Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/english/1667186-summary
https://studentshare.org/english/1667186-summary.
Asra Nomani and Mahammad Habash stated that Muslim women should have the right to choose a husband. In order to convince the opposers, Nomani presented her own life examples and stated that many Muslim women experienced loneliness and suffering in marriage. Mohammad Habash also adhered to the idea of Muslim women’s freedom of choice and claimed women should be only led, advised, and guided but not told what to do. Overall, both Nomani and Habash based their opinions, not on the ground of religion; they rather addressed the concept of freedom. It is possible to say that the speakers’ position is well-grounded; despite this one could see that their stance was defensive.
Yasir Qadhi, in his turn, opposed to what the proponents of such freedom stated and claimed that if a Muslim did not want to follow the Words of Allah and the law, he/she should not be regarded as a Muslim at all because of the initial meaning of this word and the essence of the religion as well. In other words, Qadhi discussed the question not only from the religious point of view but from the perspective of the law. Thuraya Arrayed dealt with the question from the point of view of psychology and from the height of her life experience. Particularly, she said that as young people are not wise enough they should be controlled. These two panelists had educated and religious stances and looked more confident than Nomani and Habash. The audience took an active part in the discussion as well and asked challenging and suitable questions.
As can be seen, the issue was left unresolved and every party remained on the same mind. Even though the panelists adhered to opposing views, the note was quite friendly. The opposers to the idea of freedom were more convincing. Despite this, the audience vote for women’s right to choose a husband, which was not a wise decision because the discussed issue was of a religious character.
Read More