Marocc

We're talking about Scripture here. Don't change the topic.

Leviticus 19:20 And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that is a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free. Deuteronomy 25 11 “If [two] men, a man and his countryman, are fighting and the wife of one approaches to rescue her husband from the man who is striking him, and she reaches out with her hand and grabs the aggressor’s genitals, 12 then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity [for her]. 1 Corinthians 11 6 For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head. 7 A man ought not to cover his head,[a] since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. 1 Timothy 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.

The Quran disagrees so you are still expected to provide a credible source. In case you want to argue regarding the Quran you are free to provide a credible source regarding it – such as tafser or professionally analyzed words and expressions within the Arabic text that could help prove your claim. No, it doesn't. Here's what the Bible says, since you brought it up. Numbers 5:15-22 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephah[a] of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing. 16 “‘The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the Lord. 17 Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. 18 After the priest has had the woman stand before the Lord, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. 19 Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, “If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. 20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.” “‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”

I study the opinions of qualified scholars. I can refer you to their speeches and writings regarding any statement I make. If I cannot I shall admit it is merely my own uncertain interpretation.

Most likely in my opinion, she doesn't want to cover and feels better about her life if she encourages others to do the same. But I really don't know. I don't make my own interpretations. I don't know of any Imam who teaches such and even if someone agrees with her main point, they would surely do better job at providing evidence and reasoning. Because if you had any actual interest to know the truth you would do your own research – you would've already done it – instead of asking me to explain what many much more knowledgeable people have said for 1400 years. Her view is not the problem. The problem is she picks certain very few verses from the Quran – one of which she translates wrong. She is from India and I don't know if she speaks Arabic. She picks certain hadiths from among about 200,000 – among which are dozens of hadiths regarding clothing and hijab, which she ignores – and explains and interprets them as she likes. By all apparences one would think she is trying to give a bad impression of Islam by so openly speaking what she knows nothing about and what she knows will leave a negative impression. Somehow she forgets the fact that Muslims are to dress and behave modestly – there is no way to interpret that away from the Quran and the Sunnah. She doesn't say 'Allah's peace and blessings be upon him' after mentioning the prophet Muhammad's (Sallaa lahu alayhi wa sallam) name. She doesn't make her sources known appropriately or provide any proof that her interpretations are correct or even supported by anyone. I don't believe you know much about my views.

I never said I was qualified.

Credible source?

I never said you did. But your apparent feeling toward certain ideas and traditions for instance is on the level of something I would call hatred.

I have seen it. She is incorrect and has no qualifications to advice anyone on such matters. Incorrect. You cannot beat your wife at all.

That's misleading as there are countries that apply different sets of laws at the same time. Could you provide a source for this? And this But the Muslims and the Christians were there first. We? Which one are you? Could you provide a source for this? That's kind of new.

That ship has sailed. They're lucky to light a cigarette.

Is this the type of future you haters want for Canada?

Islam is not something where people vote for what's good and what's bad. "Ibn Umar reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said: Verily, modesty and faith come together. If one of the two is missing, so is the other. Source: Shu’ab al-Imān 7211, Grade: Sahih" https://abuaminaelias.com/al-mundhiri-modesty-haya-shamelessness/

Keep telling that to yourself.

Veil is not necessary – hijab is. And just because someone somewhere who calls him-/herself Muslim does something doesn't make that something good/normal/correct. Who wants to make their religion the State's religion? What would that mean?

Why would you think I support that?

I have an idea. The little group of anti religious people in Canada could make their own little place somewhere. You want to shut people out — you'll have to shut yourself in.

You call that witty? That's dumb. Makes no sense to compare a veil to a cross necklace because the cross necklace is not required from a Christian and it isn't a cloth. And most importantly because the main problem is not prohibiting the veil but the hijab. I'm hoping they said it differently from you and it wasn't such a lie for real. What if a person has cancer and needs to shave their head? I suppose they will forbid her from wearing a scarf. At the same time prohibiting cross jewellery is childish.

That would on no way prevent criticism. Stating the obvious. Never seen that being done. If only it could be consistent with human right, but it isn't.

No I don't. What government do you suppose I support?

You support a terrorist government? So long as they're not Muslims I suppose?

How about China?

In protest of the oppression of Muslim women you wish to oppress Muslim women. That should teach the Muslim women how oppressed they are. Domestic violence in Muslim families is something you might as well think about after you have tried to solve all the other lesser 'problems' first.

That's not what I was talking about of course. You have a lot of experience with Muslims. Exclusively bad ones? I don't read them much, but never heard of anyone having been executed on the basis of apostasy — that would be illegal. Who? Exactly what? That Muslims tend to object to insulting cartoons? No. That there was a fatwa by someone from Iran for the punishment of the writer who wrote about the satanic verses? No. That some Muslims worry for their safety if they leave islam? No.

Do those prove such things are done by Iran and/or that such things have been legalized by Iran?