Muslim Women Should be Free to marry anyone they chose

Now this one happened on the 6-7 June 2009. The panel consisted of 4 speakers, 2 favoring the motion and 2 against it. Two speakers who kept me from flipping the channel were Asra Noumani and Yasir Qadhi. I will discuss the former later and start with Yasir Qadhi, a Muslim cleric based in the US. Yasir was born to Pakistani parents in Texas. He got a degree in Chemical Engineering from Texas and then moved to the KSA to study Hadith and Theology. He is now doing PhD in Islamic Studies from Yale. In short, you have to be very careful when you confront him. He is smart.
Now Asra Noumani. A notorious feminist. Born to Indian parents in Mumbai. Thinks she is the only one free and women all over the world are subjugated and mere sex slaves. I would call her "a chip off the old block". Has got no clue what she is talking about yet will sympathize with women to get their votes. So desi. So Benazir.
Being a regular reader of muslimmatters.org, I found Yasir's perspective on the debate which was really interesting.

"I asked the producers what they meant by the motion. Did they mean that a Muslim lady had the freedom to not be forced into any marriage? In which case I could not oppose the motion, as Islamic law guarantees her the right to choose her spouse. Or did they mean that she had the right to marry anyone - including non-Muslims, and even other women (the wording of the motion clearly said anyone and not any man)? They responded that they meant it as it is - anyone!! Well, in that case, of course I opposed the motion. Islamic law does not allow a woman to marry a non-Muslim man, and of course same-sex marriages are prohibited as well!"

Needless to say, even he knew he was marked for death. Regardless of his position on the subject, what I did admire about Yasir was his ability to present facts and distinguish them from opinions. This was clearly missing in Asra's case. Since her ability to argue was driven by feminism, she was left with no other option but to resort to name-calling and getting personal.
One fundamental to follow before initiating a debate is to find some common grounds. In topics like these, the most appropriate grounds would be the religon itself along with the teachings of Quran and Sunnah. One can often argue on the interpretation in which case the opponents need to refer to Fiqah. Asra, it seems, had no understanding of how Islamic Jurisprudence works.
An interesting point that was brought in the debate, which surprisingly, had nothing to do with women, was freedom. Kudos again Yasir. I never thought it like that. We are indeed born free and are free citizens of this world. Yet not free enough to do whatever we wish. The religon does impose some restrictions upon us, not just women.

“Asra, a very simple and blunt question: would you allow a Muslim woman to marry another woman?” Her response was, as I expected, in the affirmative.

So there was nothing to agree upon in the first place. This argument had absolutely nothing to do with religon.

Here is more on the doha debates.