C L O S E R

It is only rational and consistent to protect the rights of everyone including women by invoking the Islamic laws instead of resorting to secular arguments that are rooted in feminism. If secular values are the criteria then it makes little sense to interpret Islam to fit into the secular garb but far greater sense to simply abandon it. Why go for secular compatible Islam instead of pure secularism? It simply makes no sense. Unfortunately there are even feminists in Hijab along with their male apologists in leash, many of whom are also disguised as Islamic scholars with their beards and robes, are using Islamic texts to promote non-Islamic ideas like woman�s rights, gender equality as Islamic, wittingly or unwittingly. If a man or a woman has been denied their rights, we invoke the Islamic laws as remedy instead of viewing the problem as though it is rooted in gender differences.

Had Islam and Muslim men been the real oppressors of women, the feminist movement would have arisen from within the Islamic societies. Indeed, the origin of such movements perhaps reflects where the real oppression of women existed and still exists! No one can explain why Islam supposedly anti-Woman continues to attract more women than men. Both, logic and Islamic texts dictates that woman�s rights have no place in Islam, those who speak in its name has the worst track record in violating the rights of womankind. It is a political tool like the UN resolutions, employed selectively against opponents. Otherwise we would have seen it deployed in a consistent manner.

In response to the issue of women�s equality being pressed into the face of Islam, we as Muslim�s have to set our own agenda and not be baited by mischief makers who have a malignant intent towards Islam and Muslims. With this self inspection we must face truths about the broad experience of Muslim�s across the world and the variable application of the Islamic laws, which is causing problems.

Amina Abdul Wadud led a mix congregation of male and female Muslims in a Friday (Jumma) prayer for the first time in the 1500 years of Islamic history. Again the impetus for such acts emanates from the hostile secular environment. After the prayer, she are her clique stated that they were instilling gender equality and women�s rights. Ironically, Amina Abdul Wadud did that whilst wearing the Islamic headscarf (Hijab) which is considered by many to be at odds with gender equality and a symbol of the oppression of women!

Her claims of reinterpreting the text to establish �justice� for women displays her arrogance. Let us put aside the �evil� and impartial men. At the very beginnings of Islam there were the wives of the Prophet (SAW) with many other female personalities, followed by the successive generation of women scholars for centuries. Do we assume that they have all failed in their fundamental duty and hence overlooked their legitimate right to lead the Friday prayer of mix congregation? To the contrary segregation of prayers was established from the onset, as women were instructed to pray behind the men. If that is the case then how women can lead the men in prayer while the rest of the women are behind the men in the first place.

In any case, justice for Amina Abdul Wadud is not from within Islam but a reformed version that is in compliance to her preconceived secular values like gender equality; – the real arbiter. And not surprisingly she also favour homosexual marriages and detests the clear cut penal codes in the Quran. A clear act of apostasy!

Gender equality is only an example of the general drive by the moderate brigades to constantly prove the compatibility of Islam with secular values. If Islam is proven to be compatible to secular notions, what reasons remain than for adhering to Islam? Why not simply adopt the original yard stick of secularism instead of clinging on to the secular-compatible �Islam�. The exercise is very much an own goal scoring and completely folly. Given the choice between a genuine Rolls Royce and a close imitation it is well-known what most rational people would opt for.

The moderate brigade constantly shout about Women�s rights in Islam as a means to deflect criticisms emanating from the secular camp without once thinking about the credentials of those who are dispensing the criticisms. Do the critics have the right? To answer this question we need to examine their track record against what they preach. If they pass the test only then it makes sense to entertain their charges. Otherwise it is a pointless exercise to entertain the words of hypocrites.

It is only rational and consistent to protect the rights of everyone including women by invoking the Islamic laws instead of resorting to secular arguments that are rooted in feminism. If secular values are the criteria then it makes little sense to interpret Islam to fit into the secular garb but far greater sense to simply abandon it. Why go for secular compatible Islam instead of pure secularism? It simply makes no sense. Unfortunately there are even feminists in Hijab along with their male apologists in leash, many of whom are also disguised as Islamic scholars with their beards and robes, are using Islamic texts to promote non-Islamic ideas like woman�s rights, gender equality as Islamic, wittingly or unwittingly. If a man or a woman has been denied their rights, we invoke the Islamic laws as remedy instead of viewing the problem as though it is rooted in gender differences.

Had Islam and Muslim men been the real oppressors of women, the feminist movement would have arisen from within the Islamic societies. Indeed, the origin of such movements perhaps reflects where the real oppression of women existed and still exists! No one can explain why Islam supposedly anti-Woman continues to attract more women than men. Both, logic and Islamic texts dictates that woman�s rights have no place in Islam, those who speak in its name has the worst track record in violating the rights of womankind. It is a political tool like the UN resolutions, employed selectively against opponents. Otherwise we would have seen it deployed in a consistent manner.

In response to the issue of women�s equality being pressed into the face of Islam, we as Muslim�s have to set our own agenda and not be baited by mischief makers who have a malignant intent towards Islam and Muslims. With this self inspection we must face truths about the broad experience of Muslim�s across the world and the variable application of the Islamic laws, which is causing problems.

Amina Abdul Wadud led a mix congregation of male and female Muslims in a Friday (Jumma) prayer for the first time in the 1500 years of Islamic history. Again the impetus for such acts emanates from the hostile secular environment. After the prayer, she are her clique stated that they were instilling gender equality and women�s rights. Ironically, Amina Abdul Wadud did that whilst wearing the Islamic headscarf (Hijab) which is considered by many to be at odds with gender equality and a symbol of the oppression of women!

Her claims of reinterpreting the text to establish �justice� for women displays her arrogance. Let us put aside the �evil� and impartial men. At the very beginnings of Islam there were the wives of the Prophet (SAW) with many other female personalities, followed by the successive generation of women scholars for centuries. Do we assume that they have all failed in their fundamental duty and hence overlooked their legitimate right to lead the Friday prayer of mix congregation? To the contrary segregation of prayers was established from the onset, as women were instructed to pray behind the men. If that is the case then how women can lead the men in prayer while the rest of the women are behind the men in the first place.

In any case, justice for Amina Abdul Wadud is not from within Islam but a reformed version that is in compliance to her preconceived secular values like gender equality; – the real arbiter. And not surprisingly she also favour homosexual marriages and detests the clear cut penal codes in the Quran. A clear act of apostasy!

Gender equality is only an example of the general drive by the moderate brigades to constantly prove the compatibility of Islam with secular values. If Islam is proven to be compatible to secular notions, what reasons remain than for adhering to Islam? Why not simply adopt the original yard stick of secularism instead of clinging on to the secular-compatible �Islam�. The exercise is very much an own goal scoring and completely folly. Given the choice between a genuine Rolls Royce and a close imitation it is well-known what most rational people would opt for.

The moderate brigade constantly shout about Women�s rights in Islam as a means to deflect criticisms emanating from the secular camp without once thinking about the credentials of those who are dispensing the criticisms. Do the critics have the right? To answer this question we need to examine their track record against what they preach. If they pass the test only then it makes sense to entertain their charges. Otherwise it is a pointless exercise to entertain the words of hypocrites.