Who doesn't have the choice?

@@jwanita_19Girls from religious families who force them to wear hijab. I’m Muslim but I can’t deny that sadly it’s still exist in the world.

​@AisyahAlhumairah_ it's forced upon women in certain countries where it's considered mandatory. Also it is not really a free choice in many conservative households. There is stigmatization, social consequences if you do not adhere to it to the extent its expected of you. 2. I understand, as someone who wears hijab with conviction, that it's annoying when people try to constantly question you agency and try to put every Muslim women into "oppressed" box. It's good to emphasize the true intentions of hijab. The positive impact it can bring and meaning it has in our lives. It is very important to me to be in control of my clothing any my ability to decide for myself how much I show and what parts I consider to be private. But I also think it is important for us who do wear hijab to recognize that too many women do not get that right. So there are valid concerns around how some families and cultural sensibilities try to take away that agency and how they try to coerce some women into wearing it.

I'm still young, but one day if i could be a parent, i'd be disappointed and feel like i'm a failure if i see my own child refuse to obey the obligatory.Our child may not be with us all the time and there's a lot of influence out there to convince people into reveal their aurat to strangers. But if there's anybody who should be educating us about something so basic in our religion, wouldn't it be our parents and family? However i do disagree it when random stangers forces women who has nothing to do with them to wear hijab.

Not wearing hijab may seems something so normal these days but we should't allow it to influence us to do the same. It's the temptations, it's the sabr that will give us a huge reward in the hereafter. Everything is a test.

Sounds like you have a very understanding family on both sides!

May Allah Guide you to please Allah swt. Xx

@@simasoumi5551 *Quran 4:34* “Men are in charge of women by what Allah has given one over the other. So righteous women are devoutly obedient. But those from whom you fear arrogance - advise them; forsake them in bed; and STRIKE them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.” *Sahih al-Bukhari 1:301* "Once Allah’s Apostle (Peace be Upon Him) passed by the women and said, 'O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women). I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you (women).' The women asked, 'O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?' He said, 'Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man? This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses? This is the deficiency in her religion.'”

@carawaybg2vj hello Let me educate you : strike them with a little toothpick lol :) and that if she cheats on him, and that doesn't happen till the man finds 4 genuine witnesses :) known for their truthfulnzss so basically the probability is zero Yes a woman has less concentration when she is in her periods, pregnancy (uses up to 90 percent of her brain :)) she is over emotional and irrational when it concerns children or anything else due to her nature of being caring.. Let me educate you also that the first woman to attend university was a North African Muslim (fatima) the first university in the world was alqarawiyyin built in North Africa:) you typing on your phone now thanks fo Muslim mathematicians and scientists who were boomingwith light when the west was rotting in its medieval age. Let me go and copy two or 3 verses abiur women in the bible

@carawaybg2vj 22Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands In each of the three sections of Paul’s household code (Eph. 5:22-33; 6:1-4; 6:5-9), he first addresses those who are under authority (wives, children, and slaves) before addressing those in positions of authority (husbands, parents, and masters). Wives are commanded to submit to their husbands. The words “your own” (idios) indicate that Paul is addressing “wives” and not “women” generally. Educate urself on the rights of women in Islam that women in the west didn't have till 1948 :) the right of a land the right to marry and divorce ad they wished the right to remarry after 3 months of divorcing and 4 months of losing her husband The right to have the house if divorced and be sponsored for evrry child for the rest of her life by the man who divorced her :) The right of education and I won't go into how much a man should provide and treat her like a princess for ever :) Good bye

Jazakallah, please keep spreading the word!

Chapter: The Prophet's Concubine ‏‏ A person was charged with fornication with the slavegirl of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). Thereupon Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said to Ali: Go and strike his neck. Ali found him in a well. Ali said: Come out, and as he and brought him out, he found that his sexual organ had been cut. Ali refrained from striking his neck. He came to Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) and said: He has not even the sexual organ. Sahih Muslim 2771

jazakAllah for the thoughtful comment. First thing to note is that the jamaat does not set up any rules per se. It is simply enacting Islamic teachings at a community level. Secondly, as we have seen with multiple (ongoing) scandals, where hyper-promiscuous and predatory men may entice young (sometimes down to 16 years old) women, that there is actually, at baseline, a power imbalance between men and women. Women desire companionship, affection and love, principally, along with a long term desire of children. Their desires are rooted in a longer term outlook as compared to men, specifically such promiscuous men, whose goal is short term sex. Such men are often older also and more experienced in life. Islam recognises the existing, baseline, power imbalance that exists between men and women and takes a step (the introduction of a wali) that is designed to protect women against such men, who are only interested in sex but dupe young women into relationships and marriage. It requires men on the part of the young woman to recognise that, since it is the reality, that the woman herself may be infatuated with him. Just look and read the scandals going on in society at present and you will see the consequences of a system in which a wali is not present at all, due to a lack of recognition of the baseline power difference that exists in matters of consent and approval between men and women, recognising the emotional and social coercion men can bring to bear upon a younger woman. That's not to say the wali cannot act poorly and be informed by personal reasons rather than the best interests of his daughter. But that also, in the jamaat, is part of the blessing of the khalifa and an administration, in such cases that the wali is unreasonably blocking a potential suitor.

@@RationalReligionwhy did Allah command Muslim women to wear hijab only after umar saw sauda at night? Why not command from eve and the other women who followed?

@@seekthetruthandthetruthwil2388 The idea that rules for head covering and modesty did not exist prior to Islam is simply not accurate. Other faiths had similar concepts before that. Just look at the portrayal of Hazrat Mariyam within christian culture. It shows that the idea and the knowledge about its value was around.

@@RationalReligion Thx💙 for your detailed response. 1. In my mind my criticism is more about cultural influence and the question of what the best way to organize these rules are in our current context, not necessarily the underlying religious teaching. But to be fair it is not always easy to separate that exactly . So maybe I am critiquing the underlying religious assumptions as well. Idk lets see. 2. I think we always can construct examples that fit a narrative and try to justify whatever we want to justify. I can agree with the notion that gullible girls and the type of predatory men that was described in the comment do exist. The important question is to look how accurate and representative that example is of the majority that would justify making what may be true for the constructed example that is cited into the general rule. The rule doesn't just apply to minors or young women. It would also apply to 20, 30, 40 ... year old women. AFAIK the basic rules do not consider actual experience, education or life circumstances. The main thing that is required of the wali seems to be simply based on gender. At the baseline the disagreement seems to be: “Are women generally rational actors who are capable of self determination and therefore can be trusted to have full agency in terms choosing their spouse?” My answer to this question is a YES. The reply I've gotten seems to be saying NO to this question. The basic view of the response on women seems to be that we generally are presumed to be gullible, lack understanding and incapable of making rational decisions in regards to this question to such an extent, that as the default those need to be checked by paternal review. If this is our disagreement then I think we may have to agree to disagree. We then have a fundamentally different understanding of the capability of women. And none of my views may make sense if we presume women generally being incapable in regards to this question.

@@RationalReligion 3. I would still like to formulate my concerns. Maybe I have blindspots or am wrong in other details. I would like to be corrected then. (sorry for the long comment…🥲... but this is an important topic to me) Given my answer is yes to the basic question, I find the idea of diminished agency in regards to the question of who I want to share my life and body with, with whom I want to have a family and build a home concerning. I cannot think of many other questions that are more personal and touch the most inner core of our being and I struggle with the idea that someone else gets a final say over that. I have the feeling that in conversation around this topic this concern is too often overlooked and not sufficiently considered in terms of assessing what the rules should be. 4. If I understand the response correctly, the point of the wali system seems to be to protect women from being taken advantage of by predatory men. Which is a concern I share. There can be toxic societal dynamics that may put us women at a disadvantage. I agree that there have to be societal systems and an environment that prohibit exploitation. But in my mind the correct response is to empower women to have the ability to make good choices themselves. The idea that presumes as a basic rule women lack understanding and can not be trusted to make decisions like this perpetuates IMO toxic cultural mindsets that feel justified in taking away more of our agency which makes us more vulnerable. It gives men of the family additional tools that can be used to push cultural sensibilities that then have to be overcome by us. If I look at the data on the correlation of patriarchal mindsets and how vulnerable women are in those environments it does not seem to me that more of that makes us safer. Maybe it is the conservative desi cultural bubble I am in. But to me the use of the wali authority to directly or sometimes subtly add coercive pressure based on personal or cultural sensibilities is much more prevalent than the idea that men of the Jama’at would just get married to a woman to sexually enjoy them for a short time. 5. If I look at the rules it seems to me even within the framework of the response they do not make sense. It seems to me paternal control is prioritized over security. The rule state: *”Consent of marriage: If any woman gets herself married without the permission of her guardian, her marriage is void, her marriage is void, her marriage is void. (In case of minor boys/girls and adult woman the right of guardianship belongs to Father, Paternal Grandfather, Brother, Paternal Uncle and son successively.)”* The rules in their current form state that only paternal males can be wali. Even if I assume the framework, that we women necessarily need male control to protect us from “choosing wrong”. It does not explain why a maternal uncle would be excluded. From what was outlined in the response this exclusion of maternal male relatives makes no sense if it is just about protection from wrong choices. To me that shows me these rules might reflect the cultural environment that was concerned with ensuring paternal control of lineage . If I am mistaken and there is a hadith that states a reason why only paternal male relatives can be walis please share. If such an hadith does not exist I think my assumption of these being more based on cultural sensibilities seems justified. IMO the beauty of Islam is that it challenges and dismantles (toxic) cultural ideas. It did in the past. Where girls were buried alive and women were considered property. It established our basic human right to live and not only rejected that idea that we are property but also ensured that we as humans had the right to own and inherit property. I don't see why this would not be true today and why we should be cognizant to not confuse unchangeable religious rules for cultural sensibilities. I would like to dismantle those. 6. I am not sure what societal scandals are being referenced. If it is about the general state of relationships and marriage in western society then I think that has more to do with a lack of moral teaching and hyper individualistic neo liberal short term hedonistic thinking that some people have. I think the causes for what we see go way more deeper than the lack of a wali system. If we are talking about people in the Jama’at. Which is where marriage usually happens anyways. I do not see what is being described in the response. We had our Jalsa a few weeks ago. What I saw was incredibly smart and devoted Lajna. Even Hazoor-e-Aqdas (atba) confirmed that we were more disciplined that the men…😊 If I look at the amoor-e talaba data for Germany, Lajna are on average more educated. I think that is generally true for the west. And I don't think the vast majority of Khuddam are predatory men that only want to marry women to exploit them for their sexual desires and short term fun. Those may exist. I am not denying that but I would be very surprised if the moral state of Khuddam in the overwhelming majority is like what was described. I think the vast majority of khuddam also value a stable family, children and long term connection. With that understanding, basing the rules on the exceptions while unnecessarily diminishing the agency of the vast majority of women and the things I described in 2.-4.makes no sense to me. 7. I think we can address the concern in the response while at the same time increasing the agency of women to make good choices. Unlike other communities we Ahmadis are not “spiritual orphans” we are not floating around in a moral vacuum. We have a nizam-e-Jama’at that morally gounds women and men and we have huzoor-e-Aqdas (atba) who was chosen by Allah to be a spiritual head of that. As stated in the video the prophet Muhammad saw as the spritual head did have the authority to act as the wali. Huzoor-e-Aqdas (atba) has the same right as confirmed in the response. I would like to as a default have the Jama’at and huzoor-e-Aqdas (atba) to be considered the wali. With that the islamic requirement of a wali is fulfilled. To protect against what is being shared in the example we can add protections. e.g. In Jama'at Germany there is prescribed counseling by a murrabie before marriage. Which is a good venue to ensure that people are going into the marriage with the right intentions. Not just for the extreme case that was stated but i think it helps to avoid basic mistakes that both people may make out of naivete. It also adds a protective layer against forced marriages. Which is great. I do think the family and parents have a role. I do not prescribe to the neo liberal extreme individualism that some people push. The role of the partens is to instill moral values into the sons and daughters. To live the values themselves and modeling for their sons and daughters what a healthy relationship looks like and for what to look for when choosing a partner. THAT is the role they play IMO. They obviously still would have that advisory role in my view as well. Just like they have that with their sons and when he makes a decision to choose a spouse. I do not see the need for a parternal veto that diminishes our autonomy. Sons and daughters are in my assessment generally BOTH rational beings capable of taking this into account and making informed autonomous choices about their own life. Especially if it is about something as intimate as who they want to share their bodies and build their lives with. This solution respects the agency of women and with that dismantles cultural narratives that presume we cannot be trusted with autonomy. It also fulfills the wali requirement and adds a protective layer to avoid people being taken advantage of.

😅😅😂😂😂😂😂

Believe me, democracy is a scam,it doesn't exist it's propaganda.

What is the Western Value, for a woman do drink sleep around and walk naked. Just look the divorce rate in the Western countries.

Are you saying the Quran doesn’t say the hijab is a choice?

@@finity9316 yes. You're welcome to prove me wrong

@@clarkporter1340 you have the choice to follow the rules or not

It's not. That's part of their religious duty...

😅😅😂😂😂😂

She's speaking the Truth about a Regressive Ideology

Except in the west. At least she's enjoying the limelight of western media as a moslem scholar ...!!!

Islam does not teach such behaviour or action at all. Islam at its core is about building a personal connection with God, giving due rights to God and to His creation. Barbarism and torture, let alone killing for simply not wearing proper hijab is the complete opposite to Islam.

Murder is Murder in Islam. Those who did it must be punished. There is no punishment in Sharia for not wearing hijab.

How many people were killed in USA during black civil rights movement by they against the barbarity of white American government?

If people of USA overwhelming want Islamic sharia then that would be their democratic choice. Sharia can not be imposed on anyone, just like Jewish law it is applicable only on Muslims.

They do not make the majority of Muslims

She's a Somali who rejected Islam & now as an atheist had a lots of issues against Islam....

Where are you from?

get help

@@dbuc4671 please help hijabi 😍😍😍

Better than the contrary, pleasure holes for everyone and no responsibility :)

How do you know about Adam and Eve then?

So you walk around and will go to work naked then because if you don’t then you are following human made BS 😂😂😂

You don't. How they where even named as Adam and Eve. The holy storybook is full of... If humans started from 2 people, all after that are relatives and more likely retarded. So the story starts with a lie and ends with amen to that.

That was figurative part of human "history" and how you can make people believe anything in the name of lord.

​@@finity9316Some Tribes in Africa and South America doesn't wear clothing at all and yet they live normal lives including Women. The regressive thought that women with less clothing or No Clothing deserved to be Violated and shamed publicly shows what kind of Rotten Ideology you come from.......whereas Men go around having Multiple Partners and even Slaves for Centuries shows how much the Society has been biased against Women.

You're dead wrong. Get educated. I would rather be slave to God rather than being slave to my desires....!!! Why you don't look around you to see people bring worshipping their lust, drinking, gambling, fornication, drugs etc....!!!! Maybe you are confusing your iwn people with this notion of trinity...!!! The God we worship is the same & only one who created this whole universe & everything in it & around it... The one who sent all the prophets, sent all the revealed books....!!!? I do invite you to grab a Quran translation & read, maybe God will guide you.

Protection from devil 👿 or anyone else 😂😂😂😂👅👅🧕🏽🧕🏽

@@manorisantiago1471 From you

😮 Satan's mind set is to mock others see how mother Mary used to dress even today nuns follow the same

There is no harm in a man having intercourse with two of his slave girls before he does shower. It is disapproved of, however, to go to a freewoman on another's day. There is no harm in making love first to one slave girl and then to another without shower. Muwatta Malik, Book 2, Hadith 90

@@takiyaazrin7562 out of context

There are women in the community that don't wear the hijab and they haven't been thrown out of the community. It is a religious community. And like all communities or groups or clubs there are rules that everyone is to follow. (If you only read the conditions of bai't you would know what they are. You agree to those conditions when you initiate in the community). If you cannot follow them you have the right to just leave. If you insist on doing what you want, it only shows what kind of person you are. There is no single example where a woman was thrown out of the community solely because she didn't wear the hijab, and there are women who don't wear it.

@@wahmad8211 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nuCdarh9ucDahWw.htmlsi=79Op5R2buyb-OqFH

I do not think that is an accurate representation of what the caliph said. The caliph will obviously uphold the moral teaching of the community. That includes modest clothing and some degree of boundaries between the genders. which btw includes men. The Qur'an addresses them first. Asks them to lower their gaze and respect women. Women are free to decide, depending on their faith, if and how to follow the guidelines. Some women do not observe the hijab. They are still part of the community. That is their personal choice and they cannot be forced. For any sanctions that may have happened in the past there is usually more context to it. So it is not accurate to say women get “thrown out if they do not wear the hijab”.

iran will literally throw woman and prison for years and have killed in name of the genocidal religion you tube should ban these fanatics and have an atheist space,there are cases the woman that are sentenced to death are married one day and raped and then executed so that they wont reach heaven woman cant even enter a mosque wth is that the most genocidal religion os all time wherever it goes it play victim card and wants genocide of non muslims no wonder it is hatred all from one unholy book woman defending that religion is like an lamb coming to the butcher.

right to leave wth the religious cult hunts those people down by own family or community@@wahmad8211

🤡🤡

There is no harm in a man having intercourse with two of his slave girls before he does shower. It is disapproved of, however, to go to a freewoman on another's day. There is no harm in making love first to one slave girl and then to another without shower. Muwatta Malik, Book 2, Hadith 90

Ahmadi doesn't mean Non muslim. Fact check yourself LOL We are the true Muslims.

@@L4AH4N Ahmadis are kafirs... there is no Prophet after Muhammad PBUH and no Messiah after Jesus PBUH

Yes look how non Muslim we are... BEWARE!

First of all Ahmadis are muslim. Secondly why would it be wrong to watch the content even if you think we are not????🤨

​@@The_curious_RibosomeThat will be because none of you even used the Koran or any other Islamic texts to justify your position.

Wrong. Islam is not like a shirt that's has to fit you BUT you should tailor your life around Islam. If she has issues that's she got from her background in Somalia, that's has nothing to do with Islam.

Wrong. You cannot take Islam out of the equation, since this shapes the politics and culture environment in Somalia!@@Kassalawy56789

Why maryam (alai) or Mary wear head cover in stratue that found in church

Wrong dude... Get educated man.