Israel, it's about time!

[Nemo]

The root word for Islam is “al-Silm,” which means “submission” or “surrender.” There is no controversy about this among Islamic scholars.

Peace through devoting yourself to God. The Sufis defined God as an infinite being. Their view was that the world is created from God's light, or energy. In effect, EVERYTHING is a part of God. The woods, the trees, the devil, all of it. Kind of synchronizes with Hinduism, which worships different facets of the infinite. Of course, the goal of Islam is to pay homage to that infinite conscience. And eventually be one with it. Only through giving yourself up to it, can that be achieved.

Of course, there have been and are different interpretations of Qur'an.

Submission and peace can be very different concepts, even if a form of peace is often brought about through forcing others into submission.

Er...peace by making others submit? Only in S&M.

As the modern-day Islamic scholar, Ibrahim Sulaiman, puts it, "Jihad is not inhumane, despite its necessary violence and bloodshed, its ultimate desire is peace which is protected and enhanced by the rule of law."

He's not the first person to suggest that global domination might bring peace. In fact, that is what Armageddon is all about. When only one side is left standing [Jesus and Imam Mehadi according to the Muslims] and there is no more war.

There's no point in seeking global domination otherwise, since that is as unlikely as lions and lambs becoming best friends.

In truth, the Qur’an not only calls Muslims to submit to Allah, it also commands them to subdue people of other religions until they are in a full state of submission to Islamic rule.

I disagree. It is advised that you should invite other people to embrace Islam. In other words, preach the religion. There are some people however, who make interpretations of the Qur'an to suit their ends.

If the muslim women is equal to the muslim man, then why muslim women do not inherit property in equal portions to males?

Women inherit land from their parents, which is hers to use as she chooses. Her husband has to provide her with a dowry, which is also, for her to spend as she chooses. She may work and spend the money as she chooses. In case of her husband's death, she gets a share of his property as well. The man gets nothing save what he inherits from his father.

Why the initial disproportionate division in land? A husband is completely responsible to provide for his family, i.e. his wife's needs, his children's needs, his parents' needs, other dependent's needs. A wife may choose not to offer a dime of her own into her family, and she has complete right to do so.

As an unmarried woman working, the woman has no obligation to spend money in her father's family. A man is not so lucky.

Also this link might shed more light into property divisions:
http://www.icgt.org/Khutbas/StatOfWomanPIII.htm

If the muslim women is equal to the muslim man, then why the muslim women cant marry whoever she wants?

It is her choice whether or not to marry someone. She is the one who says I do. It is encouraged, though, that the whole family agrees upon the husband, mostly for society's sake. But the woman is not forced by religion to marry according to her family's wishes.

If the muslim women is equal to the muslim man, then why the Qu'ran gives muslim men permission to beat their wives for disobedience.

http://www.themodernreligion.com/wom...rison_full.htm
The bottom part deals with wife beatings. The prophet is quoted saying that those that beat their wives are not the best among them. If your husband beats you, you can always divorce, just as you can in today's world.

It plainly says that husbands are “a degree above” wives.

Physically, yes.

The Hadith says that women are intellectually inferior, and that they comprise the majority of Hell’s occupants.

You should not trust all Hadith. Nor all interpretations. Like I said, [and many people in this thread have said] people will find a way to twist things to their benefit.

Btw, there are more women than men in the world. I wouldn't be surprised if Hell's residence numbers adhere to the same ratio.

Millions of Christians were enslaved by Muslims, and tens of millions of Africans. The Arab slave-trading routes would stay open for 1300 years, until pressure from Christian-based countries forced Islamic nations to declare the practice illegal (in theory). To this day, the Muslim world has never apologized to the victims of Jihad and slavery.

Read my answer to Lightzy regarding slavery. And Christians did not change slavery. The modern world changed it. The British, the French, the Dutch, Portuguese, Americans were all what? Buddhists? And they treated slaves worse than the Muslims.

What you fail to understand is that religions evolve. I doubt any religion is what it was at the beginning. At it's time, Islam was the religion that offered the most humanitarian options with more rights to those that needed it. It would've evolved and adapted in this modern [has to some extent in some countries], had it not been for the rise in extremism. Look at the secular moderate Muslim prevalent countries we had 30-40 years ago. We could've had a great world right now, but mistakes were made that has given rise to bigots and fanatics. Those mistakes are still being made.

Do not blame the religion for the shortcomings of it's followers who fail to follow it's spirit.