I mean, I literally stated “NOT ISLAM” in the part you shared. there’s no need to clarify “no sharia” as if I suggested that as an option. I put it that way specifically so no spergs would be like “you think Islam is great and want us to become Muslims?” and yet here we are, as if my statement needed more clarification in that regard more than what I already said.
You need to clarify which “tradition” we’d need to follow since tradition is different from place to place just as much now as it was pre-1900. Surely some western society’s were semi-progressive with allowing women to have a voice and influence in society, France was probably fairly progressive like that, while other places were probably very restrictive….that’s all debatable.
The only thing that needed to be clarified in my statement is “how restrictive would you prefer society to be toward women? I think women should be able to choose the man they want to marry but beyond that, they shouldn’t have a say in anything else aside from basic family matters, nothing that would impact the family in a serious way, and definitely no say when it comes to policy that will impact society at large. I don’t support stoning women over minor transgressions like they do in Islam, but I do think backtalk from a wife or kids should be met with physical repercussions, not severe, but enough to remind them who leads the family and makes the decisions. A husband should be able to restrict which people their wife has as friends, some women are a very bad influence you don’t want in your wife’s life. idk if I support throwing a woman’s ass in a looney bin and moving on with life like she never existed just because she talked back a few times or whatever, or because the man found a more attractive woman to shack up with, that did happen in the late 1800’s to early 1900’s in the U.S., seems very cruel.
I mean, I literally stated “NOT ISLAM” in the part you shared. there’s no need to clarify “no sharia” as if I suggested that as an option. I put it that way specifically so no spergs would be like “you think Islam is great and want us to become Muslims?” and yet here we are, as if my statement needed more clarification in that regard more than what I already said.
You need to clarify which “tradition” we’d need to follow since tradition is different from place to place just as much now as it was pre-1900. Surely some western society’s were semi-progressive with allowing women to have a voice and influence in society, France was probably fairly progressive like that, while other places were probably very restrictive….that’s all debatable.
The only thing that needed to be clarified in my statement is “how restrictive would you prefer society to be toward women? I think women should be able to choose the man they want to marry but beyond that, they shouldn’t have a say in anything else aside from basic family matters, nothing that would impact the family in a serious way, and definitely no say when it comes to policy that will impact society at large. I don’t support stoning women over minor transgressions like they do in Islam, but I do think backtalk from a wife or kids should be met with physical repercussions, not severe, but enough to remind them who leads the family and makes the decisions. A husband should be able to restrict which people their wife has as friends, some women are a very bad influence you don’t want in your wife’s life. idk if I support throwing a woman’s ass in a looney bin and moving on with life like she never existed just because she talked back a few times or whatever, or because the man found a more attractive woman to shack up with, that did happen in the late 1800’s to early 1900’s in the U.S., seems very cruel.
I was agreeing and amplifying, bro. So many people going on about "White sharia" when all we have to do is look to our own ancestors.