Arabists and Muslim Brotherhood supporters repeatedly claim that the Arab-Bedouin conquests “liberated” the peoples of the Levant, without a clear and objective definition of the concept of liberation,, They claim, “They liberated us from the Romans!!!!” But the issue of the Romans was not clear as a primitive colonialism, Rule was reciprocal between Syria and Rome, so that it can be said metaphorically that Rome was annexed to Syria, Syrian Rome! And it can be said metaphorically that Syria was annexed to Rome, Roman Syria! Roman law treated the Romans, the Syrians, and other peoples of the Mediterranean basin who were annexed to the Roman Empire on an equal footing through occupation, which turned into a partnership, The classical colonial situation does not apply to the relationship between Syria and Rome, There were at least several Caesars in Rome from among the Syrians, and there was a Libyan Caesar and another from Yemen, while there was no Syrian Caliph. Moreover, the laws of the Roman Empire did not differentiate in terms of projects such as building bridges, irrigation canals, theaters, and other forms of construction between Rome and Syria, The antiquities in Syria are nothing but a copy of the antiquities in Rome or in the rest of the Mediterranean basin,These antiquities were a testament to the degree of progress that prevailed in the Levant throughout the seven centuries with the Western and Eastern Romans, i.e., the Byzantines.
Women constitute half of society, which is important and crucial,. However, despite this, women were not treated equally with men in patriarchal Bedouin societies,In ancient Rome, that is, in Syria and the Levant, women had great importance in all aspects of life, and were equal to men, even superior to them, There was no polygamy in Rome, and women were worshipped like the goddess Ishtar, They were queens and heads of state, and they took charge of countries, governments, and peoples who prospered, became strong, and advanced culturally in an amazing way, We have Zenobia, Mari, Queen Semiramis, and many others. The saying that a nation cannot prosper if it is led by a woman is wrong, even degenerate.
The story of the Syrian queens is fascinating. We know very little about them, while the rest of the world outside the Middle East knows them well, Queen Semiramis has become a living legend, Queen Naqia has become a symbol of the unyielding queen, and who does not know our Syrian princess of the Phoenician era, Europa, who gave the European continent its name, and because of whom the alphabet, science, and knowledge were transferred to Greece through her brother, Prince Cadmus? Let us not forget the supreme lady Julia Domna, who was a temple priestess, and with her political acumen, she was able to enable her sons to sit on the Roman imperial throne. Julia Domna turned Rome into an annex of Syria, so it is not permissible to speak of Roman colonialism, but rather of a Syrian-Roman partnership.
We wanted to demonstrate that women in the Levant had a very prestigious position, and since women constitute almost half of society, and since the Bedouin of the Arabian Peninsula liberated us, and we should be grateful to them!!!!!!!!, therefore it must be said that the Bedouin invasion also liberated women, Herein lies the colossal lie, for the Bedouin invaders did not liberate women, but rather placed them in the cage of the tyranny and injustice of Sharia and religion, which despised women in an unimaginable way, For 1450 years we have witnessed an irrational adherence to the saying, “No nation has ever prospered if it entrusted its affairs to a woman,” We find adherence and rigidity regarding polygamy, which did not exist in the Levant before 1450 years!
For fourteen centuries, women have suffered from many forms of injustice under the guise of religious jurisprudence, such as considering men as guardians over them, and then fighting them by starving them through a law that deprives them of their rights, Their rights are not equal to the rights of men, and in order not to starve, they must accept any insult from men, who remain in a state of bestiality, Their testimony is not like the testimony of Ishtar, Zenobia, Julia Domna, and Semiramis,In terms of credibility, they are half a human being, as the testimony of a man is equivalent to the testimony of two women, Then, jurisprudence places honor in her vagina and hymen, Breaking the hymen without a marriage contract may mean slaughtering her to protect honor, The forms of injustice that women suffer from under the guise of jurisprudence are more than can be counted, mentioned, or enumerated.
The tragedy is more general and widespread, Because women are considered deficient in intellect and religious understanding, they are not permitted to lead a nation, They are obligated to accept being considered shameful, and to accept being despised for not praying during menstruation—and we don’t know why they don’t pray during menstruation! They are obligated to accept Ibn Abdullah’s statement, “For I have seen that you are the majority of the inhabitants of Hell.” They are obligated to swallow being likened to excrement, They are obligated to be married when they “can endure intercourse”—is a wife only for intercourse?! They are obligated to accept men possessing the weapon of divorce, thus placing them in the position of a slave, They are even obligated to accept the distinction between their urine and that of men, with the jurisprudential ruling being, “The urine of a man is sprinkled, and the urine of a woman is washed.”
Throughout the last fourteen centuries, religion and its scholars have not respected women, For them, capturing and treating them in the way we know from the history of those last centuries was a given, And until now, scholars insist on considering religion as a protector and honorer of women, who exist under local traditions and jurisprudence in the best of circumstances! However, the tremendous progress in the status of women in recent centuries, which was many times greater than what was achieved during thousands of years of human history, has exposed, by comparing the situation of women in this region with their situation in advanced, humane societies—that is, the rest of the world—that considering women in this environment to be in the best of conditions was a great deception, In reality, they are in the worst condition, It can be said here that the poor condition is due first to the Bedouin invasion and the decadence of the invaders and the change in the way religion dealt with women within the framework of what is called Sharia, Secondly, it is due to the failure of the invasion of “modernity” to the region, Here, the peoples of the region became confused between modernity and consumerist modernization, which was achieved in some areas by oil, The continued existence of Sharia as a source of laws in the countries of the region means that women remain in a culture of captivity, that is, in a culture of the second ignorance, where there is no fundamental difference between the first ignorance and the second ignorance. Indeed, it can be said that the second ignorance was worse than the first ignorance!
We feel that the question about the relationship of religion to women is discriminatory, since women are human beings like men. We believe that the question should be whether jurisprudence has honored women, treated them fairly, or dealt with them as human beings! This is regardless of the shameful texts, because texts, no matter what they are, cannot do anything on earth without the men of jurisprudence, who are men of politics, religion, and governance all at once.
The texts are nothing more than ink on paper compared to the men of jurisprudence or religion, who are the men of authority and control, Their shameful interpretations and explanations, which are contradictory and antagonistic to each other, were and still are representative of their whims and convictions, Therefore, the crime against women is their crime par excellence and first and foremost!
Arabists and Muslim Brotherhood supporters repeatedly claim that the Arab-Bedouin conquests “liberated” the peoples of the Levant, without a clear and objective definition of the concept of liberation,, They claim, “They liberated us from the Romans!!!!” But the issue of the Romans was not clear as a primitive colonialism, Rule was reciprocal between Syria and Rome, so that it can be said metaphorically that Rome was annexed to Syria, Syrian Rome! And it can be said metaphorically that Syria was annexed to Rome, Roman Syria! Roman law treated the Romans, the Syrians, and other peoples of the Mediterranean basin who were annexed to the Roman Empire on an equal footing through occupation, which turned into a partnership, The classical colonial situation does not apply to the relationship between Syria and Rome, There were at least several Caesars in Rome from among the Syrians, and there was a Libyan Caesar and another from Yemen, while there was no Syrian Caliph. Moreover, the laws of the Roman Empire did not differentiate in terms of projects such as building bridges, irrigation canals, theaters, and other forms of construction between Rome and Syria, The antiquities in Syria are nothing but a copy of the antiquities in Rome or in the rest of the Mediterranean basin,These antiquities were a testament to the degree of progress that prevailed in the Levant throughout the seven centuries with the Western and Eastern Romans, i.e., the Byzantines.