I picked a subset of the topic because I didn't want to be writing all day long.
No, you didn't. Again, and again, NO SHE CANNOT INITIATE DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS. I showed you...again, you might want to review those posts.
Have you even done basic research? They even have specific words for wife-initiated divorce, khul' or haqq-i-faskh, depending on the situation. That's considering the wife wasn't smart enough to write divorce conditions into the marriage contract (like a Western pre-nup).
Studying it for 14 years? Judging by your posts, I'd like to say, I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.
At least I know a woman can divorce her husband.
What is your proof for the above assertation and why have we not heard of them before?
Here's some proof. Not we, but you haven't heard about them because a) they don't blow up buildings and b) you don't bother to research.
So, in other words, you're saying they may "pick and choose?"
Yes, they do, and they interpret them differently. Do you even know that there are different schools of jurisprudence in Islam? How much weight do you think a Shiite gives a Hadith with Aisha as the source?
No, absolutely false. Islamic law IS indeed based on the quran
The law is indeed based on the interpretation of the Quran, Hadith and Sunna. That interpretation will be done by those in power according to their idea of how things should be.
I'll give you a simple example: women being covered. Off the same text, different societies have different rules as to whether they should be covered and how much. You go from the liberal Turkey (not enforced) to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan (get beaten or worse). The Taliban remember the rule for covering, but forget the rule that you can't force her to do so.
This from the poster who claims islamic law isn't "so bad".
You are deliberately attempting to obscure the truth.
Under sharia, women CANNOT initiate divorce, and you know it. Women are treated unequally, and your verbal gymnastics attempting to claim otherwise have simply reinforced my statements.
I have done my research. You are in full taqiyya mode...
You:
"Here's some proof. Not we, but you haven't heard about them because a) they don't blow up buildings and b) you don't bother to research."
You've provided NO PROOF. While I cite texts and back up all I have stated, you submit....nothing.
It is clear you are a muslim who dislikes any scrutiny or troubling passages of your faith...
The following describes your tactics. Oh yes, they have too been used before, most unsuccessfully:
YOU: "Yes, they do, and they interpret them differently. Do you even know that there are different schools of jurisprudence in Islam? How much weight do you think a Shiite gives a Hadith with Aisha as the source?"
*"Some Muslims use the weak Hadith defense, because they approach Muhammad with their own wishful presuppositions. So, they automatically reject any Hadith that does not meet the standard of their uncritical assumptions"
*Now, it is true there were many Hadiths that were rejected by ancient traditional Muslim scholars. They rejected them because these traditions were fabricated (maudu’) for political reasons long after Muhammad died. But these were discarded long before the trusted collections were compiled.
Hmm, if a muslim rejects hadith antiRepub, it would make him a heretic, a blasphemer, and earn him a death sentence.
*"Many Muslims today are using what is called a “weak Hadith defense” to divert the criticism non-Muslims are heaping upon Muhammad based upon the behavior that is recorded in these ancient and traditional Islamic sources."
Which is what you've done.
Regarding all those muslims who don't accept the hadith...
It's crap...they do if they consider themselves muslims.
*". The Sahih Al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim collections are considered to be authentic historical records by orthodox Muslims. So, a weak Hadith defense is unjustified when these sources are used to critique Muhammad sayings and behavior."
"The law is indeed based on the interpretation of the Quran, Hadith and Sunna. That interpretation will be done by those in power according to their idea of how things should be."
No, absolutely false...islamic law in NOT based on the whims of individuals.
*"When a Hadith meets all the proper qualifications for a sahih Hadith, it must be accepted by all Muslims. A sahih Hadith is an obligatory Hadith—it is the Prophet’s Sunnah. It must be acted upon according to the consensus of the Muslim scholarship. The sahih Hadith are those used as the sources of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh). They are used as proof in cases involving Islamic Shari’ah law. They make our observance of Islam’s Five Pillars possible."
YOU: "They even have specific words for wife-initiated divorce, khul' or haqq-i-faskh, depending on the situation."
Ha! Is that what you think Khul' or haqq-i-faskh means? So your "scholarly information" of islam is based on the most hits on a google search.
Don't waste my time. You don't have a clue.
*The above is from the muslim website: http://www.muhammadanism.org/