I am a Muslim Woman

November 21, 2001 | Furi Setio Rini

[Ronin]

Hello,

My name is Furi Setio Rini and I am a Muslim woman. I am 20 years old and live in Jakarta, Indonesia. I am attending my third year of medical school at Trisatki University. My friend, Ronin, asked me to write this because he is very disturbed about the hatred of Islam that he is seeing on your board.

What can I say about me? Well, I think I am an average Indonesian girl. I like movies and music. I love to shop for new clothes. Sometimes I eat too much. I do not like the music that is too loud. I don't like politics and I don't understand them.

I have to laugh when I hear western people talk about Muslim women. Somehow they think that all of us are beaten by men and treated like animals. If you had ever seen my father, my brothers and me, running away from my mother when she was angry, you would know how silly that is.

I have never worn a veil. I wear make up and I use lipstick. Except on the days I go to Mosque. On those days I clean myself as much as I can. I do not believe that it makes much difference to God, but I want him to see me with my true face, and heart.

I have two brothers. One of them is older, the other is younger than me. I guess that they are like brothers everywhere. Sometimes I love them. Sometimes I hate them. Sometimes I wish I could kill them. But no, that is a lie. Even when I think I hate them, I love them. They are my brothers, my family. I love and respect my father and my mother. I adore my father and hope to find a husband just like him.

I have not been kissed yet. And I have not been held as a woman wants to be held. Yes, I want it. Yes, I dream about it. But I can wait until I find the man I will marry. And no -- it will not be a marriage arranged by my parents. I will choose my husband, and he will choose me. We will marry because we love each other and want to spend the rest of our lives with each other. God willing.

I am studying to be a doctor. It is my best dream and ambition to be a doctor in a small village where doctors are rare. I want to be able to help the most common people of my country. I want to make life better for them. I want to bring happy and healthy babies to loving mothers and proud fathers. I want to give comfort to the old people who have so much to teach us. I want to share my love with true and real results.

I am not perfect. I am quite lazy sometimes and I have to force myself to studies on days when it is too hot, or at times when there are so many other interesting things to do. But this is a story about Muslim women, so maybe I should talk about that a little. What is Islam to me? This is a question that is very hard for me to answer. Islam is in my blood. I pray to God each day. I ask for health and happiness for my family, my friends and my country. More than that I cannot say. I love God and I pray to Him daily. . Is that any different from you?

I pray to God each day for wisdom. But the newspapers and the television and the radio shows me nothing but images I do not want to see. I can't stand the pictures I see.

I hate war. I hate it! I hate it! I hate it!

I hate it almost as much as I hate pediatrics class. Not because I hate newborn babies, I love them. I want my own babies. But, I hate learning about the illnesses and the horrible conditions that can happen when a baby gets sick.

My heart cries. Sometimes, just opening the textbook is a horror. To see a stillborn baby makes a small death inside me. But I must learn, because if I cannot learn to treat them and make them well, more babies may die. I cannot think of anything worse.

I think that most Indonesian girls are like me. And, most Indonesian boys are like boys everywhere. They like cars and sports. They play music too loud. When they think they are so cool and exciting, they are usually very boring. The television and radio you see is not showing you the proper vision of my country or my people. We live and we love. We go to restaurants, movies, and clubs.

I do not drink alcohol, but I do not find that a hardship. (I did have a glass of red wine once. It did not taste very good.) My father and my brother smoke cigarettes, but I don't. No, we do not eat pork.

Men say that the words of God are in the Holy Quran, the Christian Bible and in the Jewish books. I do not know about that. I read the Holy Quran and try to live my life in the teachings that it contains. But inside my heart I know the only commandment of God is love. I love God. And I know that God is love.

So, this is my testament. It is not very profound.

I am a Muslim woman. I love God. God is love. I love you all.

Furi Setio Reni

[KanghaRue]

Unforunately, the things you mentioned are serious problems with Islam...that have little to do with the Quran.

The Quran never encourages meaningless prayer. If some Muslims do this...it's because they are following an empty, ritualized faith that they probably know little about.

The Quran also never mentions anything about women being ritually impure during menstruation. (2:222 is about not having sex with menstruating women...for health reasons as well as the fact that women are frequently in pain during this time)

It's very likely that the Muslims picked up this tradition from the Jews, who I believe DO have a concept of women being ritually impure during menstruation. Hinduism and Zoroastrianism also have menstrual taboos.

It's interesting that there are many ahadith on the subject...some quite interesting:

Book 003, Number 0587: 'A'isha reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said to me: Get me the mat from the mosque. I said: I am menstruating. Upon this he remarked: Your menstruation is not in your hand.

There are others like this as well:

Book 003, Number 0591: 'A'isha reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) would recline in my lap when I was menstruating, and recite the Qur'an.

I'm skeptical of the ahadith...since they were collected so many years after Muhammed...but these go against the grain. They are not what we expect from a Middle-Eastern culture of the time...as they actually go against what was commonly practiced. Ex. Aisha was reluctant to enter the mosque while menstruating. There would be little reason to manufacture them to lend authority to someone's personal desires etc. There are also other ahadith that report the Jews getting angry at these new ideas...and saying, "This man does not want to leave anything we do without opposing us in it." (I will provide the entire quote if you're interested)

Divorce is not supposed to be the say it three times and you're out stuff. It's supposed to be a rather lengthy procedure involving three periods. This is another distortion of the Quran.

Re: Only Muslim men marrying outside the religion - Some Muslims are actually arguing that this may even be a distortion of the Quran. I will try to find their arguments for you if you're interested.

Re: adultry - "The woman or the man guilty of adultry or fornication - flog each of them with a hundred stripes" (24:2)

I find the following one of the most interesting passages related to this subject:

"Let no man guilty of adultery or fornication marry any but a woman similarly guilty, or an unbeliever" (24:3)

In other words, the macho idea of men sowing their oats and then getting a chance to marry a virgin is given a death sentence with this passage.

Or how about this:

"And for those who launch a charge against their spouses, and have no evidence but their own - their solitary evidence can be received if they bear witness four times by God that they are solemnly telling the truth; and the fifth oath should be that they invoke the curse of God on themselves if they lie."

"But it would avert the punishment from the wife, if she bears witness four times by God that her husband is lying; and the fifth should be that she solemnly invokes the wrath of God on herself if her accuser is telling the truth"
(24:6-9)

So, the husband can accuse the wife of infidelity, but the wife's oath trumps her husband's.

These are all pretty remarkable ideas for a book that everyone's saying is so terrible. The fact is...it's the people who are misrepresenting the book that are evil..not the book itself.

[KanghaRue]

Unforunately, the things you mentioned are serious problems with Islam...that have little to do with the Quran.

The Quran never encourages meaningless prayer. If some Muslims do this...it's because they are following an empty, ritualized faith that they probably know little about.

The Quran also never mentions anything about women being ritually impure during menstruation. (2:222 is about not having sex with menstruating women...for health reasons as well as the fact that women are frequently in pain during this time)

It's very likely that the Muslims picked up this tradition from the Jews, who I believe DO have a concept of women being ritually impure during menstruation. Hinduism and Zoroastrianism also have menstrual taboos.

It's interesting that there are many ahadith on the subject...some quite interesting:

Book 003, Number 0587: 'A'isha reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said to me: Get me the mat from the mosque. I said: I am menstruating. Upon this he remarked: Your menstruation is not in your hand.

There are others like this as well:

Book 003, Number 0591: 'A'isha reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) would recline in my lap when I was menstruating, and recite the Qur'an.

I'm skeptical of the ahadith...since they were collected so many years after Muhammed...but these go against the grain. They are not what we expect from a Middle-Eastern culture of the time...as they actually go against what was commonly practiced. Ex. Aisha was reluctant to enter the mosque while menstruating. There would be little reason to manufacture them to lend authority to someone's personal desires etc. There are also other ahadith that report the Jews getting angry at these new ideas about menstruation...and saying, "This man does not want to leave anything we do without opposing us in it." (I will provide the entire quote if you're interested)

Divorce is not supposed to be the say it three times and you're out stuff. It's supposed to be a rather lengthy procedure involving three periods. This is another distortion of the Quran.

Re: Only Muslim men marrying outside the religion - Some Muslims are actually arguing that this may even be a distortion of the Quran. I will try to find their arguments for you if you're interested.

Re: adultery - "The woman or the man guilty of adultery or fornication - flog each of them with a hundred stripes" (24:2)

I find the following one of the most interesting passages related to this subject:

"Let no man guilty of adultery or fornication marry any but a woman similarly guilty, or an unbeliever" (24:3)

In other words, the macho idea of men sowing their oats and then getting a chance to marry a virgin is given a death sentence with this passage.

Or how about this:

"And for those who launch a charge against their spouses, and have no evidence but their own - their solitary evidence can be received if they bear witness four times by God that they are solemnly telling the truth; and the fifth oath should be that they invoke the curse of God on themselves if they lie."

"But it would avert the punishment from the wife, if she bears witness four times by God that her husband is lying; and the fifth should be that she solemnly invokes the wrath of God on herself if her accuser is telling the truth"
(24:6-9)

So, the husband can accuse the wife of infidelity, but the wife's oath trumps her husband's.

These are all pretty remarkable ideas for a book that everyone's saying is so terrible. The fact is...it's the people who are misrepresenting the book that are evil..not the book itself.

[KanghaRue]

Sorry for posting this twice. I accidently hit "post" when I meant to hit "preview".

[freefly]

"Now please ask Ronin and his Islamic friend to comment on the thousands of civilian lives taken on 9/11."

As soon as you comment on the civilian lives that WE took in our Kosovo "action" (for instance).
(Or maybe since THOSE civilians were "collateral damage" you find it acceptable?
-I WILL be surprised if you actually supported clinton's actions.)

What nobody likes to admit is that -right or wrong- these people considered the "war" to have been started LONG before 9/11.
The people that recruited them pointed to US actions around the world and used them (once again -right or wrong-)
to justify making war on us.
Since they have no F-16's or B-52's at their disposal, they used what they could get.
Their actions were right in line with the teachings of the CIA's School of the Americas for guerilla warfare.
(Good job boys, too bad your foresight didn't go beyond next week...)
They didn't have a problem targeting civilians any more than you do.

Normally I am in agreement with you here on FR.
But the average 20 year old girl here in America doesn't have much more to say about Kosovo than this young lady did about 9/11.
She was just a nice kid trying to explain that our pre-conceptions about Muslim women are not always correct.
Looks like all too many people want to take out their anger on her.
It IS easier than addressing the real issues.

"Forgive me if I now lack sympathy if citizens get hit in the current conflict.
I don't care how many of "them" we take out."

EXACTLY the rational that the 9/11 hijackers used.

[MizSterious]

What liberal turnip truck did you just fall off of? Innocent Afghan citizens? Please spare me. Innocent they might be, but they are now caught in a war, in case you missed the news since 9/11. Flash: people die in wars. If you don't want a war, don't fly your planes into our buildings. As of 9/11, this country had done nothing to provoke the terrorists, except, of course, for just being here in the first place. Well, Afghanistan has harbored these thugs for years, and now they're paying the price. Although, in all truth, fewer Afghan civilians are dying than European civilians in WWII.

[freefly]

"What liberal turnip truck did you just fall off of?"

I believe in questioning government actions and pointing out when the consequences of those actions start showing up.
Letting your government run wild without questioning it is what the liberals like to do (when it comes to domestic social programs).
And what all too many conservatives like to do when it comes to international affairs.
Both big-government liberals and big-government conservatives ride around on that big government turnip truck.
I don't ride around on it at all.
Enjoy your company?

"Innocent Afghan citizens?"

Yes.

"Please spare me."

You were.

"Innocent they might be, but they are now caught in a war,"

Sound familiar? It should.
It's what happened to the civilians that were at ground zero on 9/11.

"Flash: people die in wars."

Good reason to at least TRY to avoid them.

"If you don't want a war, don't fly your planes into our buildings."

Good advice, but I have news for you: they didn't. None of the hijackers were Afghans.
FYI: the Afghan people are being "ruled" by a group of religious fanatics that the CIA
brought to that country and turned loose after using them as cannon fodder to fight the Soviets.
If we hadn't done that, then the Taliban wouldn't have gotten into power in the 1st place.

"As of 9/11, this country had done nothing to provoke the terrorists,"

The 60+ KNOWN CIA political assassinations around the world could EASILY be considered provocation.
As with the crap that clinton pulled (or have you already forgotten the "asprin factory" to name just ONE thing?).
We don't even need to get into our poking around with the Arab countries over the last 4 decades. Not to mention Israel.
As I said, right or wrong, there are PLENTY of things that our country has done that
COULD be considered provocation by people that DID use them to justify 9/11.
There are plenty of additional examples out there. Go educate yourself.
(But only if you have the guts to challenge what you currently believe.)

"Well, Afghanistan has harbored these thugs for years, and now they're paying the price."

They "harbored" them because we kept sending those thugs money and food that they used to keep themselves in power.
And yes, they ARE paying the price.
As have we.

"Although, in all truth, fewer Afghan civilians are dying than European civilians in WWII."

True. But killing lot more civilians in past wars doesn't justify killing fewer now.

You've done a good job of showing that (at least with this issue) you really have no interest in facts, your mind is made up.
You've also done a good job of ignoring the fact that you use the same justification for your attitude toward killing civilians as the terrorists did.
As I said earlier, hating everyone for the actions of a few LEADS to what we saw here.
Instead of taking it to those responsible, the terrorists used a shotgun approach and didn't care about the collateral damage.
You seem to want to make the same mistake and then get indignant about the consequences...
just like the liberal socialists that like to think effects are not connected to causes.
Keep in mind, that will insure that this "war on terrorism" will never end, (just like our other "wars on -------").
Of course, governments LOVE problems that justify their intervention into the affairs of their citizens.
(Big never-ending problems are justification for big-govenrment socialism,
along with the high taxes and job security and elite power that go along with it.)
They also love the blind cheerleaders that allow them to get away with it.

[solzhenitsyn]

yianni, you ended your ant-Muslim rant with the words "Mecca delenda est" (Mecca must be destroyed).

If you have no moral qualms about calling for the destruction of a city of over half a million men, women, children, and infants, please let me pose this question: You know that with many millions of Muslims having access to the internet, it's only a matter of time before your remarks or others like them will be broadcast all over the Muslim world by those wishing to stir up hatred toward our country. Do you honestly believe that if your words were known to all of mankind, that it would help our war effort, and make our troops safer as they operate, very outnumbered, in countries such as Afghanistan?

[MizSterious]

Again, let me interject with a little bit of logic--although it might get in the way of your logic-impaired thesis. Please repeat after me: WE DID NOT ATTACK THEM FIRST. THEY ATTACKED US. See, when you walk up to a guy and punch him in the nose, you shouldn't be so surprised when he takes offense and punches back. And if you're with friends, and he's with friends, some of those friends might get hurt in the process. "Collateral damage" I believe it's called. So please, get back onto your liberal turnip truck, and stay there until you can get a clue.

[MizSterious]

Um, does it upset the Muslims when their hateful screed on the internet is seen by us? I doubt it. They hate us whether or not they have a good reason. They hate us primarily because we're us--they covet our lifestyle, but if they can't have it, they'll do their best to destroy it. They can't have it because their repressive religion won't permit them to have it. The sooner we understand that, the sooner we'll win this war on terrorism.

[solzhenitsyn]

Re my reply 307 above: This was in response to yianni's reply 105 on this thread. In this same thread, I said something to the effect that we have too many Muslim-haters on Free Republic, and I while I don't want to mischaracterize your responses, I think it's fair to say that all of you took exception to that.

My question for you is: If we don't have too many Muslim-haters, do you feel that we have too few, or just about the right number for you? How many more would we have to have before it would be too many?

It saddens me that we can have all kinds of hateful messages here (such as this fellow calling for the destruction of Mecca) and no one lets out a peep, but if someone points out that we have a problem, the best some can do is to shoot the messenger.

Do you guys ever confront people like yianni, or do reserve all your fury and malice for those who complain about them?

Also, do think that remarks like yianni's help our war effort and promote the safety of our troops? If not, what are you willing to do about it?

I definitely do not mean to include freebilly in the above mention of "fury and malice". I believe he was the one who merely disagreed with me, in a perfectly civilized way. I respect and appreciate that.

[solzhenitsyn]

I'm about to go on the road again, so if any of you respond to my messages above (307 and 311), I'm sorry, but I won't see your responses or be able to reply to them for some time.

[freefly]

"WE DID NOT ATTACK THEM FIRST. THEY ATTACKED US."

You and I might look at it that way, but it's NOT the way they see it.
A fact that you continually choose to ignore in spite of numerous examples.
A FACT that, IGNORED, led directly to the 9/11 bombing.

"See, when you walk up to a guy and punch him in the nose, you shouldn't be so surprised when he takes offense and punches back."

That's right. And, the way that they see it, we punched their friends in the nose numerous times.
So they played some "catch up". Meanwhile, you sit there -surprised!- and say "we never did a THING!".
Get a clue yourself, or just ignore the facts and be surprised the next time too.
(Although you should keep in mind, ignoring them will end up with more civilians -on both sides- dead.
That doesn't bother nut-ball fanatics like the Taliban, but it should bother you as an American.
We ARE supposed to think differently than they do, although few appear to make the effort.)

(Note: Some people have been expecting something of this nature for some time... federal government included...
or do you think they had the "patriot act" legislation drawn up last year as practice? Why was it expected? THINK about it!)

"So please, get back onto your liberal turnip truck, and stay there until you can get a clue."

As I pointed out, it isn't "liberal" to face the facts. Quite the opposite.
You might like to think that 9/11 happened "out of the blue", but that isn't true, no matter how many facts you choose to ignore.
So YOU climb back on the turnip truck with your liberal friends that also cannot understand the idea of cause and effect.
Make sure you take your "head in the sand" attitude with you.
It lets you fit right in with them.

[MizSterious]

I don't care a flying fig what the insane terrorists think--I was stating absolute facts. WE DID NOT START THIS WAR. However, we just might finish it. (In a way they don't like.) I will, however, let you have the last word, because frankly, I'm starting to see the wisdom in the saying that you should never try to argue logic with an idiot. I'm looking at facts, you're looking at new-age crystal bunny touchy feely junk. There can never be a meeting of the minds if one of them isn't using theirs.

[freeforall]

Could you give me some specific actions that America has done that would "cause" the attack on WTC.

[freefly]

clinton's bombing of the "asprin factory" is a single good example.
Believe me, any action that a "terrorist" government can use to show the US as being out of control IS used in just that way.
Whether true or not.

[freeforall]

I think that lame action was a respone to the embassy bombings.Clinton as CIC was to calculate all military action for maximizing domestic political gain. The message sent also was don't bomb our embassies. Again none of these actions by terrorist are in self defence. Arab World Poverty -- Whose Fault? By Larry Elder (November 18, 2001) [CAPITALISMMAGAZINE.COM] "Muslims love to live in the U.S. but also love to hate it. Many openly claim that the U.S. is a terrorist state but they continue to live in it. Their decision to live here is testimony that they would rather live here than anywhere else. As an Indian Muslim, I know for sure that nowhere on earth, including India, will I get the same sense of dignity and respect that I have received in the U.S. No Muslim country will treat me as well as the U.S. has. If what happened on Sept. 11 had happened in India, the biggest democracy, thousands of Muslims would have been slaughtered in riots on mere suspicion and there would be another slaughter after confirmation. But in the U.S., bigotry and xenophobia has been kept in check by media and leaders ...

[freefly]

"I don't care a flying fig what the insane terrorists think--"

You should. Ignoring how those people think directly resulted in 9/11.
Continuing to ignore it could well result in more of the same
(or do you think that bombing a bunch of Afghans and taking out bin Ladin is going to stop the threat?
Maybe you should go back and listen to Bush's speech).

"I was stating absolute facts."

No you are not. You are seeing only what you choose and ignoring the rest.

"WE DID NOT START THIS WAR. However, we just might finish it. (In a way they don't like.)"

Judging from the Patriot act, I doubt that we will like it much in the long run either.

"I'm starting to see the wisdom in the saying that you should never try to argue logic with an idiot."

True, but I keep trying. Once in awhile some of them open their eyes.

"I'm looking at facts,"

You are looking at some of them, but carefully ignoring the rest that conflict with your world view.

"you're looking at new-age crystal bunny touchy feely junk."

The consequences of clinton's excesses around the world are "new-age crystal bunny touchy feely junk."?
Not in my book. Not when they are used by religious nut cases to con their followers into flying airplanes
into buildings in an effort to strike back at supposed American excesses.
"touchy feely junk" is indulging in a "kill em all and let G*d sort them out" mentality.
Winning the battle that way feels good, but the long-term consequences suck.
Being smart and winning the war is far better in the long run.
Or do you just like the idea of genocide of any group that can possibly harbor potential terrorists?
(Careful what you say, In Phoenix, We're Terrorists!)

"There can never be a meeting of the minds if one of them isn't using theirs."

You got that right.
Try getting past your indignation about someone having the nerve to attack us
and start figuring out why they might want to and how to attack the ROOT cause.
That way you might just be able to prevent it from happening again.
(Clue: collateral damage results in more people who are willing to be missle guidance systems or "smart" bomb fuses.)
Of course, if you just like hating people and bombing civilians in revenge for the actions of their government, then drive right on.
It works for the Taliban.
(although not very well in the long run)

[freeforall]

Thier is no ROOT cause to terrorism it is irrational and psychopathic and therefore not open to reason.It would have done us no good to understand the root causes of Nazism.The sole purpose was to destroy it and reform that society so that they will never pose a future threat.

[freeforall]

I agree all "Causes" of this terrorist attack now mean nothing.They chose to pull the trigger, just as Hitler had greivences against the British and the French they became irrelavant when he invaded Poland.