Taking the sting out of that wife-beating verse in the Koran

The verse atheist liberal feminists hate most in the Koran concerns a husband's rights over his wife, if he maintains her:

004.034
YUSUFALI: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women,because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

PICKTHAL: Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

SHAKIR: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

You would have thought a reasonably intelligent woman could easily avoid being beaten if she heeded all the prior warnings she would get from her husband before she got her beating.

An employee gets a verbal warning, a written warning and then a final warning before being sacked by his employer.

A recalcitrant wife also gets two warnings over a longish period of time before she gets beaten. How long would it take a husband to formally admonish his wife? If he takes it up to the next level ie does not have sex with her and makes her sleep in the spare room or the sofa, then clearly she has not modified her behaviour.

There should be a Matrimonial Disputes Tribunal for the admonition to be first registered, to see that both parties to the dispute are taking this matrimonial dispute seriously.

I don't see why we cannot have a Matrimonial Disputes website for these admonitions to be registered online and for the wife to have a right of reply if she does not think the husbandly admonition justified or reasonable.

If the recalcitrant wife does not mend her behaviour, he can just give her a slap on the wrist and record the fact with the Matrimonial Disputes Tribunal that he has "beaten" her.

If she still does not mend her behaviour, he can proceed to divorce her under the rules of fault-based divorce.

That would sound fair enough to me. (Contrary to rumours that I am really a white man pretending to be a female and foreigner, I am in fact female and not white. I just think, talk and write like a man because that is how I would like things to be if I were a man and felt compelled to marry and have legitimate offspring and in so doing invest in the future of his society, nation and civilisation.)

Claire Khaw offers to tow away the broken down vehicle that is the British Democrats

The BDP are now reduced to giving away free Andrew Brons' speeches in the hope of getting the contact details of punters.  Is this what British Nationalism is now reduced to?

http://britishdemocraticparty.org/get-your-free-copy-of-a-nationalist-perspective-today/

http://britishdemocraticparty.org/why-the-need-for-the-british-democrats/comment-page-1/#comment-17190

Well, I have better ideas.

All that I ask is for the BDP to announce me as their Director of Communications and for the media to ask me any questions at http://ask.fm/oneparty4all

That is pretty low maintenance, isn't it?

That would please ask.fm and the best thing about it is that if I do a bad job, the BDP can immediately remove me as Director of Communications and dissociate itself from me.

Whatever happens, both of us would have got a bit of publicity.

The creators of ask.fm would be pleased too, because all this would be done through the medium of their website.

Journalists would like this because the kind of journalism they like best is the cutting and pasting kind which they don't have to move from their computers to do.

What I propose is very motherhood and apple pie: the repeal of the Equality Act 2010 and the abolition of no-fault divorce. NOTHING ELSE.

As I have pointed out before, repealing the Equality Act is hardly extremist. Dan Hannan said in a crowded room in October 2015 that he would repeal it when I asked him, during the launch of Conservatives for Liberty.  http://con4lib.com/hannan-launch/

http://ht.ly/ugheF
Should most British businesses be exempt from EU regulations?

If nationalists make proposals that small businesses and the independent trader would welcome, that would in some way remove the stigma of being a party representing mostly racists in a time-warp or men who cannot compete against immigrant labour in the field of unskilled manual labour.

No-fault divorce means marriage is treated as less than a business contract

Introduce no-fault divorce now and remedy the shabby state of affairs caused by craven politicians

http://www.thelawyer.com/modern-divorce-is-a-sad-comedy/3001930.article

Saying we should have no-fault divorce is like saying that marriage is actually less important than a contract.

But this is what Philippa Dolan of Ashfords solicitors says should be imposed.

http://www.ashfords.co.uk/partners/Dolan/Philippa/

The courts act to enforce contracts and in practice treats them as sacred, unless they are illegal contracts outside the law, eg if you paid a hitman to do a hit on your wife and he just took the money and didn't do the job.

If you formed a business partnership and it was your business partner's fault that caused the partnership to break up and you to lose money, should the partner at fault just take half of everything since the partnership was formed?

Should s/he fuck.

But then the white middle class liberal these days has shit for brains, and can't think straight after so many decades of feminist mindfuckery.

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/no-fault-divorce-being-proposed-by.html

Irreversible decline happens when your society no longer respects the institution of marriage

‎Daryll Christopher:

"The more a woman pays her bills, the more I will love her. Occidental males are too preoccupied or trained to act as gentlemen. We should see women as our enemies and competitors, this is who they are, we should never love our enemies, nor should we shower them with gifts."

Most black men think like Daryll. This is why blacks in America have an 80% illegitimacy rate.

That is why female promiscuity is so destructive to your society and civilisation in the long term.

Feminism and female promiscuity, having destroyed the attractiveness of women to men and vice versa, your women become rotten, and so do your men, and then your children.  The next generation is noticeably degenerate and worse, rotting rotting rotting away ....

While this process of putrefaction takes place, no one will say anything. The men who know about feminism will complain but that is all they will do.

Even if they said anything, no one would listen to them.  Have you noticed a single political party in the land supporting marriage?   Even the nationalist ones?  Of course not.

To make marriage attractive to men, you will have to make it attractive to selfish cautious suspicious men  like Daryll who don't really like women and don't really want to help others and will only look after Number One.

Daryll will not be marrying any woman because, under the system of no-fault divorce that we have, any wife of his can divorce him for any reason and take half his stuff.

Like any man who wishes to preserve his property, he understandably does not want to find a woman he hates and then give her his house.

Denouncing men like Daryll will not change their behaviour, however.

Daryll will tell any male offspring of his son noo get married and he will spread the cancer of SSMs in his own little way.  He thinks having one child is enough and it is in any case all he can afford.

Therefore the demographic time-bomb of the West will mirror the demographic time bomb of China, where they have a one-child policy.

The smarter men with money will behave like Daryll and only the stupid ones with no money will get married because they have nothing to lose. Or they are men who are happy with the idea of marrying an older woman for her money while forfeiting their opportunity to be a father and a husband.

And so racial and national degeneracy entrenches itself further.

Nothing short of a Cultural Revolution will change things. The die is cast and the spiral is downwards.

So now we know the importance of this thing so many people call "just a piece of paper" You won't miss it till it's gone and when it's gone your nation will just die of the slow poison of feminism.

Onwards, to barbarism. Onwards to decline. Onwards to becoming slut and bastard members of a Third World Third Rate nation.

With a bit of luck we can look forward to becoming a nation like Liberia or Sierra Leone or Haiti.