to cover herself in accordance with the Islamic dress code. "Such elderly women as are past the prospect of marriage,- there is no blame on them if they lay aside their (outer) garments, provided they make not a wanton display of their beauty: but it is best for them to be modest: .." 24:60

Muslim girls start to adhere to the above Islamic dress code when they begin to develop a female shape (usually at the onset of puberty).


What about the Nikab?
There are two levels of Muslim women dress; the first is the Hijab, which refers to covering all the body, excluding the face and the hands. The second level is covering all the body, including the face and or without the hands. The four main Fiqh schools consider only the Hijab as the religious duty on Muslim women, the Nikab according to these schools is just a higher rank or a favor, but not a religious duty. Only few other non-main schools consider the Nikab as a religious duty. So, according to the major trend in Sharia law, only covering the head except the face and the hands, is the religious duty. But covering the face is not a religious duty.


Does the head scarf obstruct the Muslim woman from being an active member in her society?
No, at all. There have been across Islamic history great examples of successful Muslim women wearing the head scarf. The wife of the prophet, Aisha was known as a great scholar and narrator of prophet's life. The greatest fellows of the prophet (Sahaba) were consulting her after his death in the (Islamic Law) Fiqh issues. Head scarf did not restrict Muslim women to be scholars, poets, professors, doctors, nurses, TV interviewers, artists and scientists in all fields; Physics, Biology, Engineering, Crystallography, Zoology, etc. Hijab don't restrict Muslim woman from her given right according to Sharia to educate and work.


Is the head scarf an intruder product of Islamic culture?
Of course not. If we looked at three images put side by side, the first is of The Virgin Mary, the second is of mother Tresa, the third is of any Muslim woman. What would be the common thing between the three of them?
It's the scarf of the head. The three of Virgin Mary, mother Tresa and a Muslim woman are covering their heads. This can tell us that the head scarf is not related to some culture, but it's related to keeping dignity and modesty of the woman. We never claimed that head scarf of the virgin Mary or mother Tresa was an obstacle stone in their progress and success path. We never thought that the head scarf is an scarf over their minds. Neither we thought that their head scarf is an oppression to these great examples of purity and charity.

31 comments:

SNAKE HUNTERS said...

We see nothing improper or 'wrong'
with a head-scarf.

The Burkha is entirely another matter.

This clothing is another symbol of the repressive nature of the long-held primitive 'notions of negativity' still in evidence within some 21st Century Islamic Cultures Today! reb
___________________________________

Mohamed said...

I don't think it's just about the Burka, or the Nikab. Marwa Sherbeny was killed in Germany just for covering her head. In France the government was trying to restrict wearing the Hijab.

It's the blind extremism against every Islamic thing, whether it's the Hijab or the Nikab.

moonlitetwine said...

The visual comparison helps me by expanding. I mean, the depiction of Mother Mary is familiar to me, as is Mother Teresa's.

Thanks

moonlitetwine said...

Mohamed,
I can no longer comment on your blog because you have disable the "URL/name" option, and I don't have an account on Blogger or any other system. I asked Whynot to ask Moonlite to post this for me because I know he is a friend of hers. I hope you see it.
Snake,
"We see nothing improper or 'wrong'
with a head-scarf.

The Burkha is entirely another matter.
"
 
I think it is the first time I agree with you.
 
Mohamed,
 
"In France the government was trying to restrict wearing the Hijab.

It's the blind extremism against every Islamic thing, whether it's the Hijab or the Nikab.
"
 
Sorry to say, but you obviously don't know the facts. For as much as I dislike everything about our fascist president Sarkozy, I agree with him on this. The only existing "blind extremism" is idiotic religious extremists who don't care how the society they live in runs, and want THEIR religion to over-ride all others and over-ride people without religions.
 
First it has nothing to do with being against Islamic things: the proposed law wants to ban any obvious religious sign in places like public schools in particular, no matter what the religion. Nothing to do with singling Islam out. Jews, catholics, etc are treated exactly the same way.
 
A discreet christian cross is ok, a discreet islamic headscarf is also ok, and whatever Jews wear, same thing. But something that covers the whole face is not.
 
You may not realize this but France is a 100% secular country. You are free to exercise any religion, but it is a private thing, it has no role in politics or public education. It's in the constitution since 1905, and people have embraced it fully and want to keep it this way.
 
Yes, the decision was taken because of extremist islamic religious nutcases who were public school teachers and expected it was ok to teach children while completely masked.
 
This is totally unacceptable. There are thousands of private muslim schools in France, just like there are thousands of catholic schools, and they are free to do whatever they want there. But public is public, and public is secular. I am catholic but if I was a public school teacher, I wouldn't teach with a big Jesus cross hanging over my shoulder.
 
It is very traumatizing for a French school kid to turn up at school and have a teacher completely masked. I am sure you can understand this.
 
And what if I belonged to a religion that it is part of it that I walk around naked? Would you think it is ok that in public schools I teach naked because my religion says so?
 
Whynot, thank you in advance for correcting my poor English.
Valérie

moonlitetwine said...

I am from America, the Midwest - Central Iowa.

In the US, each state has the right to teach students according to State Standards. It is one principle I really like about the US and do not wish to change.

In Iowa, each community has the right to create studies, that will appropriately adhere to State Standards. Not all states have this right for their communities.

As for the dress code for a certified public school, in Iowa the protocol is guided by the community. As one can imagine, various Iowa communities have varying dress codes for its school's employees.

Religious practice, customs and beliefs are a cause for examination, wherein they hinder the educational environment. By examination, I mean to say, if a religious practice, custom or belief interfers with the overall educational environment or that of the classroom, there will be an undertaking by the community school board if and when a formal complaint is made. The school board will take in all sides of a possibly problematic situation, such as may be perceived by the wearing of head dress, etc. A decision will be made and adhered to until the decision is changed, accepted or forgotten.

I cannot envision full coverage of an Islamic woman to be offensive. As a former teacher in the capital city, my only concerns were: is student clothing too revealing, and can student clothing too easily conceal drugs or weapons. For example, book bags and heavy coats are generally not allowed. However, I accepted emloyee clothing to be appropriate unless told otherwise by the school administration.

However, if a community school district considers certain clothing, even head wear, to be problematic, then the clothing should be forbidden for students and staff.

In fact, it is progressive and forward thinking to realize there are differences among ourselves and our neighbors. This is why most schools in my area have put aside times, when represented cultures are "highlighted."

It is a wonderful discussion you have presented, Mohamed. Please, ask me if you wish clarification by me.

moonlite

SNAKE HUNTERS said...

No_slappz,

The 'muslim world' is confused enough about their women's rights &
privileges in the 21st century.

Dr. Ali Gomaa has publicly made a giant step in the right direction in Egypt, and is also being heard elsewhere.

Porno-flicks are a stain on female dignity, not a blessing...for any society. reb
__________________________________

no_slappz said...

moonlite, you wrote:

"I cannot envision full coverage of an Islamic woman to be offensive."

Full coverage of an islamic woman is offensive because the covering is mandated by law in islamic countries. Given the virtual slave state in which women live in muslim countries, it astounds me that women in the US tolerate the muslim relgion/government.

Muslims believe the Koran is the basis for civil law, and as Islamic history shows, they go to great lengths to force the conversion of non-muslims.

no_slappz said...

snake hunter, if there is one aspect of life that has retarded the advancement of the islamic world over the last 1400 years, it is fear of sex.

The islamic culture, with its total subjugation of women is proof.

The entire culture needs rational sex education and it needs to embrace the reality of female equality. As long as the muslim world devotes as much energy as it does to enslaving half its population it will remain centuries behind the leading nations of the world.

Mohamed said...

Well Valérie,

At first, I'd like to notify you that I just changed the settings of commenting on the blog. You're able now to comment directly.

When someone wear something, someway he likes, do you think he\she is aiming at forcing others to over-ride others?!!

When a girl wear a bikini? Do you think she is over-riding others?!!

Let me tell you why some Muslim women wear the Nikab..
However Islamic religion didn't made it an Islamic duty for women to cover their faces, but in the same time Islam didn't outlaw it. It was an order only for the wives of the prophet, but it's just an option for all other Muslim women. The prophet clarified it when he said that nothing of a woman should be publicly visible except her face and her hands, which means that revealing the face and hands is permissible.

Then, why some Muslim women cover their faces when it's not a religious duty?
Some women do that seeking a higher rank of reward as the wives of the prophet did it so they do it too. Others do it because of the custom more than the religious reward. And some other do it because of modesty. They all have respect from Islam.

>
I can't accept your explanation that French government was trying to ban Nikab because it's a religious sign in public. You said that it's OK for the cross and Hijab, then you said that it's not OK for the Nikab! If you would agree for the cross, and Hijab, then it must be OK too for the Nikab!

When we can classify the cross as a religious sign related to Christians and only to Christians, but we can't always classify Hijab and Nikab as a religious sign. Not only the Muslim women wear the Hijab, but also Christian nuns wear it, and the higher examples for Christians i.e. the Virgin Mary and Mother Tresa. So, you can't say it's a religious sign.

In addition, when a Muslim women wear her Hijab or Nikab, she isn't aiming at declaring; "Look at me, I'm Muslim!" Her motivation is not to force her culture upon others. She wear it just to keep her dignity and modesty, to avoid any attraction of attention of men. Muslim women wear it, Christian nuns wear\wore it, and Jews too wore it. It's related to modesty, not to religiosity.

>
I cannot accept your refusal of the Nikab because Nikab is a religious sign, because indeed it's not a religious sign, but on the other side, I can fully understand what you said about teachers of children who would cover their faces. Plz read my words about it included in my respond (very soon) to moonlitetwine, she has a similar point of view.

>
You said; And what if I belonged to a religion that it is part of it that I walk around naked?

Well, Do you equal between wearing & .. un-wearing?

They are not equal at all. Man since he ever existed on earth always searched for materials to cover his body; leaves, animal fur, leather, silk, fiber, cotton, etc. He wasn't covering his body because it's a shame to hide, he did it motivated by his nature. That's how we are crated. Even animals, they have their fur or leather. It's about natural way of thinking to wear. So, a philosophy that invite to nudism is a out of human nature. No human with a correct way of thinking would accept it. It's against his\her nature.

But the Nikab is exactly the contrary. It's "Wearing". It's pro -not against- human nature. It don't tell you to totally "un-wear", but it just tell you to totally "wear". They both are no way equal.

The only thing that would be a point of discussion is "how much to wear!". I think that this point exactly, "how much to wear" is related to culture and custom. Cultures tell you to wear something, other cultures tell you to wear another thing. No culture or custom must be overcame, but instead cultures must be respected when basics of other cultures aren't hurt.

Cultures Coexistence, or Cultures Clash.. What is our choice?

Regards,

Mohamed

Mohamed said...

Comments are temporarily suspended!

Going back very soon!

Mohamed said...

Moonlite,

Let me please quote your concluding sentence;

In fact, it is progressive and forward thinking to realize there are differences among ourselves and our neighbors.

It's very encouraging that you think that open-minded way.

I completely agree with the main frame of your comment. Cultures are different, that's an unchangable fact of life. Would cultures coexist, or clash? That's the question that must be bravely answered.

Personally, I think that cultures must coexist however all the differences. We can't change the differences among us, but we can coexist however them. There is a limit of agreement among all cultures, when this limit is out of reach, then every culture must accept the other one. This limit is the least of accepted common manners and custom between both cultures, i.e. when the basic principles of both cultures are respected then every culture must accept the other.

If we applied that limit of basic principles of society on the Nikab, we'll find out that no basic principle is hurt because of it. Yes, it maybe a different custom that is not so familiar in the West, but when it don't strike the principles of Western society then there is no problem about it.

>
You said, As a former teacher in the capital city, my only concerns were: is student clothing too revealing, and can student clothing too easily conceal drugs or weapons.

I understand how the Nikab would be used sometimes to hide identities of criminals. Yes, it may happen. It happens with everything, everything can be used the two ways, the good and the bad. We all use knife to cut food, very few use it to kill. Would we ban selling knives because of this bad use of that minority?

The same with Nikab, the majority of those who wear it do that for good reasons; religious reward, custom & modesty. Very few use it for bad reasons; hiding identities, fraud & escaping from justice. Would we ban it for the sake of this bad minority ignoring the good majority, or instead search for a solution to stop its bad use?

Anyway it's a problem that can be easily solved, and Islamic law itself provided its solution. In every place where revealing the identity of the person is essential, it's allowed according to Islamic Sharia that the woman who is covering her face to reveal the Nikab so as to be known. In Islamic law, the woman who is required for a testimony in a court, and she was wearing the Nikab, she can't provide her testimony before identifying herself, she must reveal the Nikab. It's the same in public closed places; like airports, trade malls and police stations, there is no problem about asking the woman who wear the Nikab to reveal the cover of her face. Also, ID photos are taken for women who wear the Nikab without it, they must -for sure- reveal the face. Islam permit that.

>
Another problem raised up by Valerie which is the teacher who teach for children.

It's understood that teaching a children is different than teaching older students. When teaching older ones is all about providing the ideas and talking to the mind, teaching children is not just providing ideas and saying words to be listened to, but the facial expressions and body movements are essential to make the child understand, when the teacher wil show his pleaseing for a good thing from the child, when to show his anger for the bad thing. Yes, revealing the face is essential. That's why a woman wearing the Nikab is required to either reveal her face when she teach for children, or instead quit that profession.

Thanks, moonlit, for your comment,

Regards,

Mohamed

Mohamed said...

no_slappz,

You recommended to me a porn website saying I think the muslim world would make a great leap forward into the 21st century if all muslims watched [..].

Let me tell you that you have a sick mind. The relation between husband and wife is something that is so private, it's not a thing to be publicly seen or watched over the web. Only sick minded people would like to watch it and invite others to watch it.

Also, do you think that the world won't make a leap forward unless porn sites are widely watched?!!
When women are used that cheap and dirty way to earn money, then that's backwardness and inhumanity. It's something against human nature. Even animals don't do that. But you, .. you think that it's the way that must be used to make a leap forward.

You're with no doubt an insane guy. My time is more precious to be wasted with you.

Mohamed said...

no_slappz,

Personal insults aren't welcomed here.

This blog is meant to provide talk to the mind, not to express hatred.

no_slappz said...

mohamed,

Why are muslim men afraid of female sexuality?

Mohamed said...

no_slappz,

We aren't.

no_slappz said...

mohamed,

The male muslim culture devotes a large part of its energy to repressing women and their sexuality.

That is the defining aspect of fear.

The fact that muslim culture is about a thousand years behind western culture is the outcome of your repression of women.

Meanwhile, there is NO art in muslim culture. Nothing. Why is that?

Mohamed said...

Well,

Let me tell you that suffer from a severe lake of knowledge about Islamic culture..

a) Islamic culture since its beginning, gave women much of the rights that were stolen from them. It was a very revolutionary thinking and practice.
(In the next 5 days, I'm intending to make a post about the subject of how Islamic culture gave women their rights. Stay tuned!)

b) It's a very silly lie that there is no Islamic art. Poetry, Calligraphy, Architecture, Mosaic, Pottery, Arabesque, Carpets, Metallic Bowls, are just examples of Islamic art.

Pay a visit to Spain and see Islamic architecture there. Pay a visit to Egypt and see all the wonderful mosques there. Pay a visit to any Islamic country to see Islamic art. Search the web about Islamic Art. See my other photo blog to see an image I took in the wonderful Sultan Hassan mosque in old Cairo.

no_slappz said...

mohamed, you wrote:

"a) Islamic culture since its beginning, gave women much of the rights that were stolen from them."

Rights? Stolen? What rights were stolen?

Meanwhile, when the lives of women are controlled by a strict set of rules that they cannot change, then women are oppressed.

As I have stated -- and you have confirmed -- men enforce strict rules regarding sex.

Furthermore, as muslim male, you yourself are oppressed by your religion, which obviously forbids intellectual advancement.

You wrote:

"It was a very revolutionary thinking and practice."

The thinking is only revolutionary to you -- a muslim male. American women see muslim women as slaves, which they are.

You wrote:

"(In the next 5 days, I'm intending to make a post about the subject of how Islamic culture gave women their rights. Stay tuned!)"

In fact, Islamic culture sets limits on the lives of women that are so severe they are illegal in the US.

You wrote:

"b) It's a very silly lie that there is no Islamic art."

There is no Islamic art. You do not know the definition of "art."

You wrote:

"Poetry, Calligraphy, Architecture, Mosaic, Pottery, Arabesque, Carpets, Metallic Bowls, are just examples of Islamic art."

With the exception of poetry, none of the items on your list are art.

Meanwhile, there is no Islamic poetry that qualifies as art. Why? Because it fails the basic test of art -- which is to exist for its own sake. Not for the glorification of a religion.

You wrote:

"Pay a visit to Spain and see Islamic architecture there. Pay a visit to Egypt and see all the wonderful mosques there. Pay a visit to any Islamic country to see Islamic art"

I have been there. Again. There is no Islamic art. You think that making useful and/or beautiful artifacts is equal to creating art. It is not.

Painting, for example, does not exist in Islamic culture

Why is there a fatwa on the life of Salman Rushdie, the writer?

Mohamed said...

no_slappz,

I can estimate your age at most, 10 years.

Go play away from here, kid.

You don't worth even answering your comments anymore.

I would welcome you even if your were a kid, if you have some perspective that worth my effort to think about and discuss in a mind-to-mind talk. But when you don't have some perspective, even if you're an old person, I won't waste my time with you.

no_slappz said...

mohamed,

Your refusal to respond is typical of muslims when they are asked about troubling parts of Islam.

It is also true that muslims like you are so deeply mired in your religion that you cannot understand the fact that a much wider world exists.

Can you explain why the muslim world is centuries behind the US and other western nations?

Mohamed said...

Your refusal to respond is typical of muslims when they are asked about troubling parts of Islam.

Oh, really?

Doesn't this blog answer "troubling" questions about Islam? Doesn't IslamOnLine.net answer questions about Islam?

You didn't try to ask questions there?

Well, how you claim a refusal to answer, when you don't ask?

Go to IslamOnLine.net, ask everthing you want there.

Will you?

No you won't.

Val�rie said...

Mohamed,

"I can't accept your explanation that French government was trying to ban Nikab because it's a religious sign in public."

If you can't accept it then you obviously know nothing of what is happening in France, because it is exactly the truth. You say the nikab is not a religious sign where you live, but it is perceived as one here in France, the same as a christian cross or a jewish beret.

And, like it or not, it is what has incensed the population. You can accept it or not, it makes no difference because it is the truth. If you don't accept it, then you live in deception, like an ostrich burying her head in the sand.

"You said that it's OK for the cross and Hijab, then you said that it's not OK for the Nikab! If you would agree for the cross, and Hijab, then it must be OK too for the Nikab!"

It seems you didn't read what I wrote: the decision made by the government and supported by 99% of the population, including the 10% of muslims living here, is that SMALL DISCREET religious signs are OK. The nikab is no more small and discreet than a huge christian cross. If you do not see that, then you are blind.

Anyway, the reason of my writing my comment was that you INCORRECTLY said the FR government was taking measures especially against the muslim religion. That is false. It is a lie that I wanted to rectify because I live here and I know what is going on, whereas it is obvious that all you know is hearsay.

The people of France want to maintain the public system secular, even if the large majority are catholics, followed second by muslims. Religious symbols are ok at home, in private, in private schools, or even in public in the street, in the metro, in the train, in the shops, etc. But overbearing religious symbols are NOT ok in the secular public education system, especially at primary school.

"They are not equal at all. ..."

Your whole paragraph is very ignorant and hypocritical: the reason humans have looked for covering their body is mostly for warmth originally, NOT because it is UNNATURAL like YOU say. There are still many tribes in hot countries where people walked around naked.

Nudism beaches and camps are very many in France, and nobody takes offense. There is NOTHING unnatural about nudism, it's just that it is not accepted in everyday public life, and this is why nudist can be nudist at home or go to nudist camps.

If nudists can conform to what the majority of people think is ok in public, why can't muslim women who want to wear the burka do the same?

Especially since you say it is not a religious meaning to them, so what is the big problem in not wearing it when teaching young children at public secular school?

Mohamed said...

Valerie,

I really cannot understand you. You always use either bad or angry words. Easy on yourself (I'm not mocking you). Being always in an angry mood will noway help others understand your perspective.

Anyway, ignoring your "angry" words, here you're some notes;

a) I'm aware of French constitutions and civil laws for two reasons; my study in the faculty depends on comparative studies between Egyptian and others laws (basically French one), also our Egyptian civil laws and constitution depends so much on French legal regulations.


b) We can't say that France kept its secular nature 100%. Here you're two facts about France;

* French banks are working according to Islamic economic system 6 years ago on the level of companies and large institutions, but not yet on the level of individuals. But Senate of France is encouraging the appliance of Islamic economic system in a wider range, following the example of England that started it since 2004.

* One of the main resources of Napoleonic code of 1804 is the Maliki school, one of the four basic Fiqh schools.


c) If you followed the opinions of famous Muslim scholars, you'll find out that they are not encouraging wearing the Nikab (Burka). Yusuf Qaradawi is saying that it's not preferred to wear it so as not to restrict woman from interacting with society. Mohammed Ghazali is also one of the anti-Nikab Muslims scholars. Search for information about Ghazali, I'm sure you'll like his writings.

My point is that, it's true that Nikab is not a religious sign, whatever is thought in Europe, but to reduce it, the best way is to make Muslim scholars themselves convince Muslim women that it's not necessary according to Shari'a. French government must encourage moderate Muslim scholars to make Muslims aware of what their religion really requires i.e. only the Hijab. Secular criticism of Nikab will be faced by more resistance and won't achieve its target at the end.


d) About wearing or not wearing Nikab in classes. Al-Azhar Islamic foundation, recently regulated the wearing of Nikab in its schools that a teacher or a student wearing the Nikab must not wear it when inside the class. This regulation was welcomed by both teachers and students.

On the other hand, female teachers who wear the Nikab here, do not wear it when teaching children. I don't know what they do in France.

Regards,

Mohamed

moonlitetwine said...

I am not understanding the references to pornography in this blog enrty. I don't want to view porn in order to discover its existence. However a couple of comments tell about a Mohamed, who believes all of the Muslim world should watch pornography.

The matter of sex is best begun at home by parents. As always, love is best when a person has loving parents, then, passes love to everyone in the many ways people can do in a community.

Mohamed said...

What! Me?!!

No, sure not.

It's exactly the contrary.

Pornography is a thing that should be fought against. It's against human dignity and respect for himself. It's something against human nature. It's a big sin in all religions.
In the Bible; "You shall not commit adultery.", ".. you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife,". Ten Commandemats.
And in Qur'an; "Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty ..", "And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their .." Surah 24: 30, 31

In Islamic societies, you can hardly find a sex relation between man and woman before marriage. It only begins after the marriage.

I think you were confused if I support or don't support pornography because of my response to no_slpazz in October 18, 2009 5:25 PM, when I said no_slappz, You recommended to me a porn website saying I think the muslim world ..!!

In fact it was a comment from no_slappz that I had to delete, so that you didn't see it. He thought that I would allow him to put links to porn sites on this blog claiming that the Islamic world will not make a leap forward into the 21th century until all Muslims watch some porn site that he put its link. (!!!) I had to delete it. My blog will never be a place to direct its visitors to such sin places.

Regards,

Mohamed

moonlitetwine said...

Thank you, Mohamed.

I know pornography exists. The US is the #1 producer of pornography. Even in my former marriage, I did not allow pornography. My husband at the time accepted this, at least in our home.

What one does is a matter of belief and moral character. No person is perfect. In fact, I discovered the other day, that another convenience store no longer sells porno magazines. It's a good thing to be able to send a child into a store without worry of pornography being sold there.

I can't think of one part of society that is helped by porn. Even economically, the industry is dishonest and corrupt.

Urban_Underclass said...

Hi Mahomed,

I have not been commenting on this post because it is not my business to judge how another culture or religion behaves within the confines of their own community.

But as usual I find myself in agreement with moonlitewine,

Bless her,

Rory

no_slappz said...

mohamed,

As I have said, and as your reactions have shown, you are afraid of sex -- and deathly afraid of women.

In other words, you are like most muslim men. You show your fear by citing ridiculous verses from the Koran, the fictional book you believe should guide the lives of all humans.

Why does Islam make women into slaves?

Urban_Underclass said...

Hi Mohamed,

Who is this new Troll, No Slappz ?

Will they ever leave you in peace?

Shalom,
Rory

Urban_Underclass said...

Lisbon Treaty,
Best out of three,
Seems fair to me.

Rory

moonlitetwine said...

I heard on the news, that France will allow Muslim teachers to wear full covering in the classroom.

The logic was that it would be too difficult to enforce such a ban.