How to manage your wife

[Rufus2012 175]

Apparently, the speaker is an imam in the Seattle area.

http://www.popmodal.com/video/7382/US-Imam-Allah-is-clear-you-can-hit-your-wife

If I were to advocate hitting people, would I not be facing arrest?

Edited October 31, 2011 by WaitingInSeattle

[luckytxn 2,265]

Apparently, the speaker is an imam in the Seattle area.

http://www.popmodal....n-hit-your-wife

If I were to advocate hitting people, would I not be facing arrest?

You would be facing arrest if you did hit someone. Pretty sure you can advocate it all you want.

[SMR 368]

You would be facing arrest if you did hit someone. Pretty sure you can advocate it all you want.

Not a lawyer so I'm not going to get technical, but I'm pretty sure this is not true. Try advocating murder. You wouldn't get far.

[slim 1,530]

Not a lawyer so I'm not going to get technical, but I'm pretty sure this is not true. Try advocating murder. You wouldn't get far.

Advocating is not illegal.

Planning or actively encouraging ("Here's a string. I'll wait out in the car while you choke her out.") is illegal. Simply saying, "dude, you should off that b!tch." is not illegal. It is your opinion only.

Religion crosses that threshold sometimes since a religious leader is "actively" encouraging something. But, at the end of the day, it's still words only.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Advocating is not illegal.

Planning or actively encouraging ("Here's a string. I'll wait out in the car while you choke her out.") is illegal. Simply saying, "dude, you should off that b!tch." is not illegal. It is your opinion only.

Religion crosses that threshold sometimes since a religious leader is "actively" encouraging something. But, at the end of the day, it's still words only.

Slim, that is false. Check out the Brandenburg vs. Ohio decision. Advocating violence or criminal is not protected speech.

(1) speech can be prohibited if it is "directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action" and (2) it is "likely to incite or produce such action."

Ultimately, it will come down to the second part of that. How credible is the source and how receptive is the audience. David Duke isn't likely to arouse any substantive action if he's speaking to the NAACP. But some wingnut, speaking to a militia calling for bombings or to resist law enforcement, that would likely produce action, and thus not protected.

Edited October 31, 2011 by The_Dude

[slim 1,530]

AND is a key word in there. So is LIKELY. Both of those words end up making it highly subjective and not necessarily illegal.

There's a thin line between advocating by saying you agree with something and actually taking criminal action by directing people to do things. In the case of religious leaders (which also falls under protected speech provisions) they can share their beliefs without being criminal provided they base it on religious conotations and not action.

ETA - "god calls upon us to discipline our wives" versus "you need to go home right now and beat your wife."

Edited October 31, 2011 by slim

[The_Dude 1,142]

AND is a key word in there. So is LIKELY. Both of those words end up making it highly subjective and not necessarily illegal.

There's a thin line between advocating by saying you agree with something and actually taking criminal action by directing people to do things. In the case of religious leaders (which also falls under protected speech provisions) they can share their beliefs without being criminal provided they base it on religious conotations and not action.

ETA - "god calls upon us to discipline our wives" versus "you need to go home right now and beat your wife."

Wrong again Slim. If a religious figure is speaking to his congregation, they are more open to suggestion from someone whom they may consider a spiritual leader, someone who they would seek council from.

[sara..... 371]

at the risk of being flamed here there is something that is not understood or has never been talked about ........yes it says to indiscipline the wife........but what is not being said is it should not be with anything that wouldnt be like being hit by a feather......the Quran just like the Bible can be used for anything for an excuse to do damage

sara

[Sofiyya 1,687]

This guy's not advocating beating wives; he's explaining his understanding of a verse that seems to allow it. What he fails to mention in the clip is that there are numerous verses in the Quran that contradict beating wives. There is an entire chapter in the Quran where God (swt) admonishes Muhammad (pbuh) for being henpecked by his wives to the extent where they were beginning to interfere in his mission. Also, the Sunnah of the Prophet shows that he never did such a thing in modeling his own household.

Taking these considerations into perspective, there is much left out of the imam's explanation, but to say that he is advocating beatings is equivalent to saying that a pastor explaining Paul's directive in 1 Corinthians saying that Christian women must cover their hair in the presence of men because men are superior to women is advocating treating your wife like a inferior being. I'm sure that any knowledgeable Christian would note that there is a lot more to it than that.

[Fandango 1,440]

Advocating is not illegal.

Planning or actively encouraging ("Here's a string. I'll wait out in the car while you choke her out.") is illegal. Simply saying, "dude, you should off that b!tch." is not illegal. It is your opinion only.

Religion crosses that threshold sometimes since a religious leader is "actively" encouraging something. But, at the end of the day, it's still words only.

Tell that to al awlaki...

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

There's a Imam in Washington state? Wow that place really went to sh*t.

[Danno 1,228]

Look it's no secret many parts and cultures of the world endorse to one degree or another... physically correcting or punishing women.... why the outrage over "some Muslims" who might also find it except able?

That many are shocked by this reality is a sign of the Eurocentrism which still exists in the Western world.

[Rufus2012 175]

Taking these considerations into perspective, there is much left out of the imam's explanation, but to say that he is advocating beatings is equivalent to saying that a pastor explaining Paul's directive in 1 Corinthians saying that Christian women must cover their hair in the presence of men because men are superior to women is advocating treating your wife like a inferior being. I'm sure that any knowledgeable Christian would note that there is a lot more to it than that.

The fact is, this imam is in a position of leadership, and he is, perhaps by taking things out of context (let's face it, any religious book has its unsavory parts; although I've never read any of Jesus's words which advocate conquest) - but those in the audience may listen to him.

[slim 1,530]

Wrong again Slim. If a religious figure is speaking to his congregation, they are more open to suggestion from someone whom they may consider a spiritual leader, someone who they would seek council from.

So is he telling them to do something or is he saying, "this is what this religious scripture says?"

There's a thin line there.

the Quran just like the Bible can be used for anything for an excuse to do damage

Which is why it's highly subjective.

When we start holding religious leaders accountable for things like this we go down a very slippery slope.

Tell that to al awlaki...

A perfect example.

Direct action is illegal. Talking about something in general terms is not, especially when you're approaching the issue from a religious angle.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

How to beat your wife 101.