Just an opinion

Statistics have shown a remarkable rise in divorce rate in Kuwait especially in the first few years of marriage. And although these facts and figures are considerably high, they would still multiply if we consider the nonofficial divorce cases (separations) where some couples live together under the same roof and lack any means of communication.

Factors of divorce could be many but there is one important factor that I believe had not taken its fair share by the analysts and family social researchers; this factor is FINANCIAL.

Like many other aspects of our life, our social laws in Kuwait is based upon the Islamic law ( Elsharee3ah Elislamiya) which denotes man as the sole provider of the family while woman are free to participate in financial expenditures as per their wish, and all other financial lows like inheritance and such are distributed according to this role.

These laws are ancient and may have worked fine in the early stages of Islam, but the world today is one of economic globalization; it is the world of internet, mass communication and inflation, to put it simply; it’s a world of change, and unless the husband has inherited a bundle, he could not single handedly support the family, women have to participate, and the issue of financial support does not become a choice for women anymore, it becomes mandatory, and the man no longer assumes the role of the sole provider.

This is becoming one of the main conflicts between a working couple, because, to enforce financial support on women, other laws like inheritance which segregates between men and women based on the Islamic notion of the roles has to change, and government social securities and other financial laws that fit into this category would also have to change or else she would be the looser in this marriage contract, what is she getting out of this marriage if she spends her life savings and all her income to support her family? What if the union did not work?

And to compensate for this, most families try to waiver these laws by demanding a high postponed dowry (moakhar sadak) and some would go as far as demanding a separate house that is registered (at least 50%) under their daughter’s name just for security reasons in case the marriage did not have the chance to survive.

Most newly weds try their best to adapt to these laws, but whether they are successful or not depends totally on the individuals, but you can easily sense the financial tention in almost every household. Family interference in this specific issue becomes another important factor that we cannot overlook.

As long as we abide to these social laws, divorce rates will continue to rise.


46 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. shosho
    Oct 09, 2005 @ 23:11:00

    It’s difficult to ascribe the phenomenal rise of divorce in our society to financial reasons alone, or to the civil laws and legislations. But I agree with you that women’s participation to the household economy is no longer a matter of choice.

    I think the root of this social ill – divorce -stems from the way women are regarded in our society. Despite the fact that women have proved themselves in the work force and have assumed the highest positions in different instituations and ministries, they are still regarded as inferior, weak, superficial, and replaceable.

    With such a general attitude, how can we expect marriages to survive?

    If a man has learned not to regard women highly, and that he has the right to dictate whatever he wants and to be obeyed regardless of his fallible nature, how can we expect any woman to withstand him for long?


  2. Shurouq
    Oct 10, 2005 @ 00:09:00

    Half way through your post my PC started playing Paula Cole’s “where have all the cowboys gone” 🙂

    I will do the laundry, if you pay all the bills


  3. Elegance
    Oct 10, 2005 @ 01:27:00

    Amen to that! Nowadays money is acquiring more and more importance in our lives, relationships & characters. If people change then relationships would change, it is a successive relationship. That is why it is always good not to get married young, when you have more possibilities of going through changes in your life, which would affect your partner’s life as well. Both parties could be changing towards the same direction or in different ones, no one can predict!


  4. Purgatory
    Oct 10, 2005 @ 08:23:00

    so you are saying I have to pay for honey now disguised in a post about something else?


  5. AyyA
    Oct 10, 2005 @ 11:19:00

    You said “woman are still regarded as inferior, weak, superficial, and replaceable”, all this takes us back to the role designation and the superiority of men over women based on his role as the sole provider as described in Quran:
    “الرجال قوامون على النساء بما فضل الله بعضهم على بعض وبما انفقوا من اموالهم”
    This is the base or the condition for all other algebraic equations of money distribution between male and female in the Islamic institution. If this condition no longer exists, then other calculation must be altered, but this becomes a very sensitive issue when we are taking about changing fixed laws of Islam, and that’s why I think a lot of analysts would not even come close to considering it although roles today have changed.
    Another example of the rigidity of these laws ; In the current situation, when divorce becomes inevitable, man is forced to support his children (nafaga) with a calculated amount according to his financial status, if he is of a working class and he wants to start a new family, you can imagine how much this nafaga decreases that in some cases could barely take care of his children’s necessities, in this case a woman finds herself forced to participate although according to law she does not have to.

    Can he pay all the bills? This is the question

    Yes, when the couple is older, they can better organize their finances, sharing expenditure means sharing every element in the family life; means sharing in planning, execution and the maintenance of each and every detail. But financial dispute is almost always a cause of family disturbance even with older couples.



  6. ولاّدة
    Oct 10, 2005 @ 13:09:00


    لديّ والصديقات عصبة/مجموعة نطلق عليها اسم
    الرب واحد والزوج واحد

    وهي تنظيم محدود جداً لا يتعدى أعضاءه 6 عضوات…نحاول أن نساعد بعضنا على المرور بعثرات الحياة..والسبب انني وجدت أن دور الصديقات سيء بشكل عام بمجرد أن تشكو إمرأة من زوجها حتى لو كان لديها اطفال يطبلون لها : مالت عليه الف من يتمناك
    وتتطلق ولا يأتي الالف
    وحين تتزوج للمرة الثانية …تتزوج رجل لديه زوجة أخرى وبالتالي مهما كان ستكون الحياة أسوأ

    لذا فدائماً نذكر بعض
    زوجك هو الشخص الذي اخترتيه حين كنتِ عزباء وفي عمر صغير وبدون أطفال
    نؤكد لك
    حين تكونين بعمر أكبر وبأطفال

    خياراتك ستكون أسوأ

    لكل قاعدة شواذ…ولكن بشكل عام الرجل المطلق حين يتزوج للمرة الثانية يتزوج من هي افضل بكثير من طليقته
    بعكس المرأة المطلقة حين تتزوج للمرة الثانية تتنازل كثيراً بكل أسف كأن تقبل أن تربي أولاد زوجها مما يضع عليها ضغط أو تقبل أن تكون لها ضرة أو أو

    الخلاصة لكل قاعدة شواذ ولكني أعتقد أن الدور ليس تشريعي فقط بل دور على كل منا أن نحارب هذه الظاهرة بقدر المستطاع


  7. AyyA
    Oct 10, 2005 @ 14:46:00

    My point in this post is to get to the core of the problem I specified as the financial disputes in the family, which I believe, is one of the main factors that crack marriage institute in Kuwait.
    The purpose is to join your circle of friend in decreasing divorce cases, not the other way around.

    How many married women you have met that did not tell you that her husband is stingy (bakheel)? And those who said it; were they accurate in their judgment? How can you be sure?
    Ok to make my point clear let me give you this scenario:
    A: zoji wayed bakheel, 3omra ma yab li hadiyah mithl innas, wala yasrif 3ala elbait
    B: kilish ma yasrif?
    A: imbala, lakin yadoobak ikafi.
    B: yumkin ma 3indah!!!
    A: kaifa, mo rayal ? mo lazim yedabir? 3ayal laish tezawaj bil assas itha ho mo gad elzawaj.
    B: wi laish ma inti itsa3deena? Inti 3indich ma3ash
    A: wi laish ahader floosi, hatha 7agi, wi ana mo malzooma asrif 3alaih wi 3ala 3yalah.

    Now can you say that A is wrong? Although she might seem as nisrah, but she is right, this is the man’s role as per our Islamic sharee3a.

    Let me ask you another question; how many households you know in Kuwait that do not have a dispute over sharing the ownership of the house? Some old couples get divorced because of this very reason, can you deny that?


  8. Kristalle
    Oct 10, 2005 @ 21:59:00

    Hi Ayya,
    Let me tell u of my experience..
    I married the man i loved.. i shared ALL expenses, such as paying half rent, paying maid’s salary, paying 3/4 school fees, he only paid one quarter. On the other hand, he did NOT participate in paying ANY of my personal espenses.. I still thought that its ok, coz he kept telling me he doesn’t have any money..
    What drove me CRAZY however, is that he still, in his SICK mind, wanted me to BLINDLY obey him in absolutely EVERYTHING.. He used to have outrageous demands, like not to wear anything with the colour red in it.. or something that is too colourful.. When i get sent on business trips (3 days only) he’d turn life into hell even if i was accompanied by a member of my family..
    What i’m trying to say is that it isn’t just financial, believe me the reason behind such high divorce rates is that men have not abandoned yet the notion that wives are slaves that are expected to give everything and take either nothing or very little in return..
    Its the loss of dignity and mutual respect that’s tearing at the fabric of marriage, and this is excentuated by the lack of willingness of our men to compromise and step down from their high and mighty alter and acknowledge the fact that women are slowly, but progressively demanding to be treated with dignity, respect and individualism.


  9. Sowhat
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 02:59:00

    I think the rise in the divorce rate is associated with with te new trend ( not really nnew it is there for the last 8 years or so ) early marriages that became really common in kuwait those who marry at the age of 18-20 are not mature enought to carry the reponsibility of husband/wife however that is correlate whith what you already said .. those are financially independent aslan ..


  10. mishari26
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 10:30:00

    I think its quite simple.

    There’s a line in Mel Gibson’s “Payback” that goes like “if you go high enough there’s always one man”. The person who makes the decisions that matter is the person who owns the business with his money, usually not the manager he hires to be the CEO. How this relates to the discussion is, whoever invests more of himself (time/money) into the marriage/relationship will naturally feel entitled to make more of the decisions. He/She’d feel more of the “Boss”. its inevitable.

    So if the man wants to BE the boss, he better pay all the bills. otherwise, he should get used to a 50/50 partnership. I’m not supporting this 50/50 model as successful. I believe a ship has to have 1 captain, and a 1st mate to consult with and respect. not 2 captains, and not a captain and a cabin boy.

    So, what if the man’s salary doesnt cover the bill? you increase the salary or you shrink the bill. you dont borrow from the woman’s funds. yes. GUYS GET YOUR PAWS OFF YOUR WIVES’ PURSES! its hers. her duties towards the marriage are of a different nature, and those do not include paying for groceries. Or paying the rent, Or building the house.

    Unrealistic? absolutely. I’m just old-fashioned like that.

    But seriously. Alot of men in Kuwait have bullshit jobs. They’re not very productive jobs, its a form of communism, everyone gets paid “almost” equally. The few real viable industries (services mostly) do well, and men working in those are reasonably well-off. But everywhere else its systematic welfare. So, women want to work, they get their fair share of the same pool of “bullshit” jobs. why not? taking care of some paperwork and organization? heck women are MORE suited to do those jobs than men are (in general). They’re neater.

    Men in Kuwait are sissified. that’s all there is to it. So if they are, and women are on equal footing with them, why should women feel more secure and attached to their men? they dont. Men, if you want your authority back? earn it. dont whine about it, its boring and pathetic.

    So whats next? men and women living separate lives with kids bouncing back and forth in holidays and special occasions? seems like it. God plz no. for the sake of those poor kids.


  11. AyyA
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 12:37:00

    I see your point dear, and thank you for sharing your personal experience with us, may be I was not clear in my post, but let me reiterate it again; I meant to say that financial problem is one factor of a broken house and not the only factor, but nevertheless it’s an important factor that did not go through enough research. However, what you mentioned is related to the notion of role playing which solidifies my point even more. Let me explain:
    Man thinks that his wife is a slave and that he is superior because of the misunderstanding of the Quran verse I posted in the comment above. If you read the verse carefully, you will understand that male superiority is conditioned to what he spends on his family, what most men do not understand is that superiority does not come unconditional; they’d still want to resume their roles even when his is more financially dependent.
    Let me ask you this question; if your husband provided you with a decent life and took care of all your financial and emotional needs and secured you future with a fat bank account to your name, would you still feel aggravated by his constant interference in the little details of your life? Most probably not as much, you might interpret his behavior as love and sweet jealousy, as had our mothers and grandmothers survived, but the world is changing today.
    Btw, I have written a post which is similar to your case and will be published soon on Kaleidoscope titled as “ The Useless Kuwaiti”, check it out; I think you would like it.
    Take care, and good luck.

    Yes dear early marriages and financial dependencies are correlated.

    Thanks for explaining my point, I think you have done a better job than me in proving that money is power, and although I respect your opinion about role playing in Marriage, but to me marriage is sharing everything financial and otherwise, there is no captain here; it’s a mutual agreement in an atmosphere of love and care which is mandatory for a healthy new generation; our children.


  12. William
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 12:55:00

    This is where Islam and I differ… small rant here, please don’t get offended.

    I think Marriage should be 50/50. Bills should be paid equally and the husband and wife should work. I only feel the wife OR husband should be exempt from work if the other has a damn good job and there are kids that need to be taken care of or they are physically unable to work, and the other spouse does not mind.

    I view it as compromise. I make more then enough to support a family here, or hell, two families, but I will be damned if I have a wife, with no kids, and they sit on their ass, spend money, and clean the house, while I work my ass off and fully support them.

    This is another place where I and some other guys differ. I want a 50/50 marriage. I don’t want a slave. I am not physically abusive and I try to not be mentally abusive. I have lost my temper and yelled at loved ones before, but I apologize for that. I’m not perfect.

    Call it shallow. Call it shovanistic. Call it whatever you want. Marriage is a 2 lane street and both people should be going in the same direction. If they aren’t, it’s time to trade in one car for another.


  13. AyyA
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 13:26:00

    As per Islam; women are not even responsible for cleaning the house, their only responsibility is limited to breast feeding the infant, satisfy her husband’s sexual needs, obey him and plant the seeds of morals and fear of God in her children, so, in addition of her sitting home doing nothing, you are supposed to provide the help in the house to cook and clean in case she refuses to take care of that, and she has the right to refuse.
    Many Moslems pride themselves that Islam has honored women by this role, but I see it as white slavery; sorry but this is my opinion.


  14. ولاّدة
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 13:49:00

    أعذريني أيتها الصديقة إن كنت قد شطحت عن الموضوع….باعتقادي أن هناك أزمة كبيرة في فهم المسؤليات…وكريه أن تكون المادة سبب للانفصال ولكن هذا هو الحال

    الملاحظة العامة لدي أن الزوجة التي تشكو من أن زوجها بخيل ولا يصرف …تكون تحت الوهم أنها بعد الطلاق ستكون بحال أفضل…ولكن تصدمها الحقيقة في أنها تعيش بوضع مالي أسوأ
    ولن ينفعها موضوع تسجيل البيت فقط

    أنا بشكل عام ومن واقع طبيعتي الرومانسية ضد الطلاق…واعرف جيداً أن موقفك هو بتجاه تقليل الطلاق ولكن ما أختلف معك حوله هو الناحية المادية

    المشكلة في القلب والعقل وليس الجيب

    هناك علاقة ما بين قلب الرجل وجيبه…هذا ما علمتني إياه التجارب…وأكدته د.فوزية الدريع في إحدى حلقاتها

    أكره أن أختلف معك أنتِ بالذات
    ضاق خلقي الحين


  15. AyyA
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 14:04:00

    I forgot to add obey her husband in everything except “ elshirk billah” which is worshiping other things than God; sorry a better translation could not come to mind.


  16. AyyA
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 14:17:00

    La yetheeg khulgich 7abeebti, ikhtilaf elra’ la yofsid lilwid gathiyah, I hope I said that right LOL
    And I do agree with you 100%, who said I don’t, I’m not saying that financial problems should be, I’m saying that it already is a big problem lilasaf. And to solve it there should be more studies in this issue, Foziya eldrai3 is an angle whom I really respect, but her efforts “ allah ye3eenha” are only a quick fix remedy which does not always work in practice, we need a more professional, hands on solution to this issue.
    kil shy wala yetheeg khulgich, affa


  17. William
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 15:02:00

    So they are suppose to:
    1. please the husband
    2. make babies
    3. teach the children about God

    I couldn’t have that. I’m really big into the equal relationship thing. And it is like slavery, but in nicer surroundings I guess.


  18. mishari26
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 17:01:00

    God I love this place!

    such elegant and refined discussions. I haven’t seen a single post that was excessive or abusive of other people’s opinions :))

    I’ll make a big post after fo6oor. We’re finally getting to the core of it.


  19. Kaleidoscope
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 21:31:00

    Ayya’s new article has been posted on Kaleidoscope



  20. mishari26
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 21:35:00

    Dear AyyA & Will,

    There’s no question I think that marriage is a union. It binds two people to the same path in life to a big degree. So one could well say they’re in the same “boat” so to speak. Its what I like to call an “organizational entity”. Its not “Yours Truly” anymore. Decisions need to be made that will affect people other than yourself.

    So I ask, what “organizational entity” (OE from hereafter) in the world is run by a 50/50 commitee? I don’t know of any. No corporation, no country, no clan, no cult, no business. Absolutely no OE in the world is ruled by two people with equal vote weight. And rightly so, because its not practical, if the two disagree about something and fail to reach an agreement then you reach a no-decision. failure to function as a decision-making body.

    If you had 3 people in the OE with 33/33/33 votes then you dont have that problem. but we’re not talking about threesomes here.

    So, I’m sorry to say, 50/50 is a romantic illusion, its cute. its not real. The “buck” has to stop somewhere. Yes there’s love, yes there’s mercy, yes there’s caring, and yes there’s lust. Good organizational sense does not prevent any of that. It actually facilitates them better. By providing continuity and longevity to a successful relationship.

    It doesnt have to be the man leading, let it be the woman. All is needed that all parties agree to the terms when entering.

    About Islam however, God sets the rules as such. that the man has to provide, the woman has to accept his leadership. its up to you if you accept that or not. I just appreciate the elegance of the “providence+authority” go hand in hand. It makes sense to me.

    I’m not gonna pull any punches, in Islam the woman is asked to obey her husband in everything, just like AyyA said, except to disobey God directly. like, he cant ask her to stop praying or such. But I beg to differ with AyyA, the role of the woman isnt as mundane as you put it. Being a successful homemaker is a whole lot more difficult. And I say that in recognition of mothers who actually do take care of their houses (herself or via the maid) its not an easy job. They’re not “sitting on their asses” if they plan to build a successful house with properly mannered and educated kids. Now again, feel free to switch roles, have the man do the housework if you like. I just think God’s choice in having it be the woman makes more sense to me, the woman will get pregnant intermitantly and nursing her babies after birth is more suited for a home environment.

    I’m not against women working, I’m just saying men are more suited for the job.

    I’m not pointing at pregnant women and laughing “haha, you should stay at home while I the man enjoy work outside”. I came from the womb of a woman like all of you. we all came from the wombs of our mothers, not our fathers. Lets not belittle that role please and call them white slaves.


  21. Elegance
    Oct 11, 2005 @ 23:29:00

    I just have to clear one point for you here: what Ayya explained about the role of a housewife was in the old days at least that’s what some says. Nevertheless, we hear stories of women in those days who participated in wars, politics, elections, lecturing and working, which contradicts with the first explanation…what I’m trying to say that each one explains it in their own way, according to their purposes, interest or needs.


  22. Elegance
    Oct 12, 2005 @ 01:56:00

    Who said that marriage is like a ship?
    I’ve seen and still see 50/50 mariages that are succesful, so I don’t think your theory really works.


  23. AyyA
    Oct 12, 2005 @ 02:58:00

    This is the law William, but in Kuwait not all practice these laws in reality, there are a lot of couples today that equally share all the responsibilities and the expenditures, it all depends on the individual.

    Thanks Eclectic

    Thank you Elegance, I saw your point

    LOL, you cracked me up man
    But honestly your analysis is incredible, but I have some scattered comment about it:

    -The only organizations that I know that is actually run by one man is Arab countries and their governments.

    – Yes, managing a home even with a maid is a hell of a job, and on top of that she has to work outside to earn family bread, I know how hard that is, I was a working mother for years before I retired.
    – Some pregnant women work till the day they deliver, and I was one of them.
    – Experience had proven that there is no difference in gender when accomplishing a job; it all depends on the individual. Check the outcome of our educational organizations as a bench mark and compare
    – I’m not calling my mother or myself as white slaves, I’m saying that I don’t see any honor in those roles as is claimed by Moslems.


  24. fractal00
    Oct 12, 2005 @ 05:47:00

    Who said that a marriage should be a 50/50 relationship… I tend to feel sad when i see that marriage relationships and love have turned into figures and numbers on a financial book or statement.

    Islam, people always use islam as a way of means to justify the situation. Islam as a relegion never said that women should be slaves to men. I am not into relegion a lot so i am not gonna start getting philosophical and attempt to explain any of the verses. But what i know about women in Islam is that they are honoured and have a very high status. They were since the introduction of Islam encouraged to participate in everything, there a lot of female warriors in Islamic history, and based of some Hadeeth by the profit Peace be upon him they were encouraged to engage in business transactions, his first wife was a business woman. And a lot of u bloggers have studied relegion in schools here in kuwait and you know that children are something very important in Islam, maybe the most important part of it, they are described as the future whom we have to rely on someday. So if a women is incharge of raising them up, that is something very important, something we males should thank them for and encourage them to do.

    Sadly in the Gulf and the Arab world men have used Islam to control women and dirve them into salvery, i doubt that a kind good like ours would want women to be slaves to men and suffer in marriage. But society is ruling over the relationship between men and women. Men who want to show their family and their peers that they are men and that they can get women to do whatever they want.

    Don’t blame the high divorce rate on financials, when two people love each other money wont become a problem even in this material world we seem to be living in. Love is supreme. Blame the parents and society who encourages things as arranged marriages, blame the young couples who flirt with each other in malls and from cars, who through looks and quick chats decide that they are in love and that they need to get married. How can these two know anything about each other. These lead to the high divorce rates because after marriage the couple start learning about each other, and it seems that not a lot of people are enjoying what they find out. This is one of the resons behind the high divorce rate not money.

    There are rich people out there who married poor people and they are among the happiest couples.

    A woman should be considered as a 1 not a zero, and 1+1=2 … without women where would we men be… Men shouldn’t treat women as slaves because women are a blessing we should thank god to.. and women, staying home and raising kids isn’t a game it is a huge responsibility we have to take, use it well and maybe your kids wont have to post these comments onlien 😉

    For me, i can never imagine my wife sitting at home… I wouldn’t accept her not working. But and this is a big But, when my children are young one of us has to stay home and raise them up in their early years, who that is i don’t know either me or my wife. But women working this is something important, it allows her to have gain her independance and learn from life. This way she can teach what she can help her husband and support him, vise versa offcourse.

    Men be good to your wives, respect them love them and don’t stand in their way. Relegion is not against women, if u go into relegion you will see women come first, they bring life to this world and are the base of a family. If you want to blame anyone blame the foolish kids getting married early, society and parents.


  25. Hanan
    Oct 12, 2005 @ 16:23:00

    This is developping into an interesting discussion. You seem to have hit a nerve Ayya.

    I agree with elegance. Marriage isn’t a ship. Neither is it to be compared with the running of businesses. It is a more personal relationship chosen between two who believe that they want to share their lives together. Even though children, companionship, stability, or even sex might be the motivating factor behind such decision, it remains to be a personal decision between two, not to be equated to one between CEO’s and employees.

    Marriage is not a corporation, country, clan, cult, or business. There is no need for it to be ‘run’ by anyone. It’s a relationship, its rules should be devised and maintained by those two people in it. Of course Islam and/or Islam-based laws might make that a little difficult, but if the marriage is that of adults, as it should be, then they should know how to bend those rules 🙂


  26. AyyA
    Oct 12, 2005 @ 16:41:00

    1- I did not come up with figures and numbers, Islam did, it specified marriage as a CONTRACT (3agd zawaj) while in the rest of the world it’s a certificate, and here is some verses from Guran.:
    قوله تعالى : (ياءيهاالنبى انا احللنا لك ازواجك التى اتيت اجورهن )
    الاحزاب : 50
    (فاتوهن اجورهن ) النساء : 24 .
    قوله تعالى : (فان ارضعن لكم فاتوهن اجورهن ) الطلاق

    2- Learning in conventional schools does not give you enough information to understand your religion, it is always biased, but nevertheless, it’s a good start to begin your own research.
    You said: “people always use Islam as a way of means to justify the situation”. Our lives, including marriage institute, is based on “Alsharee3a Alislamiya”, so whether we like it or not, we have to abide by them, they are direct orders from God, but what most fail to see that these rules are conditional.
    3- You also said “children are something very important in Islam, maybe the most important part of it, they are described as the future whom we have to rely on someday”
    Well, I think every normal human being agrees to that. Children are very important for us. They are our future. But they are the fruit of the relationship between both man and woman. So why should the responsibility rely only and greatly on women alone when Islam did not assign that responsibility to her? Her responsibility is what I mentioned above check this
    4- Again pregnancy and motherhood should not be taken as an excuse to belittle women’s roles as a sharing partner in this contract.

    5- You want me to give you more examples of women degradation in Islam, here is some 7adeath:
    ـ للمرأة عشر عورات: فإذا تزوّجت ستر الزواج عورة وإذا ماتت ستر القبر التسع الباقيات. (حديث
    ـ النساء حبائل الشيطان. (حديث
    ـ النساء سفهاء إلا التي أطاعت زوجها. (حديث
    – لا يسأل الرجل فيما ضرب أهله. (حديث
    – علّقوا السوط حتى يراه أهل البيت فإنه أدب لهم. (حديث
    ـ ثلاثة لا تتجاوز صلاتهم آذانهم: العبد الآبق حتى يرجع، وامرأة باتت وزوجها عليها ساخط.. (حديث
    ـ لو كنت آمرا أحدا أن يسجد لأحد لأمرت المرأة أن تسجد لزوجها ، والذي نفس محمد بيده لا تؤدي المرأة حق ربها حتى تؤدي حق زوجها ولو سألها نفسها [!!!] وهي على قتب لم تمنعه! . (حديث
    ـ والذي نفسي بيده: لو كان من قدمه إلى مفرق رأسه قرحة تنجس بالقيح والصديد . ثم استقبلته تلحسه ما أدت حقه. (حديث
    ـ إذا دعا الرجل امرأته لفراشه , فأبت أن تجيء فبات غضبانا عليها , لعنتها الملائكة حتى تصبح (حديث
    ـ مثل المرأة الصالحة بين النساء مثل الغراب الأعصم بين مئة غراب. (حديث
    ـ يا معشر النساء، تصدَّقن فإني أُريتكم أكثر أهل النار، فقلن: وبم يا رسول الله؟ قال: تكثرن اللعن وتكفرن العشير، وما رأيت من ناقصات عقل ودين أذهب للب الرجل الحازم من إحداكن. قلن: وما نقصان عقلنا وديننا يا رسول الله؟ قال: أليس شهادة المرأة مثل نصف شهادة الرجل؟ قلن: بلى. قال: فذلك من نقصان عقلها. أليس إذا حاضت لم تصل ولم تصم؟ قلن: بلى. قال. فذلك من نقصان دينها. (حديث)


  27. AyyA
    Oct 12, 2005 @ 16:50:00

    I totally agree with you


  28. William
    Oct 12, 2005 @ 19:17:00

    50/50 doesn’t have to necessarily break down to 300KD for one, 300KD for the other, when it comes to bills, just how much they put into the relationship. Me, without kids, would refuse to have a wife sit at home and “take care of the house”. You factor in kids, it may be different, but in my current situation, it isn’t, and it won’t be in a relationship I am in. If I make say 600KD and the wife makes 200KD, and the bills are 400KD, I have no problem with a 33/66 or even 25/75 split, but I think the woman should clean the house and do more household chores then the man.

    As far as women being held high in Islam, I am told that, but I have been reading an English translation of the Koran (not valid for religious purposes and I need to find a more elaborate piece with greater detail) but if the translations are close, I don’t see how they are held very high. It would appear they are to be subservient to the man, and even in financial do not inherit as much as the male (maybe in some cases, but I can’t remember, don’t have it handy). Fortunately for me, my views are not based off of religious law. I am in Kuwait, and while here I will respect and abide by whatever laws there are, but I do not guide my life by them.

    I respect both Christianity and Islam, but there are just some things that I cannot and will not accept (at least not at the present time). I believe marriage is an institution, a bond between a man and a woman. In the US, slavery was repealed a long time ago, and modern slavery is no different in my opinion. I do not want to marry a slouch and I do not want to have a wife held captive. I want both people in the relationship (mine that is) to put in equal amounts of work (whether it be chores, money, etc).

    I honor women. I respect women. I know how hard it is to raise kids and keep a good household. If kids are an issue fine, but the wife should have some freedom.

    As far as providing = decision maker. Sure, you could say that, but since I do not want to be the sole provider (except with maybe kids while they are young), that will not be an issue for me.

    I do see why it happens and I understand why, I just don’t agree with it.


  29. Gigi
    Oct 13, 2005 @ 00:16:00

    “As long as we abide to these social [I think you meant religious] laws, divorce rates will continue to rise.”

    That would have almost been convincing, were it not for the fact that divorce rates are increasing practically all over the world.*

    In the States the divorce rate is hovering around 50%. Imagine. 50% of all marriages end up in broken homes there. I do not think that that is the result of Islam’s “ancient laws” dear Ayya.

    Also, you very easily denounced the Islamic system, yet you have not attempted to provide an alternative, or give examples where this alternative has resulted in decreasing divorce rates.

    Gigi, pointedly

    P.S. I urge you, dear Ayya, to never post a Hadith without mentioning it’s Sanad. Because there are many, many Hadith’s that are under dispute.

    *I have my own theories as to why that could be, however, I don’t think this is the place for me to mention them.


  30. shady q80
    Oct 13, 2005 @ 01:54:00

    If practice makes perfect…what does lack of practice make?

    Without experience, you end up marrying a stereotype. Conflicts occur because of the preception gap between reality and stereotype.



  31. Jewaira
    Oct 13, 2005 @ 02:54:00

    Yes marriage is a an evolving relationship between two people.
    It should be about both man and woman (and their children) pouring into one pot: their home and their family.
    Unfortunately, there have been so many cases of Kuwaiti wives who have poured their life savings and their salaries into a failed marriage. So that is what makes families tense when setting up marriage contracts- wanting to ensure their daughter’s financial security.

    Even when a couple work things out financially between them, what guarantees does a woman have that her husband will not abuse this understanding and marry wife number 2 behind her back or neglect her on the premise that he has no money? The law does not protect the wife in this case.


  32. mishari26
    Oct 13, 2005 @ 19:21:00

    Dear AyyA, Elegance,

    So, lets set things a bit straighter:
    1- Marriage is a union.
    Any contract that binds two people or more creates some form of a union. When I volunteer for the army, the reason would most probably be that I’d like to defend my country, so this reason binds me with all the other army personel. When I join a telecommunications company again I share the feeling that telecom is cool, exciting and profitable with all the other employees. This feeling “binds” all of us from the manager to the technician. If I thought “reba” (interest, or “usury” in old english) was wrong, I would never go work for a bank that practices it for example. My point is, every union “paints” its members with some idea that they share.
    Same with Marriage, both man and woman believe they can build a happy home for the both of them and for their offspring hopefully. Those would be the “goals” of the union. Did I stray in any of this? some people dislike resembling marriages to big organizations, because they feel marriages are romantic, and corporations are evil and icky. I will just shrug at that. I dont know how to respond to it. to me they’re both projects aiming for success, the goals are different ofcourse.

    2- Union requires leadership.
    Since a collective of people are involved, naturally they might disagree about how to deal with any matter that they face. Some form of decision making system has to exist to face these matters. If each member of the union ignores that system, then the union would disolve and be meaningless. Ofcourse, not every aspect of a member’s life might be ruled by that union. For example a soldier in the army doesn’t have to wait for his commander’s approval to go buy a luxury car. (does he??)
    So all agreed that unions require a system of leadership? ok, on to the next point.

    3- 50/50 leadership doesnt work all the time. (if it does, how come no other union works that way? please provide an example so I can be convinced).
    So for the case of marriage, we have 2 people in the union, one of them has to have the upper say when things come to unresolvable disagreement. Like, should we stay in this apartment? or move into a house? both parties can’t be convinced of the others point of view, so what happens? one of them has to submit to the other. even if the one sumbitting still disagrees. Just like I do at work when my boss tells me that he/she wants things done this way, not the way I feel is correct. He/She is the boss and I submit to him/her. This is not demeaning to me when I do, nor “degrading”. Its a system for facilitating decisions that lead to action. Its called efficiency. Even if my boss was wrong, he/she wont be 100% wrong, he/she’s probably 20% wrong or something. or on the other hand I the employee might be actually short-sighted and not have the vision that he/she had. regardless of who’s right or wrong, a system of leadership has to be present and effective.

    If the union fails in having a system of leadership, it will disolve. hence you get divorce.


  33. AyyA
    Oct 13, 2005 @ 19:54:00

    Hala wallah , nawarat wi ashriqat
    First of all, our social laws ARE based on Alsharee3a Al-Islamiya (religion).
    Second, these figures are not accurate if you bear in mind other couples who lead a separate life without official separation for society’s sake. And if you add those, you’d probably end up doubling that percentage.
    Regardless of that; this percentage compared to a small supposedly perfect social system is pretty high, don’t you think? No need to compare them with other societies which we believe are imperfect.
    And third; you know what hell I had to go through to get those 7adeaths and Quranic verses? And to get away from the sanad issue I posted a bunch of them so that you’d recognize some undisputed ones that you have taken in school and could recognize them ( just kidding)
    No seriously; I don’t want to diverse from this very important issue, the point I’m trying to present is that although role playing in Islam was based on a condition as it is clearly stated by the Quranic verse above, we still abide, as a nation, to the social laws of the old days although our situation is different today. Let me give you a similar example;
    Since 1956 Tunisia, an Islamic country, had prohibited and criminalized polygyny. It established identical grounds for divorce for husbands and wives and allowed both spouses to divorce without proof of fault. It issued these laws to be applicable with modern life and at the same time to be within the framework of Alsharee3a Alislamiya. On the other hand, other Islamic countries refused even to think about it and believed that it’s a direct call to break family ties and morals. And above all that, to disobey God who had permitted polygyny.
    How could this happen if both claim that the bases of their laws stem from the same verse in Quran?
    Let’s take a look at the verse under dispute:
    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

    وَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا تُقْسِطُوا فِي الْيَتَامَى فَانْكِحُوا مَا طَابَ لَكُمْ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ مَثْنَى وَثُلَاثَ وَرُبَاعَ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا فَوَاحِدَةً أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَلَّا تَعُولُوا

    ======= فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا فَوَاحِدَةً أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَلَّا تَعُولُوا ========

    وَلَنْ تَسْتَطِيعُوا أَنْ تَعْدِلُوا بَيْنَ النِّسَاءِ وَلَوْ حَرَصْتُمْ فَلَا تَمِيلُوا كُلَّ الْمَيْلِ فَتَذَرُوهَا كَالْمُعَلَّقَةِ وَإِنْ تُصْلِحُوا وَتَتَّقُوا فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ غَفُورًا رَحِيمًا

    ============== وَلَنْ تَسْتَطِيعُوا أَنْ تَعْدِلُوا بَيْنَ النِّسَاءِ ===================

    The first two verses allow polygyny on one condition: man should treat each and every one of his wives justly with his money, heart and time. And a slightest bias to one is totally forbidden. On the last verse, however, it assures man that he would never be just (لن (
    Tunisia had adapted the modern law on the bases that polygyny was permited to solve problems associated with a situation or an era at which this act was mandatory, like at times of war in the beginning of Islamic civilization. And since God had assured that this condition will never be met, as scripted in the last verse, then when the situation does not exist anymore, the act becomes forbidden as an order from God.

    Wi ba3dain ta3ali, who said that I did not suggest solutions? Check my post again please.

    Shady Q8i
    If I understood what you wrote right, I think you’re brilliant.

    Lady J
    Precisely, and that’s why I said that marriages of today might work if the coupling is based on total understanding and trust, but this is not always the case, so more research to alter these laws are urgently needed.


  34. William
    Oct 13, 2005 @ 20:37:00

    I know the section you are referring to Ayya (well the English translation). It does state in that that you would have to treat both wives equal but that is not possible. In the translation it mentions after that the whole thing about Allah being merciful and whatnot. It was translated at least in a way that makes it sound OK as long as you ask forgiveness or whatnot. Once again, don’t have the translation on hand, and it may be very different from the original.

    Corporations can be restructured, lol. I don’t think it’s fair if you have one person ordained as leader in a marriage. If one wants an apartment and one wants a house, something called COMPROMISE comes in. Not just one person saying “it’s gonna be my way because I say.” THAT causes problems unless you are totally subservient to that person. Couples should talk about major decisions and come to an agreement. Having a marriage where only one person gets everything they wanted is not cool in my opinion.


  35. mishari26
    Oct 13, 2005 @ 21:21:00

    Dear Will,

    I know what compromise is 🙂 I’m saying what happens when no compromise could be reached? (worst case scenario) I mean, life isnt all nice and peachy, certain couples fight over stuff. bitterly. You don’t agree that somewhere along the lines every couple decides who has the final say when things go completely south?


  36. mishari26
    Oct 13, 2005 @ 21:27:00

    Dear AyyA,

    By your interpretation, polygyny is prohibited by God, correct?…. but.. but.. clearly it wasn’t at the time of irrasool. so if men had multiple wives at that time, either they all deliberately disobeyd God’s ruling or you misinterpret it. which do you think it is?


  37. fractal00
    Oct 14, 2005 @ 04:57:00

    The problem is when you quote the Qur’an, it is easy to do so there are a lot of verses that make your point, sadly i am not a relegious person, i know my share but not enough to affirm something or deny it . So i would like to state my own opinion, which is not based on Islam or anyother relegion.

    From my experience and from the people i have known through my life, i have seen a lot. People marry for the wrong reasons:

    2-That thing you think is love
    5-getting laid
    6- The fear of being alone
    7- a whole lot of other reasons to

    Someone told me i should have mentioned an alternative. I like the west in this matter for one thing, people over there can meet and live with each other for a long time before getting married, and a large percentage of those relationships end up in successful marriages. The reason is that there nobody is incharge of anyone… They live together but their financials are seperate they both have different lives to lvie outside the relationship, this allows them to assess each other and see if they are comfortable with each other before marriage. This while it does not solve the issue of divorce decreases it greatly.

    And no i didn’t mean relegious reasons when i was talking about the social system… Here in Kuwait, in the Gulf and in the Arab world women and men marry based on family, money, status and age… This was not mentioned in Islam that this girl from this family has to marry someone of the same family or from a family of equal status. There are a lot of problems facing marriage here in the Middle East.. This post is great for discussing it … But i would like for me and for the others commenting here to speak their hearts out … And not rely on scripts and other materiel … Say what you think is right and wrong … In marriage a woman can be the slave and the person who takes care of the children, that’s her choice if she wants it .. My Uncle in the U.K sits at home taking care of children because that is what he and his wife agreed on.

    When two people marry they should study this step and choose for themselves as long as this is not allowed in the majority of the Arab World Divorce and problems in marriages wont be solved.


  38. bo_ghazi
    Oct 14, 2005 @ 15:06:00

    hi Ayya..
    nice discussion you got here…
    I read one of your comment (in reply to gigi) regarding the mutiple marriage thing mentioned in the Quran. I was thinking the same thing.. why would God tell me I am allowed to marry 2, 3, 4 as long as I will be just with them all, but yet again I wont be able to do so as explained at the end of the aya
    إن تعدلوا ، و لن تعدلوا
    I asked a religious guy about it and he said that God made it a condition to be just and fair when it comes to the materialistic things between ur wives. Meaning, you buy the first wife a house , then you should buy the second a house as well. You give a monthly allowance of 500KD, then you do the same for the other(s)… etc.

    As for the (wa lan ta3dilo) part, well its regarding the emotions. You see you cannot maintain or show the same emotions to all your wives, hence you (ya3ni the man) will not be fair for when its comes to expressing ur emotions & having the same feelings to your wives.

    Thats what the man told me.


  39. AyyA
    Oct 14, 2005 @ 17:07:00

    First of all, Islam did not create monogyny, history proves to us that it was in existence before Islam, it was a wide spread practice. Other conventional religions did not prohibit it as we see in the stories of Anbia’ (prophets) like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David and Solomon in Quran.
    Islamic methodology, as articulated in the Quran and manifested in the practices of Prophet Muhammad had altered social and political institutions. It limited monogyny to keeping four because it was left open to no limit at the time. And a lot of the ones that entered the faith in Alrasool’s time had already more than one wife and the prophet ordered them to give all and keep only four as we see in these 7adeaths:
    روى أبو داود – رضي الله عنه – بإسناده أن عميرة الأسدى قال :
    أسلمت وعندي ثماني نسوة ، فذكرت ذلك للنبي (صلى الله عليه وسلم) فقال : ( اختر منهن أربعا)

    وقال الإمام الشافعي – رضي الله عنه – في مسنده : أخبرني من سمع ابن أبى الزياد يقول أخبرني عبد المجيد عن ابن سهل عن عبد الرحمن عن عوف بن الحارث عن نوفل ابن معاوية الديلمى قال : أسلمت وعندي خمس نسوة ، فقال لي رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وسلم) : ( اختر أربعا أيتهن شئت ، وفارق الأخرى) .

    But there was a reason behind this limit. Islam was going though wars to spread the faith and a lot of Moslem males died in these wars. This resulted in the rise of female population as compared to men’s. Notice how orphans were mentioned in this particular verse. And that’s why it was necessary at that time as I believe.

    Most of us take religion as what we learn from our schooling and our culture and practice the faith blindly. This is true not only with Moslems, but also with other religions. But forcing a religion is antithetical to the spirit of Islam; no one has to practice Islam just because he was born a Moslem. One has to have faith if he declares himself as a true believer before he commences the practice. That’s why I believe that doing your own research is mandatory whether you are a religious person or not.
    The condition here is not only financial as your religious friend assumed, or else, he is defying the verse

    وَلَنْ تَسْتَطِيعُوا أَنْ تَعْدِلُوا بَيْنَ النِّسَاءِ وَلَوْ حَرَصْتُمْ فَلَا تَمِيلُوا كُلَّ الْمَيْلِ فَتَذَرُوهَا كَالْمُعَلَّقَةِ وَإِنْ تُصْلِحُوا وَتَتَّقُوا فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ غَفُورًا رَحِيمًا
    Notice here the word “fala tameeloo” and Almail is an emotional act. The translation for this verse here is (not literally): and you shall never be able to treat them justly, do not get biased to one and leave the other hanging, and if that happened fear God and fix it, and God will forgive you, for he is the merciful.
    To be just financially is no problem. But can you be just emotionally? This is the question. And I do not believe that this escaped God; our creator who knows and feels our thoughts and emotions before we even utter a word.


  40. Gigi
    Oct 14, 2005 @ 17:09:00

    Ayya.. I did reread your post many times. I could not find the alternative solution. What I did find was that you said the Islamic system was no longer viable and you mentioned that it needed to be “changed”. What you did not mention is change into what system? In order to provide the security a divorcee needs are you proposing that Islamic law is changed to- for example- incorporate giving the woman 50% of all the husband’s money and property like in the States?

    Also, when I mentioned the statistics in the States it was a parallelism and not a comparison. I don’t see why you dismissed what I said regarding the fact that divorce rates are increasing all over the world. That was a valid point, I think. Therefore I repeat, the rise in divorce rates is not the fault of anything concerning the Islamic system. I think a more overarching theory needs to be made.

    You said something about our “supposedly perfect social system” and about how other societies are imperfect. I disagree with you here, Ayya. We are all imperfect. And even with the best systems, whether they are ones practiced here or abroad, people manage to abuse its principles.

    That brings me to another point. In the comments you seemed to deride the fact that in Islam the bind between a man and a women is described as a Contract. I agree with Mishari26 when he said that you guys might have an overly romantic interpretation of what a marriage is and are therefore looking at that term a tad too sensitively. In my mind, the word Contract bestows the union with a dignity that is not to be taken lightly. And if the Contract is followed sincerely then it only serves to protect the rights of the weaker person. If I wanted to criticize the term you preferred: “Certificate”, I could say that all that states is “wow, i got married” and that’s the end of it. Whereas a Contract denotes an ongoing commitment that includes rights and responsibiities that should be followed by both parties.

    I don’t know about everyone else but personally I prefer the term Contract.

    Gigi, unsentimentally

    P.S. You could have saved yourself some of the effort in finding and posting those Hadiths if you had limited yourself to only mentioning those that were not under dispute or dismissed 🙂


  41. AyyA
    Oct 14, 2005 @ 21:50:00

    In my post I said:
    “To enforce financial support on women, other laws like inheritance which segregates between men and women based on the Islamic notion of the roles has to change, and government social securities and other financial laws that fit into this category would also have to change”
    The Islamic inheritance distribution system of male/female (2/1) for example was based originally on the assumption of the male being the sole provider of the family. Researchers and specialists should alter this ratio and make it 1/1 when these roles are not valid anymore. They also should work accordingly with mother’s and wife’s inheritance in the framework of Alsharee3a Aleslamiya. Likewise with the social security that a working mother gets; which is equivalent to that of a single male’s, should also be altered. Children allowance that the government automatically transfers to the father’s accounts should be reconsidered. Any other financial dealings that fall into this category like nafaga and such should also be reconsidered and altered to be applicable to the modern life of today. But this all should be done by the experts who have long neglected this issue relying on women’s ignorance of their rights.
    Did you know that according to Islam; woman has the right of superiority (algiwama) over man if she was the sole provider of her family? Not many women know that they already have that right within the framework of Alsharee3a. To back this statement and not to be labeled as giving a fatwa, I tried to look this up in the Net, but I only succeeded in finding one site that mentions that. And it does not surprise me, because this issue is very sensitive for religious preachers. Click here

    And I’m not suggesting that we should abide by the State’s law, or any other law in dividing the property after divorce, we have the social court that should study each case separately and according to that distribute the wealth justly. Just like any other disputes in our life.
    And again I’m saying that my opinion here is based on the observation that expenditure correlating with role playing in a modern family system is one important factor of conflict in modern family. But I never said that it’s the only one. And other societies have their own specific issues and I won’t get into that because they are irrelevant to my issue; my analysis is limited to an Islamic Kuwaiti family.
    And to the rest of what you said, I have to say that I do not have anything else to add to this subject that I did not mention before. And I do respect your opinion concerning your satisfaction with “3agd” even if I disagreed with you.


  42. shady q80
    Oct 15, 2005 @ 07:33:00

    No offense to any of you, but I feel this discussion on the number limit to be placed on polygamy is largely pointless.

    Regardless of ideology, you must agree that though you may be able to limit the number of marital relationships one may have, there is no limit on the number of extra-marital relationships that same individual may have. (You can’t have four wives in the States but you sure as hell can have four girlfriends).

    Be it an islamic state on a western one, that shortfall strikes at the heart of both.

    There is also the matter of mutual consent. Yes, he is marrying his fourth wife, but if everyone’s happy about it (him and wives #1-4) why bother? Most women that are angry at this have either not taken part in polygamy thus rendering their opinions irrelevant (hey, if she’s happy being wife #423413 who are you to disagree?), or have had the bad end of it where polygamy has taken place without the required consensus, should take their case to the nearest court (assuming a fair judicial system).

    So what remains? Reciprocity, more commonly known as fairness. However you want to put it Islam has predefined roles for both sexes. Whether there is any justification for such roles is irrelevant really as they still exist today, in this society as much as the next. The only problem here is when these roles sneak into the justice system and play an important role in its laws.

    The problem is not Islam, the problem IMHO is the Islamic state. This is not because of the Islamic laws themselves but because we have ceased to live in a society where these laws remain undisputable. The problem with using religion as a basis for any political order is you you up with a system that is inflexible (because such flexibility would undermine the deity) and unchangeable except by massive social revolution. We must come to terms that unlike 1500 years ago, we live in a world of diverse cultures: we can either learn to live with this diversity, or fight it. Our current government assumes that everyone under its jurisdiction subscribes to the same ideology; that, to them, represents an undeniable truth. That, I believe, is a gross miscalculation on their part.

    These are my _incomplete_ thoughts on this matter. I know there is a lot I have left out, but you will have to forgive me that.


  43. shosho
    Oct 15, 2005 @ 12:12:00

    The comments are too long but can’t bother to read them all 😛

    But from what I skimmed, there are a few things that I wish to add:

    1-Although Islam has restricted the number of wives to four, a man can have countless slaves. This explains how the Ummayads and Abbasids had four wives and thousands of slaves/concubines. Practically, this is impossible to achieve these days, but in theory, according to Islam man can sleep with more than four women.

    2-Contract vs. Certificate: to me ‘3aqd’ records a set of rights to man and woman. According to the marriage contract many things are recorded to preserve each party’s right.
    Some of the things that can be recorded in or determined by the contract are: inheritance, dowery, divorce allowance,lineage, ‘3esma’ (woman’s right to divorce herself), and most importantly the ‘conditions’ section which few bother to use in the melcha. The father could impose any conditions on the bridesgroom to preserve his daughter’s rights. For that reason I prefer contract over certificate which merely indicates that flan is married to flana, at least in a contract I can choose to impose my conditions.


  44. mishari26
    Oct 15, 2005 @ 13:40:00

    You’re right shosho, things have gotten a bit out of hand. and I apologize for my long posts, so I’ll summarize coz this is the core of what I wanted to say:

    I think divorce rates are high because in modern marriage no effective system of leadership exists. (explanation is all in the previous comments)


  45. AyyA
    Oct 15, 2005 @ 16:30:00

    Thanks guys for your insights and valuable opinions, I don’t believe that I ever had a much heated debate with such lengthy remarks ever LOL

    shady q80
    I couldn’t have said that any better, holding the stick in the middle strategy is doomed to fail, cheers

    The term “3agd” is a subject to many diverse opinions, some might agree and some might not, and both parties have valid reasoning.


  46. AyyA
    Oct 15, 2005 @ 16:34:00

    You don’t have to apologize for your lengthy remarks dear, any opinion is welcome and you can use all the space to want so long you boarded “ The Ultimate”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: