From what I understand, a Muslim man can marry a woman of another religion. but the opposite is wrong. why does this happen? Why can't a non-Muslim man marry a Muslim woman? I'm a Catholic guy and I could be wrong, but I don't know a dogma about how this would work. although some say it is best avoided.
>>17273437>interfaith marriageWas prohibited by the church back when christian = white, and muslim = black/brown muttsthese days they don't care anymore and deny the past. basically both islam and christianity stopped being race based in order to try and fight over converting everyone to their religion even though doing so broke both faiths
>>17273437>Why can't a non-Muslim man marry a Muslim woman?Because God said so. But if you want to look for the wisdom in it consider how the man is the one in charge of the household and what this would mean for the children's future faith.
>>17273444see, I'm here to see all the different analyses, but I don't think I've ever heard anything about the Catholic church having such views. I know that Muhammad despised the Mongoloids, I don't think there was a kind of theological racialism when did this happen anon? I don't think the church wanted the natives to be converted in 1500
>>17273446well, that makes a little more sense.But then why allow a man to marry a woman who is not Muslim? Even if the man of the house is the patriarch, the mother will still have her role in the family and it would be somewhat confusing for the child to see the mother professing another faith than the father. What if the children asked their father something like>dad, who is right? you or your mother?the father would say that this is right and the mother is a pagan?
>>17273462>dad, who is right? you or your mother?You or*** the momSorry, my keyboard literally sucks.
>>17273437the Christian woman bfto the Muslim woman
>>17273466anon, I don't think it's that simpleChristian women today are simply feminists and even "trad" women are trad with non-traditional premises. my friend married a woman who was "submissive" but in the end it was just a headache, without going into details.
>>17273462>But then why allow a man to marry a woman who is not Muslim?Again God's orders, simple as. Thinking about a possible reason it should be obvious that the men are usually the ones out in other communities. Think of a traveling merchant who basically lives amongst the Jewish tribe he trades with and wants to settle down. Or even warriors who would like to have children with the women captured in war. The authority of the father would protect the children and also maybe even influence the mother since he is the leader.>dad, who is right? you or the mother?If he is Muslim he will say that he is right. There can be only one truth after all. Also it wouldn't be that confusing for the children since the father will lead prayers and the like
>>17273466in being feminist and masculine? Yes. they really winThe highest standard of traditionalism that any Christian woman can achieve is to follow female cothc pages that teach women to be feminine (kek) or submissive. and see how when the subject of being submissive comes up, Christian women seethe about it and invent any kind of relativism or semantics with Bible verses to soften or change the context you know>it doesn't actually mean that! Being submissive is basically accepting your husband's mission to be the provider! while they spare no effort to dictate the male role in this. They are all feminists. all.
>>17273437Because>me take you woman = good>you take me woman = badBasic caveman instincts. Should be self-explanatory.
>>17273450>but I don't think I've ever heard anything about the Catholic church having such viewshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ne_Temere>Ne Temere was a decree issued in 1907 by the Roman Catholic Congregation of the Council regulating the canon law of the Church regarding marriage for practising Catholics>Ne Temere focused on the validity of marriages in which only one party was a Catholic. Although it did not specifically make any mention of children born to such marriages, it did require the issuance of a dispensation. A condition of the granting of said dispensation was a promise that any children born of such union would be raised in the Catholic faith.
>>17273477>Again God's orders, simple as. It means absolutely nothing to me. different gods and only one is true in the end, but that's not the point of the thread.>Thinking about a possible reason it should be obvious that the men are usually the ones out in other communities.Yes, it's still pretty vague. and the same problems mentioned would still be noticed. in fact, this could be even more problematic, since depending on the place, completely strange faiths would be on the "table".>Think of a traveling merchant who basically lives amongst the Jewish tribe he trades with and wants to settle down.Well, a Jewish woman and a Muslim man would have crucial theological problems and a kind of theological reconciliation would be possible if either of them would simply pretend that their religion doesn't exist.>Or even warriors who would like to have children with the women captured in war. Yes, but let's stick with the traditional wedding for now. >The authority of the father would protect the children and also maybe even influence the mother since he is the leaderI agree, but if a woman is Christian or Jewish at heart, this would be out of the question. some died for their faith and the debates of the husband's attempt could shake the marriage and cause arthritis.1/2
>>17273485The Irish courts ended up more or less unofficially implementing it as law when they sided with a Catholic mother over the Protestant Father in which church the kids were to be raised (even though common law practice at the time was that the father decided which religion his children would be taught/raised in)
>>17273477If he is Muslim he will say that he is right. There can be only one truth after all. Also it wouldn't be that confusing for the children since the father will lead prayers and the like2/2well anon, I still see crucial problems with this Even if the father is necessarily the authority in the relationship, it is unlikely that the wife would stop following her religionWhat would the couple's son think when he saw his mother praying the rosary or praying to Mary while his father made salat? And if the father works all day, wouldn't the child be exposed to a very different belief system? for just citing a few examples. the problems would be several.for example, as a good son, he/she would want his/her parents to find themselves in paradise, would the father simply explain that the mother would burn in hell? clearly we must conclude what the non-Muslim wife should behave in relation to what she can or cannot say, but regardless of that, the son/daughter at the same time would realize that the father's destiny in the mother's theology would be hell and so on. several problems.without mentioning frequenting places of faith. Could the mother go to the Catholic church? Baptize your children? anyway, it would be very conflicting
>>17273498>>17273477In fact, I say this being a "hypocrite", because I have a certain desire to marry Muslim women and I would certainly face all these same problems.Hey anon, I will answer you tomorrow.my cell phone is at 14%I'll answer you tomorrow>>17273485I referred to the racial issueyour link doesn't prove anything racial
>>17273502>your link doesn't prove anything racialThat's just how it was until relatively recently.
>>17273491>It means absolutely nothing to me.Yeah I know but the point I am making is that when you ask why God orders this or that without an explicit reason mentioned we just hear and obey. I don't know the mind of God and it would be blasphemy to pretend I do.>completely strange faiths would be on the "table"Well it mentions people of the book. I know later on some scholars tried to expand the meaning but I don't believe it is valid. Polytheists are certainly excluded though so not all faiths would qualify.>if either of them would simply pretend that their religion doesn't existI am not aware of such a problem from the Man's side. She would be let to do whatever and really the only thing I can think of is the issue of Children. I am sure in your faith it is at least recommended to teach them>the debates of the husband's attempt could shake the marriage and cause arthritis.I suppose this is just left up to the couple. At most we are obliged to spread the news not start debates or make the wife change her heart (impossible without God's help).>What would the couple's son think when he saw his mother praying the rosary or praying to Mary while his father made salat?There is no problem with the child being exposed to the beliefs of the mom or any other christian while growing up. I mean as long as she wasn't making the kid pray her own way or forbidding him from praying behind the father or something. going to continue in another post btw
>>17273437It should go without saying that having your daughter marry an infidel was not seen as a particularly wholesome or virtuous behavior in a time where people actually believed in God. However much you might think you hate your political rivals or whatever, these people hated each other a thousand times more, and frankly for much better and more visible reasons.A Muslim man might marry a Christian freely because that's essentially conquest, you take the enemy's women. The Christians were actually more hardcore in their animosity. If the Crusaders took your city, they weren't interested in fucking all the brown women, they were interested in stacking saracen skulls in a pyramid visible from orbit, and women have skulls too. I read a really fascinating account of the Crusades from a more modern Arabic perspective, and the thing that stayed with me was how similarly they described it to the Mongols' obliteration of Baghdad and the surrounding area. The Christians had a phase where they were simultaneously pious chaste fanatics and barely civilized "my dad was a pagan warlord" savages who were one bad day away from painting themselves blue and burning people alive in big wicker baskets for their dark gods.Understandably, these guys were not at all amenable to the idea of their daughters fucking their mortal religious cultural and racial enemies.
>>17273509>would the father simply explain that the mother would burn in hell? Muslim are forbidden from making such statements. It could damn us straight to hell. Who goes where is exclusively up to God and we think positively about the most merciful Lord. The soul of the woman is to be judged according to his standards and it could be possible for her to enter heaven depending on what she actually believed and what was presented to her of our faith.>Could the mother go to the Catholic church? Baptize your children? anyway, it would be very conflictingOf course she could go to church. As for baptism I don't think that can be allowed by the father at all. Generally we aren't allowed to participate in the practices or even holidays of other faiths.>>17273502>In fact, I say this being a "hypocrite", because I have a certain desire to marry Muslim women and I would certainly face all these same problems.Well if you don't want her to sin according to her religion I would suggest against it. But I know how difficult these things can be. All I can do here is pray for the both of you.>my cell phone is at 14%No problem, have a good night I suppose. If I see the thread again I will respond inshaallah
>>17273498>Could the mother go to the Catholic church?Yes! also the children can theoretically end up as Christian depending on their choices. It's not like they are forced to convert
>>17273437Why Islam is contradictory.
>>17273531>>17273521>>17273521>>17273509thanks for the answers
>>17273512>The Christians were actually more hardcore in their animosity. If the Crusaders took your city, they weren't interested in fucking all the brown women, they were interested in stacking saracen skulls in a pyramid visible from orbit, and women have skulls too. which is historically false.It's the opposite, and your post didn't answer anything. nor the OP's question
>>17273521>Muslim are forbidden from making such statements. It could damn us straight to hell. ? Are you telling me that hadith about infidels should not be said? so Muslims do this all the time? be honest in your posts
>>17273444>Was prohibited by the church back when christian = white, and muslim = black/brown muttsClovis married a Christian and later converted. Without marrying your Christian maidens to pagan chads Gaul would have possibly been pagan even longer than Anglo-Saxon England was and considering Frankish dominance over Western Europe it may have held on indefinitely.
>>17274146Gauls were white so that didn't matter. Whites were the target demographic for Christianity and furthermore, they believed they had a duty to convert all white people since they're natural born Christians.
>>17274150Clovis was German unless you're that schizo who thinks that Franks were celtic. Either way the point is that even the early church had no inherent issue with intermarriage and the bible is fully accepting of interracial marriage and somewhat supportive of interfaith marriages, with interfaith marriages being seen as a dangerous thing that can lead to the faithful being perverted by heathens.
>>17274168>the church has always been for race mixinglol, lmfao even2k years of law banning it would suggest otherwise
>>17273437Muslim pussy at birth does not belong to the woman but some Muslim man to use. It stays on the shelf until taken.
>>17273437Omar Sharif, the most famous "Arab" actor in the world was actually a Greek Christian who only eventually converted to Islam in order to marry an Egyptian woman lol.
>>17274082Why do you speak without knowledge? general and specific statements are different https://islamqa.info/en/answers/731
>>17274178>Misquoting meChoke on your own chode
>>17273437>my opinion's good because it has the good meme face>yours is bad because it has the bad meme face
