Muhammad did no such thing. Now whilst some scholars disput all accounts lets take the one that said the me were indeed killed and women and children enslaved The Banu Qurayza fate was ut to an independent arbitrator, the Aws. The Banu Qurayza agreed. The Aws and teh Qurayza appointed Saad as arbitrator (he wasa leading ma from the Aws. The sentece Saad passed was based on Deuteronomy (20:10-14) which states “And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword but the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee” It was Jewish law not Islamic law that gave the punishment to the Jews As for Saudi, it does not use Quran and Hadith and is a land of oppression according to Islamic law
a norse woman was, by law, under the authority of her husband or father. She had only limited freedom to dispose of property belonging to her. She was prohibited from participating in most political or governmental activities. She could not be a goði (chieftain). She could not be a judge. She could not be a witness. She could not speak at þing (assemblies)
So were/are Muslim women. Keep digging, pal. Quran (4:34) - "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them."
you need to post the proper translation and read the tafsir of that verse kid and you may learn summat This isnt slightly the same. A woman has rights over her fathers and her husbands wealth, they have no over hers at all. tell me are you sam shamoun?
Predictable as ****. Read the first line of that verse. On another note, what do you think the correct punishment for adultery, homosexuality and apostasy should be?
**** off predictable you just get any ****e that you think fits your argument. Noticed you ignored the Ban Qurayz stuff Its Sura Nisah verse 34, I know it well in arabic or english, happy to break down any of the arabic words you dont understand. nisah itself means woman, guess what it will be about? The words are protectors and maintainers of women. If he spends to maintain and support her then he is in charge of his household. Its this spending and maintaining that gives him certain authority. If he doesnt do that he has no authority. Certain authority doesnt mean he can do what he wants. He still has no rights over her wealth and inheritance etc. She has full rights over his Quran has given the punishment for those things, so has christianity and so has judaism. if you believe there is a god and you claim to be a follower of those religions then that is that.
You havent answered any of mine I said above if you claim to follow a religion then thats that. I am muslim, so Islamic punishments I have no issues with. Am sure as someone who has been happy to post verses and argue it you will know exactly the punishments the Quran has, so why the daft question?
Just your backwards views in general. If you think homosexuality, adultery and apostasy should be punished, let alone by death, that makes you a bigot. I don't know why I'm arguing with someone who believes in sky fairies ffs.
