Women in Lebanon have long been underrepresented in the law. Lebanese government is grounded in liberal tradition in all sectors of society, which intends to protect private freedom in the home from state intervention. Women’s rights and Personal Status Laws have been under the jurisdiction of the religious courts under the confessional system, in which the laws stem from religious interpretation unbound by state interference. In April 2010, the Lebanese Council of Ministers approved the KAFA (enough) draft law on the Protection of Women from Family Violence, which criminalizes domestic violence and places it under the jurisdiction of the penal law. The development of this bill has sparked a controversial public debate, in which gender roles and definitions are challenged, disrupting the patriarchal familial structure entrenched in Arab society. According to Michael Warner, in Publics and Counter Publics, “Social movements take shape in civil society, often with an agenda of demands vis-à-vis the state. They seek to change policy by appealing to public opinion” (51). Currently, the increased public arguments have highlighted various religious arguments against the bill and various feminist arguments supporting the bill. “The question for debate, then, is to what extent the environment for critical social movements is becoming more undemocratic, ‘refeudalized,’ or colonized by changing relations among the state, mass media, and the market” (Warner 51). KAFA’s public arguments include the “White Ribbon” campaign in universities, press conferences, and conferences open to the public refuting the arguments by Dar al-Fatwa (the highest Sunni Muslim authority) and the Islamic Council (the Higher Shia Muslim authority) against the bill. This paper explores the ideologic, as defined by Sharon Crowley, of the Muslim religious arguments in opposition to the bill, and rhetorically analyzes the public debate to illustrate how the articulation of religious and feminist positions in a public forum reframes the long-silenced issue. This paper argues the debate has redefined the public sphere in which gender is not only debated, but the public circulation of a once-private gendered issue embodies the reciprocity between public and private.