Saturday, July 30, 2005

Iraqi women split on role of Islam in new constitution

Iraqi women are split over how great a role Islam should play in the new constitution, currently being drafted in parliament, with some fearing "a return to the Dark Ages". An early draft of the constitution published in the local Al Sabah newspaper on Tuesday made clear that Islam is to be "the official religion of the State" and "the main source of legislation". The text is supported by the conservative Shia majority in Iraq's parliament. "No law that contradicts the universally agreed tenets of Islam may be enacted," reads the draft, still under discussion by a parliamentary committee and subject to revision. Parliamentary speaker Hajim Al Hasani made clear that he did not believe that this meant the rule of Sharia, or Islamic law. But for women's rights activist Yannar Mohammed any reference to Islam in the constitution "will take us back to the Dark Ages". Mohammed fears that any such language could allow public floggings and stoning of adulterers and granting clerics the last word in matters of marriage, divorce and inheritance. "The liberation of Iraq has unleashed the darkest forces in the country," said Mohammed. "We will be losing the basic protections as women and public citizens" if this language is adopted. Being a woman MP in Iraq is a dangerous job: in late April Lamiya Abed Khaduri, from former prime minister Ayad Allawi's party, was shot dead on her doorstep. And in May Salama Al Khafaji, an independent MP elected on the Shia alliance ticket, survived a fourth attempt on her life in two years.


At July 30, 2005 6:39 AM, Blogger Ole said...

Maybe the only hope for Islam is a women's rebellion. Highly doubtful though.

At July 30, 2005 9:24 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

Ole: It can be encouraged. Starting with banning the veil in Western countries.

At July 30, 2005 3:51 PM, Blogger erp said...

Women in Islam must rise up in sufficient numbers and demand reforms. They can't wait for help from the U.N. or other do-gooder organizations or fall victim to what I call the Prince Charming Syndrome, sitting by passively waiting for that handsome prince on a white horse to show up and take them to his castle.

Update: Looks like the younger generation gets it: Burka clad teenage girls mob a male media idol in the lobby of a Saudi hotel. Authorities are horrified and drag the offending boy away, but the girls have picture cell phones now and are sending forbidden pictures to each other. Read more about the Saudi Girls.

Like the story of the hole in the dyke, once a crack appears, there's no way to stop the flood. Wouldn't it be nice if the feminists in NOW, the National Organization of Women, would speak out against the slavery of Muslim women, but don't hold your breathe, they're committed to advancing socialism, not advancing women's rights.

There's a window of opportunity now ladies, carpe diem or go back to the dark ages and the living shroud.

At July 30, 2005 7:37 PM, Blogger Mike H. said...

Iraqi women need to get rid of the arranged marriage. As long as the men figure that they can just buy a new wife they will continue to do the honor killings and slavery.
Umm, I'm thinking about starting up a new crusade. If any one wants to join me we can get a couple of horses and some swords and we'll be right in style for a seventh century bash.

At July 30, 2005 9:47 PM, Blogger PD111 said...

Down with the burqa!
The burqa, in my view is a symbol of the oppression of women. I'm deeply offended that such a symbol is openly flouted in the West.

The burqa is a symbol of the enslavement of women, i.e., it is an open symbol of the institution of slavery. And this is why I find it so offensive.

Now I have nothing against a woman wearing a burqa in the privacy of her home, or in the course of a "rag" event or some such. What bothers me is that, we as a society have recognised the institutionalised slavery of women in islam, as legitimate in the West.

So here we are, in the 21st century, right here in the domain of Freedom, and we have allowed islands of slavery, marked by the acceptance of the burqa, to become established within this domain.


At July 30, 2005 10:33 PM, Blogger Jude the Obscure said...

DP111 Sometimes I wonder if something else is going on. this young woman left Pakistan at 5 yrs of age. Her mother doesn't wear a veil except outside the house. This young woman started moving into religion when she was 20 and is likely to become stricter in observance than her mother. Why?

At July 31, 2005 1:25 AM, Blogger ik said...

maybe in a couple of years after the mullahs have taken over the Iraqi women might start remembering Saddam in a positive way!

At July 31, 2005 2:36 AM, Blogger Don Miguel said...

"Wouldn't it be nice if the feminists in NOW, the National Organization of Women, would speak out against the slavery of Muslim women, but don't hold your breathe, they're committed to advancing socialism, not advancing women's rights."

erp, NOW will also never do anything that may be considered pro-American. NOW has a dismal record in support of women living under repressive regimes like the Taliban or Saudi Wahhabis. They undoubtedly believe in the multicultural "all cultures are equal (i.e. no culture is better than another one)" lie. NOW is also a shadow of its former self due to the loss of members who actually can think for themselves.

At August 01, 2005 3:52 AM, Blogger erp said...

don miguel, I agree that NOW wouldn't do anything pro-American, but why would supporting Muslim women be considered pro-American?


Post a Comment

<< Home