@ Baal
Hi Debunker, I apologize for calling you a liar, you were only stalling a bit but that is not a lie. Angel was talking about going to court, and you replied with '2 witnesses required'. Although 2 witnesses do not equate going to court, perhaps you only tried to put an argument that the husband might still be required to not 'divorce in anger'.
I too apologize for calling you a liar.
Fvck the Saudi laws. Did they even have laws 30 years ago. And then ordering a girl lashed 90 times over a cell phone and mouthing off to a kunt of a teacher. And turning down the request of an 8yrs old for a divorce because she is too young to make the request. Fvck the Saudi law till the next 17 hundred kingdoms. You are quoting Saudi laws to me?
You know the relevance... they *SUPPOSEDLY* follow Shariah Law, the strictest version of it, or so they claim. So when even Saudis don't have this Bait Al Ta'a law, this would mean that's not part of the so-called Shariah Law.
OFF TOPIC:
The girl was lashed 90 times over smashing a glass cup over the head of the school's principle... the cell phone had nothing to do with it... get your facts straight. (of course, I don't condone the punishment, but I'm clarifying the crime).
Over 50% of the married people in Saudi are asking for a divorce and the only thing preventing the country from descending into total social disintegration is the court preventing the women from going forward with their divorces.
Actually over 50% of marriages in Saudi do end in divorce. And very few women use Khul' not because there are pressures from the courts, it's because usually women don't want to return the Mahr back to the husband, which in the case of Saudi Arabia, ranges from $15,000 to $50,000 on average.
Fvck the Saudi laws and triple fvck the wahabi shit that is holding that country back.
Again, see the point above.
I checked the link and I was shocked. This is not how one of my cousins got her Khul'... Her ex-husband was a stubborn pig and she ENFORCED divorce upon him by going to court and throwing the Mahr in his face.
As for Egypt, check out this article:
Even with Egypt's new law, a wife who wants a divorce over the objections of her husband will have to return to him any money or property that he paid her upon the marriage. That provision was the price paid for the support of leading Muslim authorities.http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2872/is_2_26/ai_62140821/And specially in Wahabi Saudi they are still giving women the run-around to get her divorce. Auto-losing her custody unless her husband give up the retarded kids of course.
If you don't know how women are divorced in Saudi Arabia, then please don't pretend that you do. Now, I'm not sure about the kids issue, but what the hell do you mean by *retarded* kids? Explain please.
Your shit to sort out not mine. You are the one who think too highly of those books. As far as I am concerned, hadith, sirat, koran are all fables written by the same people promising you a Rolls Royce after you die. If I give you a verse and I say the verse is from the hadith, you might act all indignated and self-righteous to correct me that verses come from the koran and not from the hadith, and my answer to you will be the same, same shit, same lies, same hate and same fear.
The point that you keep missing is: History books are not *scripture*.. mixining up Quran and Hadith is one thing, pretending that history books is scripture is another. In any case, even though I don't give a crap about Judiasm, I don't cite some Jewish history book and then claim it is part of the Talmud or the Hebrew Bible. This little thing is known as integrity.
Now let's pretend you acted all polite and nice about it and went: "Btw Baal you stated verse 9:5 came from the Hadith Sahih when the verse came from the Uthamanic Koran you silly old buddy old chum.", and me out of pure congeniality and mirth might answer back: "Oh yes yes yes you are right, all those verses and hadith really look the same to me I just figured I gave you enough information to go on finding what really happened for yourself."
Ok, you're right, I should have been polite about it but that was a bit of a challenge given that you called me both stupid an a liar in previous post, so perhaps I was just urged to return the favor?
Wrong. At no time of the divorce process, can Two witnesses nullify a divorce. Goes like this: The man can divorce the woman. Slam Dunk and she is out. No witnesses involved yet. The woman however is ordered to goto court. Only after the Iddat period is complete, the man is only asked to get 2 witnesses to finalize the process. And the witnesses have no power to stop the divorce.
And where did I say that they have the power to stop the divorce?
At no time of this process, can the man be forced to return to the woman. At worst for the man, the witnesses might state that the men is not on equitable terms, but they still can not force the man to sleep beside a woman he does not want to sleep beside.
If the witnesses state that the divorce was not equitable, then perhaps the woman can then take her ex-husband to court *AFTER THE FACT* and use the witnesses to her favor. Again, the man did not have to goto court and pay for the initial lawyer fees.
You and me agree that the man should be required to pass in front of a judge to make sure he left her on 'equitable terms', but that is not what the koran recommends. Just because something is necessary and has to happen, it does not mean the koran ordered us to do it.
Topic: Mohammad, the Pedophile