The right to be angry

I like to think I use anger upon occassion to help me achieve success in actions I chose to do, and do not let anger dictate my actions.

their are certain situations were anger is allowed, such as a ccording to a hadith when muhammad SAW would think about the status of the ummah in the future whether it woul;d get corrupted or not he would get angry of the fatc that it may go down, but even when he got angry it would be controlled and at a certain elvel where the shaytan wouldnt get the chance to blind him in anger.

So theri are certain situations you are allowed to be angry but at a certain level aswell it cant go above it.

I was reading somewhere about a girl who had got an abortion without telling her partner in crime... and when he found out a few months later and was furious, throwing things around smashing things in anger...

... and some people were suggesting that his behaviour was not on and that she should not be around such people...

it just seemed kind of strange.

I would have thought that was one place where anger would be allowed?

well he could have hit her so no, not strange.

Control is probably very important even here - for instance if you are in a position to cast judgement, that should be done when not angry as the anger could cloud the judgement and make your judgement biased (and that I think was the advice given by Hadhrat Abu Bakr (ra) to someone [maybe his son?]).

Why was he not getting a sympathy vote here too?

And why is this about allowing and not allowing anger? Anger just happens. It's just another emotion. Why has only anger been highlighted?

"..its her body..."

(to be fair, that was a response by the female posters while the male posters who replied later were more saying they would be angry.)

you can seethe with rage and still just sit there and not react. or you could show that you are angry.

Anger is an emotion that can often easily be seen as compromising judgement for the worse and often lead to bad results.

being angry at the situation would be ok but its what he did in anger was wrong, you cant go smashing things around like that

why not?

I thought it was a perfectly... reasonable response.

well actually psychotherapists tell us its good to release emotions. throwing things was his release of his anger. but he could have hurt someone. more practical ways go punch a bag, couple rounds of squash. leave the room, go to the library and let out a good loud scream.

i don't think its good to hold emotions like that inside better to let it out without harming ppl of course.

i am hot tempered but i think its genetic a line of firey women unfortunately. spiritual acitivities work for me. going mute with others works for me too. leaving room works. slamming doors behind me works too. i've never broken anything in anger, but it would feel good to break a few dishes, that would be some release. there are restaurants where they let you break dishes turkish ones i think can't recall its a tradition.

I think a part of it all was to express his displeasure to her too - to show what it meant to him.

But that is just an example that I was thinking about.

Is it wrong if people become intimidated by your anger? Or is that just normal?

Well, it's not going to be the guy who has to carry the baby around is it?

I thinks she should have spoke to him about it before doing something like that.

I actually find it difficult to understand how some people can jsut make the decision for an abortion just like that.

Just to add, I am not equivocating the right to be angry with the right to be violent.

(and the abortion was just a single example, turning the whole thing to be just about that would be defeating the overall picture of things.)

how do you know they make the decision just like that?

this could be something they have thought about for a very long time (to have children or not) and when the time came they knew what to do.

He was venting. Could have been worse. He could have gone all Bruce Banner on her.