Man, I couldn't stand that character.
Posted on 06/13/2007 3:45:35 AM PDT by theothercheek
Imams and religious scholars interpret the Koran and the teachings of Muhammad to issue fatwas that guide the faithful on matters of Sharia law. The New York Times reports that in Egypt, there is growing concern that "too many fatwas are being issued, and that many of them rely on ideology more than learning. … government-appointed arbiters of Islamic standards say the fatwa free-for-all has led to the promotion of extremism and intolerance." Case in point: The breast-feeding fatwa.
About a month ago, religious scholar Izat Atiyah issued a fatwa that unmarried men and women can be together at work only if the woman breast-feeds each of her male colleagues five times to establish familial ties. His "reasoning":
"Breast-feeding an adult puts an end to the problem of the private meeting, and does not ban marriage. … A woman at work can take off the veil or reveal her hair in front of someone whom she breast-fed."
The mass media of the region ridiculed the ruling relentlessly, until Atiyah was suspended from his job as a department head at the Foundation of Religion College of Al Azhar University. He later withdrew the fatwa on the grounds that it was a "bad interpretation of a particular case."
No argument from The Stiletto. First, the fatwa betrays a profound ignorance of how the female body works: A woman who has not recently given birth cannot produce breast milk. Second, even if a woman had recently given birth and was lactating – which is completely outside cultural norms, considering she is unmarried and would likely be the victim of an honor killing as soon as her pregnancy became apparent – how could she produce enough breast milk to feed all her male colleagues and her baby? Third, by what stretch of the imagination is an unmarried woman’s modesty compromised if a man sees her uncovered hair, but not if he sees (and suckles) her uncovered breast?
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/11/news/fatwa.php
“A fatwa free-for-all in the Islamic world”
By Michael Slackman
Published: June 11, 2007
ARTICLE SNIPPET: “CAIRO: First came the breast-feeding fatwa: It declared that the Islamic restriction on unmarried men and women being together could be lifted at work if the woman breast-fed her male colleagues five times. Then came the urine fatwa: It said that drinking the urine of the Prophet Muhammad was deemed a blessing.”
ARTICLE SNIPPET: “”We were very angered when we heard about the Danish cartoons concerning our Prophet,” wrote Galal Amin in the newspaper Al Masry Al Yom, referring to the 2005 publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad that caused an international uproar. “However, these two fatwas are harming our Islamic religion and our Prophet more than the cartoons.””
Only Islam can come up with such retardedness.
"The New York Times reports that in Egypt, there is growing concern that "too many fatwas are being issued, and that many of them rely on ideology more than learning. … government-appointed arbiters of Islamic standards say the fatwa free-for-all has led to the promotion of extremism and intolerance."
Are they suggesting that at one time fatwa's made sense? I wonder if the NYT's can elaborate on this a bit, and give some examples of common sense fatwas.
Perhaps the "kill Rushdie" fatwa was just and made sense, or the kill the Norwegian publisher fatwa is just, or the fatwa Mohammad made to be at war with all mankind till either the entire world belongs to Allah, or the last day arrives, which BTW was supposed to have happened in the year 800 or there about according to Moe's one and only "prophacy".
It would be interesting to see some journalistic investigation on the NYT's part into the history of Islam and the fatwa's pronounced since it's birth. It would be interesting to see just how many the NYT don't publish in it's attempt to make Islam look good.
I won't hold my breath to see this in next weeks NYT's lesson/ sermon on Islam.
since this seems to be a weekly feature, perhaps they should call it "the NYT's call to prayer"
IHT is owned by the NYT and published this article first - the article in both papers is identical or nearly so. Political Mavens/Jewish World Review offers news-based op-eds, so this post from PM/JWR uses the NYT article for context and then adds commentary.
It would seem that in the religion of peace ,every peckerhead with a Koran is Pope and allowed to issue edicts.
The edicts called fatwa’s govern until some other peckerwood decides they dont make sense.
Actually, if you read the NYT article - or the identical IHT article Cindy posted a link to - none of the fatwas are based on common sense, and some of them have very tragic results. This particluar fatwa was ridiculous, but what about the family of a 9-year old adopted boy who told they must put him out of their home because the wife had not given birth to or breastfed him and could not share her home with him because he was an unrelated male. It almost makes you feel sorry for these people. Maybe that’s why they become suicide bombers - they can’t think of another way out of the straightjacket that is their religion.
Gee, I wonder how upset Galal amin would be if all of Mohammads stupid fatwas were regularly published, such as how to wipe you butt with stones, what the devil does in your nose and ears while you sleep, green jars, Camel urine, black cumin, sex with animals, blacks denied entry into Mohammads brothel in the sky, predestination (which pretty much makes any Islamic rituals and rules null and void) along with other stupid things Old Moe was shown by his pal Allah, such as the sun setting in muddy ponds, it's seasonal wardrobe, the chariot it rides around in pulled by angels, a flat earth, which is on the back of a fish which is on a rock which is on a cow, and of course an entire giant city 7 miles above earth.
This is not true.
At 11:30 one recent morning, a young woman entered and sat in the chair opposite him. She held her son, about 4, on her knee as she explained that her husband had married another woman (four wives are allowed in Islam) and that the new wife was only 18. “He said he would spend five nights with her and one with me,” the woman complained. “Can I ask for a divorce?”
Under Islam, the sheik advised, all wives must be treated equally. So if she could not work the matter out “peacefully, then yes, she could ask for a divorce.”
Ongoing breast milk production occurs with levels of pregnancy-related hormones that are in the body at sufficient concentration to induce lactation. When a woman is already breast feeding a two year old (i.e., not recently having given birth) she maintains lactation because breastfeeding keeps enough of the hormone in her body; she can even wet nurse someone else’s child. (In any case, I have never been pregnant, and my breasts have never produced milk.)
Partly. The ruling still assumes it is OK to have four wives.
ping
In other words, authority figure peckerheads, not random peckerheads.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Aha-—but peckerheads none the less.
Man, I couldn't stand that character.
Chinese used virgins as wet nurses for their royal babies. Apparently with enough stimulation, (sucking), any mature female can produce milk. Mothers of adopted newborns are now being encouraged to try to breastfeed their new babies.
True, but modern science has found a slightly easier way using doses of chorionic gonadotropin and prolactin, both pregnancy related hormones.
If a woman is given the hormone in high doses she can breastfeed an adopted infant. But I need proof that “virgins” breastfed babies in ancient China at a time when supplemental hormones had not yet been invented.
Lactation can be induced with hormonal supplements.
Yes, once a woman has been pregnant, produced a child, she can breast feed for years as long as she's being milked.
That's how dairy farms work. The cow is "freshened" delivers the calf which is taken away immediately, and she stays on the milk machine thereafter. Eventually however, the heifers milk production will decrease after about 4 years or so, and she is allowed to dry up and be "re- freshened".
With humans, a similar thing happens, after 4- 5 years, milk production dries up, requiring a 're-freshening'. obviously, this varies from woman top woman.
I've never heard of a woman producing milk just from stimulation however. You'd think prostitutes would have divulged this if that were true.
Perhaps it's possible if a woman has recently given birth to re- establish milk production. back to the wierd Muslim practices, a Muslim womans husband is entitled to her breast milk if he so desires it. It's a sick twisted cult. But heck, if Mohammad said it's ok, then it is. After all, he's a fine example to follow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.