should married men be allowed to marry again ?? - Page 11

Originally posted by: *Woh Ajnabee*

You know, Labib, I have very little self-control. And more than that, I have no problems admitting my lack of self-control, which I think is ever worse. I did glimpse at the thread when it was first started or brought back to life (I can't remember which one), but stayed away after that. There was no way I could read the posts and not reply, but I was bored last night and couldn't take it anymore.

Ah, quite understandable.

Originally posted by: crazy_sunny

yeah a discussion is just as interesting at times than a debate esp in thought provoking topics being posted these days !

Completely seconded. Personally, I feel it is more interesting reading debates rather than actually participating in them, 'cause I, for one, can state it without a slightest bit of hesitation that I really do not like the experience that I have to go through while debating; it's excruciatingly difficult for me to keep my temper under control (especially when I am debating about things regarding human rights and stuffs that have a drastic impact on individual's civil rights and personal life) - something that is quite essential. But in a discussion we can all voice our views, without pulling each others legs. Though at times, debates are necessary for changing the environment and showing off our debating skills.

Originally posted by: mahikhan

Suppose my sister happens to be one of the unmarried women living in USA, or suppose your sister happens to be one of the unmarried women in USA. The only two options remaining for her are that she either marries a man who already has a wife or becomes public property. There is no other option. I have posed this question to hundreds of non-Muslims and all opted for the first. However a few smart people before accepting, said they would prefer their sisters to remain virgins.

What and no one thought of hooking up one woman with another? 😛

Originally posted by: ghina

i cant say exactly, but as far as i know, it is to be said that a man's sexual desire is highter compare to a womans. So inorder to fulfill his desire's in a rightful manner, to marry 4 women is allowed in islam. Because in islam to commit sex before marriage is a big sin. However, conditions being applied that one should only marry more than 1 if he can treat all the wifes equally, which i doubt a man can do.

Jesus! That is like so unfair. A man is only one use at a time. Women have the ability to multiple. Whats the point of his many wives with that logic. Give women more husbands, so when she is finished with one, he can recuperate and she can move onto the next.

[quote]Suppose my sister happens to be one of the unmarried women living in USA, or suppose your sister happens to be one of the unmarried women in USA. The only two options remaining for her are that she either marries a man who already has a wife or becomes public property.[/quote]

😕 I don't follow the logic. Why would she become public property? Either marry or become prostitute? Yeh kis duniya ki logic hai?

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

What and no one thought of hooking up one woman with another? 😛

Interesting, but not all women wants the company of another women, physically, emotionally, sexually, or psychologically. This commentary was given by an extremely intelligent but extremely pious Muslim, so it follows logically he wouldn't be thinking along the same line as yours. But to those of you who want it, you want it, go for it.

Originally posted by: PhoeniXof_Hades

Interesting, but not all women wants the company of another women, physically, emotionally, sexually, or psychologically. This commentary was given by an extremely intelligent but extremely pious Muslim, so it follows logically he wouldn't be thinking along the same line as yours. But to those of you who want it, you want it, go for it.

Zakir Naik? The same dude who says that "if you eat pig, you behave like pig" ? 🤪

Originally posted by: Kal El

😕 I don't follow the logic. Why would she become public property? Either marry or become prostitute? Yeh kis duniya ki logic hai?

Even I do not believe that this logic is applicable for today; it was applicable for the time when the female population had no rights (well, some did, but on an average, they had extremely lower rights compared with what men had, or what women have today), and they were totally dependent on their husband and family in law (they weren't educated either to live a life of their own, without the help of a husband). Of course, now that the world has been changed, women can live a life independently this logic is sounds pretty much stupid and irrelevant for the society we live in. The reason why I posted this was to show why the Quran allowed it (the Quran was written at a time when women had very less rights, and furthermore, most were incapable of earning a living for them self). I repeat, both polygamy and that logic was applicable for that time, and not today (though, if someone wishes to get into such an relationship, I wouldn't mind at the least). Surprisingly, even though Islam allows it, most Muslims are monogamous.

Originally posted by: Kal El

Zakir Naik? The same dude who says that "if you eat pig, you behave like pig" ? 🤪

I've no opinion on this guy; I haven't got the time to research upon him to come into a conclusion. I keep hearing conflicting and contradicting opinions about him.
Though, what you stated might be true, I would like to have a source.

Originally posted by: PhoeniXof_Hades

Interesting, but not all women wants the company of another women, physically, emotionally, sexually, or psychologically. This commentary was given by an extremely intelligent but extremely pious Muslim, so it follows logically he wouldn't be thinking along the same line as yours. But to those of you who want it, you want it, go for it.

It was tongue in cheek. He may have attempted to rationalize polygamy, but the logic is somewhat flawed in my opinion. Not that I have anything against polygamy or the sorts in any aspect. For example it states that an unmarried woman is either marry or be public property. I personally find that it is more warped and in an unpalatable line that a woman be deemed 'public property' for not having a husband.

On the logic that you provide, not many people desire the company of one solitary individual emotionally, sexually, or intellectually. Perhaps one person understands their feelings, another is sexually compatible and a third person connects with them intellectually for conversation. We may have another person who is just more fun to hang out with, and someone else who is a great drinking mate, and another who shares an obsession for the same video game. Based on that logically we all ought to live in swinging communes where everyone has at least one partner who fulfills one set of desires.

Originally posted by: PhoeniXof_Hades

I've no opinion on this guy; I haven't got the time to research upon him to come into a conclusion. I keep hearing conflicting and contradicting opinions about him.
Though, what you stated might be true, I would like to have a source.

It's from one of his lectures/presentations. I believe I saw it on TV once.