As I learned in my Islamic law class, if real Islamic law was applied, in accordance with the true teachings of Mohammed (surrah and hadith), then Islamic law would afford women many rights. I think it is important to recognize the distortion of Islamic law by clerics and others instead of allowing the clerics to maintain control and alter true Islamic law. Before taking the class, I was the first to say that Islam was sexist. However, as I studied Mohammed and the early religious scholars, I found that Islam had been distorted by the extremists (much like the Christian Right has distorted the views of Jesus). I found myself citing to hadith and the Qu'ran in support of my view that Islamic law did support the right of a woman to lead prayer.

Islamic law is whatever the current clerics say it is. isn't that the point of organized religion? to make the masses subservient to he who interprets the ancient texts for his own benefit.

It is a shame that we go to trouble to overthrough sadam, then we set up a religious dictatorship of the majority. Wonderful.

Islamic law IS more than what the current clerics say it is. To say that the point of organized religion is to have clerics, priests, rabbis, ministers, etc. to tell the laity what the religion is discounts personal insights and relationships with G-d. I am not saying that those same "religious leaders" would not claim that their interpretation is correct, but that does not make it so. It is kind of like accepting Bush's word about the progress in Iraq because both Bush and the "religious leaders" have a vested interest in what they assert. Moreover, without a discussion or debate, we allow the clerics to distort the true Islamic law, often termed shari'a. For example, shari'a is often referred to as Islamic law. In actuallity, shari'a means Allah's law, thus is only the law as handed down to the Prophet by Allah, not the interpretation of hadith, sunnah, or the Qu'ran by clerics today or tomorrow.

As for Iraq, I am in complete agreement. I did not support the invasion of Iraq, and I do not support the ongoing war. However, part of the problem with a true democracy (as opposed to a republic, which is what the US really is) is that the will of the majority prevails. There is no protection of the minority.

kristina perhaps you should study the nature of your own religion be it christianity or whatever to discover the truth of what i am saying. The
"good book" is always interpreted to either benefit the one in power, or the one who is trying to gain power, wins, and consequently gets to write history.

Illogical and irrational texts can never be interpreted in a consistant or scientific way. Each epoch reads in to such things what they want to see and ignore the rest. Just look at the right wing christians of our day.
(my opinion)

...and Communism is more than what the Kremlin says it is, too. In fact, Communism would be the ideal government if it was done RIGHT!

...but it was not, is not, and never will be, done "right". Just like Islam.

JesusJonesSuperstar,

I understand what you are saying. You are correct about the majority in power benefiting from their interpretation of the text. Texts cannot be interpretted in a consistent way (if it could, law school would be a hell of a lot shorter). In my Islamic law class, I found some of best friends were on the opposite side of the debate on a woman's rights under Islamic law, not because they didn't think a woman should lead prayer but because they thought Islamic law did not allow it. My only argument is that we can no more declare Islam to be whatever the extremist clerics say it is than we can declare Christianity is what the religious right says it is.

Perhaps I find myself being somewhat more accepting of Islam because of my professors. My first exposure to Islam was in undergrad, and it was taught by a priest who was very accepting of what he called a "beautiful faith". My Islamic law professor was a Palestinian-American woman from Berkeley. It was through her that I found Islam was not the sexist religion the clerics had painted it as. Mohammed often found himself answering his students' questions about women, and his answers were always about equality. Now, I know that is not what is practiced by a lot of Muslims today, but that does not mean that it is not Islam.

I am not trying to make excuses for extremists or theocratic dictatorships. I am simply saying that we can condemn the government emerging in Iraq without also condemning Islam. Just as we can condemn the leadership of the Catholic church for hiding and condoning abuses by priests without condemning Catholicm.

After the attacks in Jordan, I saw many Jordanians on tv declaring, "This is not Islam. This is not Islam." If more and more people stand up and defend Islam from the extremist clerics and mullahs, the clerics and mullahs lose their power.