Why can't a Muslimah marry a Jew of a Christian? (Split)

[Palwasha]

Thank you Feroza and Spogmai for yours posts!

Isn't this clearly double standards?

What's double standards?! Men and women are not the same!

Where is Qrratugai when you need her.

Khor, if you want answers, especially when it comes to issues such as religion, sometimes you gotta find your own answers rather than looking to the interpretation of others.

[spogmai shaglay]

The irony of your post. I can't help but to feel saddened that you have not even bothered to see the context of my post, but have the audacity to tell me to "read." Pathetic, wouldn't you say so?

The above quotes show the context of my post.

Further, have you read the Quran? If so, explain to me why a woman can't marry a non-Muslim whereas a man can.

dont be saddened for me Friend at all... as i know what i am doing, what i am following, i need no clearing of things from people around....

i haven't read the complete interpretation of the Quran....but the question asked i answered because i have read that part where it talks about marriage to non-muslims (whether men or women).....

i appreciate people not using words like pathetic and all while referring to me as i haven't done it to anybody....thats the sole reason why i dont reply in many of the dust just looking at the people involved in the discussion....

i respect people and i expect the same......

i cant get down to the level of people so i better keep shut....

because u spoke about Islam being flawed, i had to post here.....

i appreciate u taking a stand for us against Atheist here......

u can read the post By Mujib where he has mentioned the same things that i have said in my post and he has also quoted from the Quran...

did u read my post or u haven't read it at all... i have answered ur question there.............

[Dust]

^The respect is mutual. You people are just becoming defensive, that is all.

The answer you have given me about not reading all of the interpretation of the Quran, yet you still remain a Muslim, is the same as what a Christian would give you. You both know that you are right and have a gut feeling to back it up, eh?

I read your answer but it does not clear up the double-standards. Is not a Christian man a believer just as is a Christian woman? Also, it is not always the man who is dominant.

Are you able to rationalize this?

[unknownprince]

We have a thread called "Marriage to non-Pashtuns," and you may express your feelings about this matter in there. I encourage you to do so.
But if I may say, are the kids from a non-Pashtun mother to a Pashtun father any different in looks than kids from a non-Pashtun father to a Pashtun mother? If you're against it just because you're worried about our LOOKS (?seriously?), then surely, you'd be against it not just for women marrying non-Pashtuns but for men as well.

Oh, and if it's really about looks ... what if a Pashtun marries someone who's not stereotypically "ugly"?... Like, a Pashtun woman marrying a Bosnian man, perhaps? :D Would that be okay? Why or why not?

(Please reply in the thread specified above, since this is off-topic in this thread.)

Actually, the male gene is usually dominant, and from the Pashtuns I know whose mothers are non-Pashtun, they look as Pashtun as me!!! Plus, I don't care about looks, I was just saying that if woman start marrying out, the Pashtun ethnic group will disappear!!!

Thats genetics sister!!!! That is just the way it is. Plus, children whose father is Pashtun and mother is not usually always follow the Pashtun culture even more so than others!!!

[Roshina]

What's double standards?! Men and women are not the same!

Can we use this extremely obvious and factual statement in EVERY single argument related to religion, gender, humanity, etc.?

I mean, name two groups that are "the same." Do people have to be the same in order to have the same rights/privileges? Moreover, Christians and Jews are not the same as Muslims, are they? Non-Muslims are not the same as Muslims, non-Pashtuns are not the same as Pashtuns, *I* am not the same as *you* (you and I being individuals), a poor person is not the same as a rich person, and so on. How do you support your statement above then, which I deem irrelevant to the discussion, and it's the same one that many Muslim apologists use over and over and over in EVERY discussion they can throw it in?

What I want to know is, what ABOUT a woman's inherent abilities screams, "I can't marry a Christian/Jewish man, but my father, brothers, and sons -- being men -- can marry Christian/Jewish women just because they're men"? What's inherent about men that gives them this privilege?

Also, I still wait for someone to explain to me verse 2:221, which is actually talking to MEN not to marry disbelieving women until they believe. And verse 5:5 allows Muslim men to marry Christian and Jewish women. Yet, some of us are going around saying that Christians and Jews are considered disbelievers in Islam because their concept of God doesn't parallel (most) Muslims' concept of God. I understand many have pasted long articles from other sources, but I need someone to tell me in simple words using THEIR own words. If you understand it yourself, then share the knowledge with me and others here. If you can't explain it yourself but are only gonna keep on repeating the claims of others, that means you don't understand it yourself but are only seeking articles that agree with YOU rather than agreeing with the Quran.

How does this work? Does verse 2:221 abrogate verse 5:5?

Also, Guley, why do you accept the interpretation that you accept?

[unknownprince]

We have a thread called "Marriage to non-Pashtuns," and you may express your feelings about this matter in there. I encourage you to do so.
But if I may say, are the kids from a non-Pashtun mother to a Pashtun father any different in looks than kids from a non-Pashtun father to a Pashtun mother? If you're against it just because you're worried about our LOOKS (?seriously?), then surely, you'd be against it not just for women marrying non-Pashtuns but for men as well.

Oh, and if it's really about looks ... what if a Pashtun marries someone who's not stereotypically "ugly"?... Like, a Pashtun woman marrying a Bosnian man, perhaps? :D Would that be okay? Why or why not?

(Please reply in the thread specified above, since this is off-topic in this thread.)

Stereotypically ugly? If a Pashtun woman married a Bosnian man, her children will look Bosnian, not Pashtun, same goes for an Indian, Arab, blacks, and whites. If she married any of the aforementioned, her children would look like that, and they would no longer look like Pashtuns. Its all genetics. The presence or absence of the Y-chromosome determines both sex and dominant features. What does stereotypically ugly mean? Please elaborate.

So no, it would not be ok if a Pashtun woman married a Bosnian man, or any other non-Pashtun man. I didn't know Bosnians were good looking. Last time I checked, they did not look like us at all, but thats not my point. My main point is this, if woman start marrying out, our race will disappear.

[Dust]

Qrratugai's post is what i call the proper ingredients for a solid and healthy discussion.

[Roshina]

Actually, the male gene is usually dominant, and from the Pashtuns I know whose mothers are non-Pashtun, they look as Pashtun as me!!! Plus, I don't care about looks, I was just saying that if woman start marrying out, the Pashtun ethnic group will disappear!!!

Thats genetics sister!!!! That is just the way it is. Plus, children whose father is Pashtun and mother is not usually always follow the Pashtun culture even more so than others!!!

Unfortunately for you, Zahir Gula, I don't buy any of what you've said -- you must be able to back up such claims using evidence.

A Pashtun woman is JUST as Pashtun as a Pashtun man. If I married a non-Pashtun man, my kids will be 50% of what I am and 50% of what their father is; if a Pashtun man married a non-Pashtun woman, his kids will be 50% of what he is and 50% of what their mother is. They won't be 100% of what the father is. This is patriarchal thinking and has no connection with biology/genetics, so don't even THINK about saying that genetics has the identity of the children taking the genes of the father only This is basic biology ... and common sense.

Perhaps you don't live in a community where mixed marriages are acceptable. I do.

[Dust]

Stereotypically ugly? If a Pashtun woman married a Bosnian man, her children will look Bosnian, not Pashtun, same goes for an Indian, Arab, blacks, and whites. If she married any of the aforementioned, her children would look like that, and they would no longer look like Pashtuns. Its all genetics. The presence or absence of the Y-chromosome determines both sex and dominant features. What does stereotypically ugly mean? Please elaborate.

So no, it would not be ok if a Pashtun woman married a Bosnian man, or any other non-Pashtun man. I didn't know Bosnians were good looking. Last time I checked, they did not look like us at all, but thats not my point. My main point is this, if woman start marrying out, our race will disappear.

This is absurd. We all have features from our parents. Some people tend to look more like their mother whilst others like their father.

[unknownprince]

I have yet to get an answer.

this is what I make out of it.

A man can marry a Jew no problem.
If a woman does the same its a problem?

Jasmine, don't you agree with this thinking?

[unknownprince]

Unfortunately for you, Zahir Gula, I don't buy any of what you've said -- you must be able to back up such claims using evidence.

A Pashtun woman is JUST as Pashtun as a Pashtun man. If I married a non-Pashtun man, my kids will be 50% of what I am; if a Pashtun man married a non-Pashtun woman, his kids will be 50% of what he is. They won't be 100% of what the father is. This is basic biology ... and common sense.

I am talking about people I know, thats my evidence!!!

[unknownprince]

Unfortunately for you, Zahir Gula, I don't buy any of what you've said -- you must be able to back up such claims using evidence.

A Pashtun woman is JUST as Pashtun as a Pashtun man. If I married a non-Pashtun man, my kids will be 50% of what I am and 50% of what their father is; if a Pashtun man married a non-Pashtun woman, his kids will be 50% of what he is and 50% of what their mother is. They won't be 100% of what the father is. This is patriarchal thinking and has no connection with biology/genetics, so don't even THINK about saying that genetics has the identity of the children taking the genes of the father only This is basic biology ... and common sense.

Perhaps you don't live in a community where mixed marriages are acceptable. I do.

What is stereotypically ugly?

[unknownprince]

Bottom line is that Pashtun society is patrilineal, not matrilineal (excuse my spelling 0f those words-don't care to check it)
!!!!

Forget the looks argument. Our race will disappear if Pashtanas start marrying out

[Shayesta]

I mean, name two groups that are "the same." Do people have to be the same in order to have the same rights/privileges?

Akhey, zaar de shema!


I also got another question; I hear many people who read the Quran-e-Sharif say that in our holy book Hazrat Isa Alaisalam is mentioned with possibly more respect than Muhammad Sallalahu Alaihe Wasalam and that we are told to respect Hazrat Musa Alaisalam as much as other prophets, right? But then, why are we being told to bring over Jews and Christians over to our religion even if we supposedly are to believe in same prophets, God, etcetera? If we respect Hazrat Isa Alaisalam and Hazrat Musa Alaisalam equally then why don't we accept Christianity and Jewism next to Islam? Why is it haram to have 'various religions'? I mean, we are supposed to be the same people with same believe, same God and same prophets. Then what's and where's the problem?

[Abu Hurayrah]

Shayeste, we have to respect our prophets, because for sure, those prophets did not come to promote the modern Christianity of Judaism. They brought islamic Tawheed.

Respecting people who call themselves Christians or Jews means, not to harm them, and let them believe what they want. It is not respecting the teachings of Judaism or Christianity. Because those teachings include Shirk and polytheism, which a Muslim is not something for us to ''respect'', but to refute with the best knowledge , in the best manners which our beloved prophet (s.a.w.) has thought us.

The problem is that the people changed the revelations and teachings of Musa alayhi salam and Isa alayhisalam for instance. They have books without authors, which contain shirk. It was never the case to have ''several religions'' and nowhere in the Bible you can find the word ''Christianity'' , they where adressed by ethnicity, or followers of a person. In this case, the Christians where the ''Nasraniyin'' which in fact where the followers of Isa (a.s) and the followers of Musa (as) where called the ''Bani Israel'' Because those prophets where only sent to certain people. But Muhammad (s.a.w) which is the last and final prophet, was sent to the whole of humanity.

We actually do not have a problem, in this case. The problem lies with people who worship others besides Allah and who do not acknowledge the final Messenger which was prophesied in the earlier scriptures.