Progressive

[original PM]

Muslim women demonstrate how husbands should beat them | Daily Mail Online

[vetran]

Ms Allouche says the act is 'symbolic', while Ms Latifi claims it's 'a beautiful blessing'.
The women agree that they should only be beaten if they are caught 'committing sin' - pointing out that this means seriously disrespecting Allah or their husbands.

'Disobedience to the husband. Immoral acts or cheating. Admitting anyone to the home that the husband doesn't like,' Ms Latifi explains.

Ms Allouche smiles as she adds that does not mean a man can beat his wife simply for not cooking dinner, with the women agreeing that violence should only be used to 'promote tranquility'.

is it me or are the lefties just ignoring this sheet?

I'll get the stick out next time the extended in laws come round.

[BrilloPad]

'Disobedience to the husband.' Ms Latifi explains.

Ms Allouche smiles as she adds that does not mean a man can beat his wife simply for not cooking dinner.

If I order Mrs BP to cook dinner and she disobeys, can I beat her?

I might add that if I ordered Mrs BP to cook dinner I would not eat it due to certainty of it containing poison.

[RetSet]

Hmm...

Somebody's Spoof Detector is seriously broken...

[NotAllThere]

Women from radical Muslim group say it is fine for husbands to beat their wives.

I.e. not a progressive or mainstream Muslim group. Quite popular though among conservative and more fundamentalist prone Muslims.

'And what is the third option all about? What kind of hitting? It should not cause pain.'

So apparently, it's not really beating at all, but rather a form of gently whipping with scented bootlaces? (Yeah, right!).

Daft bints in any case, giving men justification for really beating up their spouses. (In Morocco, there's even TV shows teaching women how to hide beatings behind make up).

[darmstadt]

“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.” (Ephesians 5:22-24)

“When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets: then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.” (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)

[original PM]

“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.” (Ephesians 5:22-24)

“When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets: then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.” (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)

Indeed but that was written 2000 ish years ago....

[SueEllen]

Indeed but that was written 2000 ish years ago....

Like most Abrahamic religious texts then.

[NotAllThere]

Like most Abrahamic religious texts then.

Only the New Testament really. Deuteronomy was probably compiled around 500BC. The Koran about 600AD.

Some fundamentalist Christians seem to like to go for wife spanking. Although they deny it, it does seem like a Christian bondage network.

Maybe the Hizb ut-Tahrir should really be known as the Islamic bondage network?

[darmstadt]

Wife spanking, tied up in chains...them religious people know how to have a good time

Beautiful Surrender: 13 ‘Godly’ Christian Wives Explain Why They Submit To Their Husbands | Thought Catalog