It is currently 04/04/25 10:38 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next   Page 1 of 6   [ 133 posts ]
Author Message
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 2:38 am • # 1 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112
This is an appalling, enraging, depressing, and exceptionally important read ~ Karzai legalizing rape and repression of women to win a frigging election is ... I just can't pick the right word for it ~ inhuman? ~ inhumane? ~ sick? ~ evil? ~ depraved? ~ all of the foregoing? ~ THIS is what our troops are dying and being maimed [both physically and psychologically] to protect??? ~ Image ~ Sooz


Brutal Law Strips Afghan Women of Rights -- Where's the Outrage?

By Marie Cocco, Washington Post Writers Group. Posted [url=http://www.alternet.org/ts/archives/?date[F]=04&date[Y]=2009&date[d]=02&act=Go/]April 2, 2009[/url].

Afghan President Hamid Karzai just signed a law consigning the women of Afghanistan to lives of terrible repression.

Afghanistan's women are no longer in vogue.

It was only a few years ago that Laura Bush, who normally shied from causes that could be considered controversial, took up their banner. "The brutal oppression of women is a central goal of the terrorists," the first lady said in a radio address shortly after President Bush launched the U.S-led invasion to overthrow the Taliban following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "The plight of women and children in Afghanistan is a matter of deliberate human cruelty, carried out by those who seek to intimidate and control."

That was then. This is now: Afghan President Hamid Karzai has just signed a law that forces women to obey their husbands' sexual demands, keeps women from leaving the house -- even for work or school -- without a husband's permission, automatically grants child custody rights to fathers and grandfathers before mothers, and favors men in inheritance disputes and other legal matters. In short, the law again consigns Afghan women to lives of brutal repression.

"This is really, really dangerous for everybody in Afghanistan," Soraya Sobhrang of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission said in a telephone interview from Kabul. Noting that violence against women already is rampant, Sobhrang said the new law effectively "legalizes all violence against women in Afghanistan."

The legislation zoomed through Afghanistan's parliament. Karzai, who faces elections in August, signed it in an apparent effort to placate conservative religious forces that are said to hold the balance of power in his re-election bid. The United Nations Development Fund for Women is still analyzing a final version of the legislation but says it is "seriously concerned." The law appears to contradict both the Afghan constitution, which guarantees equal rights for men and women, and international conventions on human rights.

The U.S. State Department has had no comment.

Afghanistan's women are, apparently, the latest casualty of the Obama administration's tilt toward realpolitik: ignore human rights violations -- whether they're in China or Russia or in the quiet misery of an Afghan villager's home -- in pursuit of larger foreign policy goals.

This contradiction between political rhetoric and policy reality has often been the American way. But now we have Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state. When she was first lady, she championed the rights of women oppressed by the Taliban long before most Americans had ever heard of that radical regime. Clinton took the helm of the State Department vowing to elevate the cause of human and economic rights for women and girls -- a pledge she made again in The Hague this week at the end of a major conference on Afghanistan that was aimed at securing greater international cooperation on the desperate and disparate crises there.

"My message is very clear. Women's rights are a central part of American foreign policy in the Obama administration; they are not marginal, they are not an add-on or an afterthought," Clinton said in response to a general question about the situation confronting women in Afghan society. "You cannot expect a country to develop if half its population [is] underfed, undereducated, under-cared-for, oppressed, and left on the sidelines."

The secretary was not asked specifically about the new law. Among its other provisions, it guarantees that married men can have sex once every four nights and wives must submit. In effect, it legalizes marital rape. Sobhrang worries there may be worse to come. "They are talking about child marriage," she says.

Without pressure from the foreign powers that hold so much sway in Afghanistan, there was little that even the women in the country's parliament could do. Sobhrang faults those who were quiet in the face of the clear effort by a religious faction to reimpose medieval mores on a country that is in many ways a ward of the contemporary international community.

The ugly truth is that Afghanistan has long been sliding back into the violent chaos that is friendly political ground for the Taliban and other extremist groups. Women have, as usual, been among the chief victims.

There is indeed a lengthy and urgent to-do list for the Obama administration, which says it is determined to abandon a failing course. But that does not mean the United States should again fail Afghanistan's women.

To consign them to what Laura Bush correctly called "deliberate human cruelty" is cruelty itself.

Marie Cocco is a prize-winning syndicated columnist on political and cultural topics for The Washington Post Writers Group. She is a frequent commentator on national TV and radio shows.

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/13481 ... e_outrage/



Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 2:44 am • # 2 
Yep, sooz. That's the one thing all the tribes in Afghanistan seem to agree on. Women are worthless. Our kids are dying so the men in Afghanistan can have nicer places in which to abuse their women.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 2:58 am • # 3 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
Afghan government examining rape law: ambassador

A controversial proposed law in Afghanistan that includes a provision making it illegal for a Shia Muslim woman to refuse to have sex with her husband is under review, Afghanistan's ambassador to Canada says.

Afghan Ambassador Omar Samad said the Afghan government is studying the law, which has sparked international outrage, to determine its status, and pleaded for patience and understanding.

"I fully understand the reaction - the immediate, emotional reaction of countries like Canada who have done so much to build a young democracy," Samad said in an interview.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and opposition leaders have expressed strong concerns about the legislation, which would also make it illegal for a woman to leave the house without her husband's permission, or have custody of children.

The law is intended to regulate family life only inside Afghanistan's Shia community, which makes up about 20 per cent of Afghanistan's 30 million people.

"People also need to understand that this young democracy is immature. It is not at the same standard as a Canadian or European democracy," Samad said. "And it's in a very different cultural context as well. We are going to fall down, we are going to make mistakes, and we're going to move forward as a result."

The Canadian government summoned Samad for consultations over the law, considered a form of diplomatic rebuke.

Samad said the condition of women in his country cannot be compared to the days under the Taliban, who banned women from appearing in public without a body-covering burka and a male escort from the family.

Women now hold 89 of parliament's 351 seats and many own businesses. Millions of girls also now attend school.

Critics say law designed to win election support


Afghan President Hamid Karzai's office has so far refused to comment on the proposed legislation, which has been criticized by some Afghan parliamentarians and a UN women's agency but has not yet been published.

Critics say the Afghan government approved it in a hurry to win support in the upcoming election from ethnic Hazaras - a Shia Muslim minority that constitutes a crucial block of swing voters.

The law, which does not affect Afghan Sunnis, says that a wife "is bound to preen for her husband as and when he desires."

"As long as the husband is not travelling, he has the right to have sexual intercourse with his wife every fourth night," Article 132 of the law says.

"Unless the wife is ill or has any kind of illness that intercourse could aggravate, the wife is bound to give a positive response to the sexual desires of her husband."

One provision says a "man should not avoid having sexual relations with his wife longer than once every four months."

With files from the Canadian Press and Associated Press


http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/04/0 ... istan.html


Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:01 am • # 4 
Karzai reinstituted the 'moral gangs' who go around checking beard lengths and making sure women are covered and accompanied by men, a few years ago. We are fighting so that Afghan men can rape their wives.

This Afghan excursion gets dumber as time goes by.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:01 am • # 5 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
I wonder if the Afghan government would be reconsidering this law if there weren't NATO troops parked on their doorsteps?


Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:06 am • # 6 
In the meantime our kids die and the Afghani women are raped. Wow, good thing we're there huh. They are thinking.....right on. Would you give your life for that, oskar?


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:13 am • # 7 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
Avoid the question again.
Gonna do a bit of name-calling now?


Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:20 am • # 8 
oskar576 wrote:
I wonder if the Afghan government would be reconsidering this law if there weren't NATO troops parked on their doorsteps?
Well they wouldn't be the government or able to consider any law if there weren't NATO troops parked on their doorstep.


Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:21 am • # 9 

He is going to have it reviewed and if it goes against "sharia law" it may be changed. It doesn't go against sharia law. He says he sees nothing wrong with it.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,512556,00.html

The world protested, oskar. It wasn't because we are having our kids killed there. It was because the world protested. They can do that without getting kids killed you know?

I ask again, would you give your life for that?



Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:29 am • # 10 
This all started as a result of our War on Terrorists and has qrown to this... It is time to leave, since we can't fight all of the men of that Country in addition to the Terrorists...


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:31 am • # 11 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
I ask again, would you give your life for that?

Were I in the armed forces and had I been sent to Afghanistan, probably. I can't do better than that since you're asking a hypothetical.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:33 am • # 12 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
Why did you leave out this bit?

Karzai said he ordered the Justice Ministry to review the law, and if anything in it contravenes the country's constitution or Shariah law, "measures will be taken."


Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:42 am • # 13 

Right and it does neither.



Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:51 am • # 14 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
You have read the Afghan Constitution?


Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 3:58 am • # 15 
oskar576 wrote:
You have read the Afghan Constitution?
I hadn't until you mentioned it, but I've now looked at it here. It includes this line:

5. Observing the United Nations Charter and respecting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

Interesting ...


Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 4:02 am • # 16 
I have read enough to know that it does not really differ from sharia law. It says "no law may contradict the beliefs and provisions of Islam" and uses Hanafi jurisprudence which is part of Sharia law. It actually specifies Shia jurisprudence in cases involving shiites. It does many lovely things like giving the death penalty to anyone who converts to Christianity.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 4:04 am • # 17 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
Have you a link, please?


Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 4:07 am • # 18 
Ha. It also says it is against the production of narcotics and intoxicants and we all know that's really working well.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 4:09 am • # 19 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
No link, then?


Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 4:09 am • # 20 
Quiver gave you a link. You can research it yourself you know.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 4:20 am • # 21 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003

Sorry. Hadn't noticed the underlined "here"
Now refer to:

Article Twenty-two
Ch. 2, Art. 1

Any kind of discrimination and privilege between the citizens of Afghanistan are prohibited.

The citizens of Afghanistan - whether man or woman - have equal rights and duties before the law

My interpretation is that having a special law that singles out Shias is contrary to the Constitution.

Then the very last sentence in the Constitution clearly states:

Upon its enforcement, laws and decrees contrary to the provisions of this constitution are invalid.



[Sooz comment on edit: oskar provided a full copy of the Afghani Constitution here, which I have moved in its entirety to our Links and Resources board at https://voicesorchoices.com/viewtopic.php?t=1044 for anyone who chooses to read or use it for reference]



Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 4:34 am • # 22 

Jeez oskar, read the damn thing instead of posting it. Yes the first part is just lovely. That's to satisfy the world community. The catchall is according to the rules of Islam.

Try reading Article 130 ch 7 Art 15 it talks about Hanafi jurisprudence. That is part of Sharia law

and Article 131 Ch 7 Art 16. It specifies that Shiites will be dealt with according to Shia law.

Please delete that long post and let people go to Quiver's link instead if they want to read it.



Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 4:41 am • # 23 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
Article One Hundred and thirty
Ch. 7. Art. 15
While processing the cases, the courts apply the provisions of this Constitution and other laws.
When there is no provision in the Constitution or other laws regarding ruling on an issue,
(there is a provision that states that all are equal regardless of gender)the courts' decisions shall be within the limits of this Constitution in accord with the Hanafi jurisprudence and in a way to serve justice in the best possible manner.
Article One Hundred and thirty one
Ch. 7. Art. 16
Courts shall apply Shia school of law in cases dealing with personal matters(there is a provision that states that all are equal regardless of gender which, IMO, overrides this exception) involving the followers of Shia Sect in accordance with the provisions of law.
In other cases if no clarification by this constitution and other laws exist and both sides of the case are followers of the Shia Sect, courts will resolve the matter according to laws of this Sect.


Top
  
PostPosted: 04/04/09 4:56 am • # 24 
I know what it says oskar. I sent you to it. They wrote and the President signed the law. Obviously, they don't interpret the "provisions" the way you do. They worded things the way they were told to. That doesn't mean they abide by them. "According to the laws of Islam" covers a lot.

We have some nice words in our Constitution but that didn't keep us from having slaves for a long time and it didn't get the blacks or women voting rights for a long time.

"Courts shall apply shia school of law in cases dealing with personal matters involving the followers of the Shia sect in accordance with provisions of law". This is part of the Constitution. The laws can be anything they want.

I'm going to ignore this thread from now on as long as it is taken up by the posting of the Constitution. It's a pain in the ass.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 04/04/09 5:00 am • # 25 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
LMAO


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next   Page 1 of 6   [ 133 posts ] New Topic Add Reply

All times are UTC - 6 hours



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
© Voices or Choices.
All rights reserved.