خطرناک اسلام مخالف بل پاس

Rambler

Minister (2k+ posts)
Disciplining a child through physical, mental or verbal abuse is illegal here in the West. It is backed by scientific research and child psychologists.

It would be better to not bring West in this discussion. We have a much better framework available to us. In the west there is a ridiculous law of rape of spouse as well which is a contradiction in term.
 

back to the future

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
looti molvi or not
a western system is being introduced by the women who do not know anything about islam.This bill will result in divorces and non marriages like westernised countries.If this is what these overseas women represent then they should remain where they are.

I am myself in favour of hanging this looti molvi aziz ur rehman and the rapist of little girls they must be hanged publicly.Likewise who ever is doing violence and I know majority of pakistanis they are not good people at all.They indulge in dowry taking are greedy but a mechanism to introduce reasonableness should be the way out..

Taali aik haath say nahin bajti.
 

arifkarim

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
In the west there is a ridiculous law of rape of spouse as well which is a contradiction in term.
This law is not about rape of spouse but about domestic violence. Sex should be through consent. Husband can cannot forcibly have sex with his wife. And vice versa.
 

miafridi

Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
The bill has already been passed. Why to revisit? , It has been supported by all the major parties i.e. PTI, PMLN, and PPP.

It has to be passed by both the houses to become a law. The bill will now go to the National Assembly and if it is passed there as well only then it will become a law.
 

arifkarim

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Two separate things - Having a moral and legal framework is one thing and having laws and an effective system of enforcement, prosecution and justice system is another.
There is nothing wrong in the law. Law bans domestic violence and that's it.
 

Rambler

Minister (2k+ posts)
This law is not about rape of spouse but about domestic violence. Sex should be through consent. Husband can cannot forcibly have sex with his wife. And vice versa.

Sex is an important part of marriage infact the main pivot of marriage revolves around sex and children. If a husband has to force his wife to sex then the marriage is over anyways. It may be grounds for divorce but it is not rape by any stretch of imagination.
 

knowledge88

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
So which clause is against any Islamic injunctions.e.g Where does it say you cannot check mobile phone of your children?
domestic.png
 

arifkarim

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Sex is an important part of marriage infact the main pivot of marriage revolves around sex and children. If a husband has to force his wife to sex then the marriage is over anyways. It may be grounds for divorce but it is not rape by any stretch of imagination.
So husband can have forced sex with wife and divorce her, then this is not rape? 😂
 

Rambler

Minister (2k+ posts)

I am no legal expert but this does not mean parents cannot check mobile phones of their children. It is not the case even in the west. My little understanding of law is that the ambiguities in one law could be cleared from another law. Children are under parents protection and parents are even encouraged to control what children do and cannot do online even. So by no stretch of imagination this implies that parents cannot check what their children are doing. It would be ridiculous to interpret it that way.
 

knowledge88

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
I am no legal expert but this does not mean parents cannot check mobile phones of their children. It is not the case even in the west. My little understanding of law is that the ambiguities in one law could be cleared from another law. Children are under parents protection and parents are even encouraged to control what children do and cannot do online even. So by no stretch of imagination this implies that parents cannot check what their children are doing. It would be ridiculous to interpret it that way.
Read, the link of the bill I sent you, instead of expecting me to cut, paste, highlight and then put it on a website and then sending to you so you could understand it. The bill clearly uses the word, "CHILD " so I assume, it is under 18. Also, invasion of privacy is clearly mentioned in the bill., It can be anything a child has, Why can't it be a mobile?
 
Sponsored Link