Hamid Karzai, the US-anointed and supposedly "West-friendly" President of that clusterfuck-disguised-as-a-country, signed a bill into law this week, entitled the "Shia Family Law", which contains provisions specifically negating the rights of women to refuse their husbands sexually, down to *how often* they should be expected to submit to their marital duties, tacitly approves child marriage, places *legal* (as opposed to ecclesiastical or de facto) restrictions on women leaving the home, makes divorce and obtaining child custody easier for men (at the expense of women) and assorted other key indicators of progress towards improved human rights:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/afghan-leader-accused-of-bid-to-legalise-rape-1658049.html

According to moderates in the government (who have been threatened for opposing or attempting to speak out against the bill):

The bill lay dormant for more than a year, but in February it was rushed through parliament as President Karzai sought allies in a constitutional row over the upcoming election. Senator Humeira Namati claimed it wasn't even read out in the Upper House, let alone debated, before it was passed to the Supreme Court. "They accused me of being an unbeliever," she said.

With friends like these, who needs the Taliban? Apparently the payoff for Karzai was the Afghani Supreme Court's endorsement that he be able to stay in office until elections in August, and a bid for Shia support (or at least less trouble from Iran) in advance of those elections...

I hate to say it, but this in my mind, is yet another reason we, and all of the West, just need to give the hell up on builiding an oil pipeline (or anything else) through that country and leave, leaving them with no external outlet for their animosity (except Iran, and wouldn't *that* be interesting), no holy war to fight, and just let them get back to the boring and grotty business of survival in such a hostile land - at which point I suspect more sane dynamics, such as an *internal* desire for economic and social development and its attendant desire for cooperation, might begin to assert themselves.

Regards,
Nydia

P.S. While the above might seem like a dangerous and counterproductive thing to do, I think our attention these days would be better spent being paid to Pakistan (and the Taliban incusrions there), which actually has a meaningful infrastructure, and more importantly, nuclear weapons.

Sad deal.... Glass. Parking. lot.

Ties in really well with the video that has been circulated on Pakistani television showing a 17 year old girl being held down by three Talibani while a fourth whipped her, in front of what appeared to be a couple dozen onlookers.

Apparently she had resisted marriage to a Talibani commander, and was then accused of immoral behavior (unspecified).

And, someone actually had the temerity to use a cell phone to capture the event. Wonder what the penalty for that would/will be?

People seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that the US overthrew the Taliban from power because they were oppressive to the Afghan people and generally were not nice people. Not so. They were only forced from power when they actively gave refuge and major support to Al Qaeda before and after 9/11. Prior to that time we were more than happy to sit back and let them terrorize the Afghan people for almost a decade.

As long as jihadis bent on attacking the US aren't in power there or building training bases in the country, we don't give a damn what laws they pass amongst themselves.

Yes, this is a religion of peace ;( Peaceful as long as the women don't mind being less than mules. As long as you only publish what they want you to publish. Peaceful as long as you do as you are told when you are told to do it.

Nope, nothing wrong here ...move along free thinking folks or face punishment as dictated by the above mentioned law.

Thing is, this isn't even a "fringe" element to the religion anymore.

Yes, this is a religion of peace ;( Peaceful as long as the women don't mind being less than mules. As long as you only publish what they want you to publish. Peaceful as long as you do as you are told when you are told to do it.

Nope, nothing wrong here ...move along free thinking folks or face punishment as dictated by the above mentioned law.

Thing is, this isn't even a "fringe" element to the religion anymore.

Here you go again... Islam is as much a religion of peace as is Christianity. Think about it

No jackass, show me such a large % of Christianty that pushes such an archaic , 14th century(?), mindset as the example given.

Then pull your head out from under the sink and start pushing for this kind of crap to be driven out of the religion of Islam so the rest of the world would actually believe the PR of being "peaceful".

Man you really are a sham of a man and a damn good belly laugh of a citizen.

No jackass, show me such a large % of Christianty that pushes such an archaic , 14th century(?), mindset as the example given.

Then pull your head out from under the sink and start pushing for this kind of crap to be driven out of the religion of Islam so the rest of the world would actually believe the PR of being "peaceful".

Man you really are a sham of a man and a damn good belly laugh of a citizen.

About 80% who are practicing Christians do.

No jackass, show me such a large % of Christianty that pushes such an archaic , 14th century(?), mindset as the example given.

Then pull your head out from under the sink and start pushing for this kind of crap to be driven out of the religion of Islam so the rest of the world would actually believe the PR of being "peaceful".

Man you really are a sham of a man and a damn good belly laugh of a citizen.

And you are fucking insane... A conservative Christian friend of mine just last night was telling me how he saw a program that was discussing many religions and how he was so surprised to find out that Islam was in his words "EXACTLY like Christianity in beliefs, with just different names for prophets." He was also surprised that Islam considers Jesus a prophet and accepts some aspects of other religions.

His exact summing up was "It is the exact same thing, and I always thought it was because of such a different religious belief that we had so many conflicts"

You are clueless Fandros because you dismiss that in a religion with 1.8 billion followers there will be nuts.

Rover, I'm Christian and there is no large % sect that practices anything like that ignorant example that Nydia provided us with.

Oh and Jedd, sod off and go home. I highly doubt you have friends period let alone who always seems to conviently fit the bill for some topic you're trying to hoist your logic upon.

And you are fucking insane... A conservative Christian friend of mine just last night was telling me how he saw a program that was discussing many religions and how he was so surprised to find out that Islam was in his words "EXACTLY like Christianity in beliefs, with just different names for prophets." He was also surprised that Islam considers Jesus a prophet and accepts some aspects of other religions.

His exact summing up was "It is the exact same thing, and I always thought it was because of such a different religious belief that we had so many conflicts"

You are clueless Fandros because you dismiss that in a religion with 1.8 billion followers there will be nuts.

Oh , you stupid sob, if you are trying ...once again...to push the bullshit that what Nydia described as fringe you better pull your head out...it's a growing % of Islam. I don't think it's growing though tbh, I think it's getting more exposure to the light of modern press. If Islam was such as you would have anyone believe why don't they stand up and decry the actions of the Shia Family Law nutters.

Oh , you stupid sob, if you are trying ...once again...to push the bullshit that what Nydia described as fringe you better pull your head out...it's a growing % of Islam. I don't think it's growing though tbh, I think it's getting more exposure to the light of modern press. If Islam was such as you would have anyone believe why don't they stand up and decry the actions of the Shia Family Law nutters.

They fucking do all the fucking time you batshit crazy piece of shit, it rarely gets exposure and when it does you couldn't care less... Shut the fuck up about shit you don't know.

Rover, I'm Christian and there is no large % sect that practices anything like that ignorant example that Nydia provided us with.

Oh and Jedd, sod off and go home. I highly doubt you have friends period let alone who always seems to conviently fit the bill for some topic you're trying to hoist your logic upon.

HAHA now I don't have friends?

You are truly insane Fandros... The king of always having some life experience that somehow relates to something completely different is accusing me of lies about friends...

About 80% who are practicing Christians do.

hrmm I'd say that number was yanked from your behind :D

I grew up in what I'll say was a "religious" household and up till a few years ago I would say I was a "practicing Christian" even after coming "out". I can say in my lifetime I've never met a large percentage of practicing Christians do anything like what is described by Nydia.

I have attended Baptist churches, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Church of God, and MCC (gay church) churches... even for a time after my mom's last divorce I went to a non-denominational church that had people speaking tongues (scared the shit out of me at 8yrs) and have never once heard that in a sermon, Sunday class, or church function be it a retreat, revival, vacation bible school, or sunday picnic. I guess that leaves Catholics? That's the only church I've never attended or wanted to attend. I can't speak for them.

And yes, my spelling sucks don't hold it against me pls :D

To be fair, there are certainly ultra-evangelical sects that take the idea that women should 'submit' to their husbands literally, and there's a lot of more or less euphemistic language about men being the head of the household, etc (and in the LDS church dogma women have to be *pulled* into heaven by their husbands, never married? sucks to be you), but attempting to codify such things into law here would be met with scorn largely because of the foundation on which the US Constitution is founded (we have guarantees of equality for all religions under the law, and separation of church and state which has been held to with varying degrees of success). On that note, it's easy to be smug about our rejection of such heinous practices as if the foundation upon which our laws are woven explicitly forbids them anyway. I also wouldn't be quite so quick to assume that there aren't those in this country who *would* like to see religion used as justification for secular law (see: teaching of creationism in schools, abstinence-only education, fetal 'personhood' and Defense of Marriage laws, and other anti-science, anti-public health activism by the religious right), including those that, as the apostle Paul advocated, enshrine 'the 'benign' subjugation of women'.

The law in many Islamic and Islamic-majority countries, on the other hand, differs fundamentally in that respect - there's 'secular' law, and then there's ecclesiastical or Sharia law, often involving different sets of courts, and their way of attempting to address the issue of religious diversity (because strict church/state separation would be unthinkable in many of these states) is to have laws which vary by sect - the Shia Family Law being an example of this.

To me, the most shocking part of the news report on Saturday about the law was not so much what it was codifying (although it's extremely distasteful and will result in a great deal of suffering and increased brutality against women) but *why* it was passed, and specifically, how casually - this issue (of the legal and codified subjugation of Shia women) was nothing more than a political bargaining chip intended to give Karzai a leg up in his upcoming election. That the tenuous status of married women as human beings in that country should be reduced to a small percentage jump in the polls is the most disgusting part of it all - but on the bright side, in a bow to international outrage, Karzai has said he's going to 're-examine' the law.

Regards,
Nydia

This Shia Family law thing pushes me past the bounds of reason. I apologize if my response was .....harsh.

I grew up in two households where it didn't matter your gender you pull your weight and help no matter the task.

I beg folks to forgive me if I find this Shia Family Law to be an abomination and should certainly be openly decried by those proclaiming Islam as one of peace and love. It's in thier backyard after all and a supposed perversion of thier beliefs.

hrmm I'd say that number was yanked from your behind :D



LOL..you're sharp...and correct. I was trying to make Fandros call me a git. But really since we openly support Saudi Arabia and have for years. Why are we bothered by the Afghans becoming Saudi like in their government?

It does seem that beheading is quickly becoming a Muslim tradition and honestly, that is the fault of the moderates for not speaking up when they should.

LOL..you're sharp...and correct. I was trying to make Fandros call me a git. But really since we openly support Saudi Arabia and have for years. Why are we bothered by the Afghans becoming Saudi like in their government?

It does seem that beheading is quickly becoming a Muslim tradition and honestly, that is the fault of the moderates for not speaking up when they should.

As much as it repulses me... What is the difference between beheading someone to kill them, and hanging them?

As much as it repulses me... What is the difference between beheading someone to kill them, and hanging them?



Nothing...dead is dead...are they hanging people also?

Nothing...dead is dead...are they hanging people also?

Just sayin... they hang people who are sentenced to death... So what is the difference?

Now if innocent people are being beheaded that's a different story.

I fail to see how the Taliban can be compared to christian s unless you go back to the crusades. Shame so many over look the destruction they brought upon there own culture and history in the name of power and control.

http://www.artsjournal.com/issues/Taliban.htm
EXPLAINING THE DESTRUCTION: (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/19/world/19TALI.html?searchpv=nytToday) Taliban leaders decided to destroy artwork after a delegation visited and offered money to help protect the giant Buddhas. "They said, `If you are destroying our future with economic sanctions, you can't care about our heritage.' And so they decided that these statues must be destroyed. The Taliban's Supreme Court confirmed the edict. The New York Times 03/19/01 (one-time registration required for access)
EYE-WITNESS PROOF: (http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-afghan-.html?searchpv=reuters) Taliban leaders say they may let journalists see the destroyed remains of the giant Buddhas they destroyed as early as Wednesday. The New York Times 03/18/01 (one-time registration required for access)
UNDERSTANDING THE TALIBAN: (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/18/weekinreview/18CROS.html?searchpv=nytToday) Difficult as it is for the rest of the world to understand why the Taliban would destroy artifacts so old and precious, a question arises: "In the deepest, broadest sense, did the Taliban really have any idea what they were doing? The movement's leaders are mostly young sons of illiterate peasants, raised on mine-strewn battlefields and stark refugee camps, and educated in rote sectarian blinders. Do they understand that this act, more than anything else, will be how the world remembers them?" The New York Times 03/18/01 (one-time registration required for access)
THE MOST DANGEROUS RELIGION (HINT: IT'S NOT ISLAM): (http://www.artsjournal.com/artswatch/aw-taliban.htm) The world has watched in horror as Afghani fundamentalists willfully destroyed cultural treasures. But destruction of art is only a piece of a larger cultural battle going on here. Is international cultural conflict replacing political Cold War conflict? ArtsJournal.com 3/16/01
PROVOKING THE BULLIES: (http://www.timesofindia.com/today/15woru5.htm) Most of the world has been outraged over the Taliban's destruction of the giant Buddhas. Now Pakistan's foreign minister urges other nations not to shun the Taliban, fearing the regime will use international hostility as an excuse to make life even more difficult for the Afghan people. Pakistan is one of three countries that offically acknowledges the Taliban regime. The Times of India (AFP) 3/15/01
DUTY TO PROTECT: (http://www.purabudaya.com/resources/bamiyan/bamiyan.htm) Destruction of Afghani art certainly didn't begin with the Taliban's assault on the giant Buddhas. The Society for the Preservation of Afghanistan's Cultural Heritage (SPACH) has been fighting to save artwork in Afghanistan since 1994 (without much luck). "Monuments were being neglected, if not badly damaged by the war, historic sites had been and were still being illegally excavated and, most importantly, the Kabul Museum, which houses an important collection, was being damaged and plundered." Purabudaya 2000
ATTENTION GETTER: (http://www.msnbc.com/news/543189.asp) The world is still trying to figure out why the Taliban destroyed their art. Was it just to get attention for a country the rest of the world has been ignoring? "For Mullah Omar, who had spared the statues in the hope of improving relations with the West, the increased pressure indicated he had nothing left to lose. His response to the rest of the world: If you want the monuments to survive, then recognize us as we are." Newsweek (MSNBC) 03/13/01
ART OR PEOPLE? (http://metimes.com/2K1/issue2001-10/methaus.htm) Who can explain the Taliban's destruction of art? "For example, why are they doing so? Was the destruction of statues a stupid act, or was it a shrewdly calculated move to attain international attention? Then, who created the Taliban? And who is pushing them against the wall now? After the world's reaction over the statue issue, many in Afghanistan might ask whether the stone statues were more important than millions of starving human beings." Middle East Times 03/12/01
HOW THEY KILLED THE BUDDHAS: (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=000166941319210&rtmo=QwwkpQkR&atmo=99999999&pg=/et/01/3/12/wbud12.html) "After failing to destroy the 1,700-year-old sandstone statues of Buddha with anti-aircraft and tank fire, the Taliban brought a lorryload of dynamite from Kabul. A Western observer said: 'They drilled holes into the torsos of the two statues and then placed dynamite charges inside the holes to blow them up'." The Telegraph (London) 03/12/01

Just sayin... they hang people who are sentenced to death... So what is the difference?

Now if innocent people are being beheaded that's a different story.



Isn't that a large part of the problem with their "law"?

The average person charged with an offense is not allowed to confront accusers, or present any defense. Last night on '60 Minutes' we were shown the interview of an Iranian who gave a very harrowing account of what the accused faces in Iran, including the torture of prisoners in the attempt to force confessions, or "state friendly" statements.

A 17 year old girl in Pakistan was publicly whipped because someone said she had committed an immoral act; no proof, just accusation without specifics.

A young unmarried girl who was impregnated when her own brother raped her was going to be stoned to death, because she had been raped.


Whether Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan or Afghanistan or any of the Islamic states that allow this bastardized form of "law" to govern citizen's actions, it is a fucked up and insane practice designed to keep those with the power to administer and mete out punishments happy.

I fail to see how the Taliban can be compared to christian s unless you go back to the crusades. Shame so many over look the destruction they brought upon there own culture and history in the name of power and control.

Who said anything about the Taliban? We were discussing Muslims after Fandros went off about Islam.

Isn't that a large part of the problem with their "law"?

The average person charged with an offense is not allowed to confront accusers, or present any defense. Last night on '60 Minutes' we were shown the interview of an Iranian who gave a very harrowing account of what the accused faces in Iran, including the torture of prisoners in the attempt to force confessions, or "state friendly" statements.

A 17 year old girl in Pakistan was publicly whipped because someone said she had committed an immoral act; no proof, just accusation without specifics.

A young unmarried girl who was impregnated when her own brother raped her was going to be stoned to death, because she had been raped.


Whether Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan or Afghanistan or any of the Islamic states that allow this bastardized form of "law" to govern citizen's actions, it is a fucked up and insane practice designed to keep those with the power to administer and mete out punishments happy.

Yes, the problem is the entire justice (or lack of) system in the Islamic nations, not the actual form in which the Death Penalty or other punishments are executed.

Not calling you a git anymore Rover, too much mad man love for ya ( okay open respect ).

Jedd on the other hand is the offal scraped off my boots after I climbed out of working the pig pens as a kid growing up.


hell, that's not fair to the offal now is it....I apologize to the offal for lowering it to Jedd's level.

Well, what is the contemporary Christian counterpart to Shia law? Travel back in time to the 14th century age of Catholicism. Even then they had quite a bit of separation of Church and State at least when it came to daily governance. The Church was always a big part of every day life (The Inquisition! What a show!) but was not as much a part of the day to day details as Islam. Could you import 14th Century Catholiscism into the modern world? Not without alot of revision or the end result is epic fail. Islamic law works only in backward nations that already live in the standards of the 14th Century or feel its a good idea to roll the clock back on the past 600 years of progress back to an age when Islam micro-managed every second of every day.

Fuck that. If that is what these jackasses want than they can have it. Whats the last shithole to go this route? Somalia? At least we know where the terrorist are bred!

Not calling you a git anymore Rover, too much mad man love for ya ( okay open respect ).

Jedd on the other hand is the offal scraped off my boots after I climbed out of working the pig pens as a kid growing up.


hell, that's not fair to the offal now is it....I apologize to the offal for lowering it to Jedd's level.

You are a fuckin joke Old man... Congratulations on perfecting ways to insult people... If only you could apply that much brain power to actually making sense in a discussion.

http://www.cottonsoup.com/img/design/monkeys-big.gif

You are a fuckin joke Old man... Congratulations on perfecting ways to insult people... If only you could apply that much brain power to actually making sense in a discussion.

Well in all fairness you are an easy target. Blindly spouting your bs and rarely standing up for what would normally be deemed morally right. Shia Family Law is an abomination and can not be considered fringe as it's growing.

Not once did you address that, instead you jumped me...again.

Really pup, come out and just join up the Fandros Fan club. I'll deny your app of course but it'll do you worlds of good. Fighting that type of inner struggle is bad karma man.

Such murky waters, this topic. For Muslims there is no seperation of common, civil law and Sharia as many beleive Sharia pre-dates all. In many regards its true. What is hard for us to grasp is the principle that in the US and many other foreign nations where the functions of government operate under civil law in a secular manner while morality tends to fall under the realm of "common law" which may or may not have origins of having a "higher power" preside as judge. In Sharia based governments, getting into trouble with the law transends just having to appear in court, pay fines and do jail time. It also stands as an affront to Islam, since the rules are "The will of Allah", so you can be deemed as having violated the trust of Allah which is probably considered alot more severe than just running a red light. Its double jeopardy at its finest. Not only are you in trouble with the local deputy dawgs, you are also in trouble with your faith and its earthly appointed representatives. AKA, boy, you sure are fucked! Very harsh by Western standards as its hard enough tto fight city hall. Try fighting the very moral fabric of society and you are running some very slim odds of success, let alone getting an unbiased trial.

Its almost like the UCMJ where if you get a DUI, not only did you screw up on in town, good chance you also have an Article 92 hearing in the near future as well, since most commands make you sign a statement from the CO that goes into your service jacket agreeing that you won't drink and drive. That sure adds a bit of sause to the goose!

The point lies here within:

If you have a nation that is almost ungovernable by conventional means, either because your government is too weak, has too little influence etc, than one way to maintain order is to literally put "Allah in the drivers seat". Somolia did it. Figures that any other nation on the verge would follow suit.

You won't listen to me? Fine. Listen to Allah instead. Allah will fuck you up......or at least allow us as Allah's earthy representatives to fuck you up. Any good Muslim also is empowered, to a degree, to act as morality police, because all good Muslims should know whats right and wrong. It makes for huge grey areas where radical thought and fundementalism can slip in and do its dirty work.

The only thing that is an eyebrow raiser is when other nations that we don't consider to be "on the verge" have a large Muslim population that refuses to intigrate with the host nation because Sharia law, intertwined with all aspects of any good Muslim's life, refuses to recognise any other forms of law. Europe has this problem to various degrees, depending on which country you look at. Africa even more so. Ethiopia is about to, or already has a Muslim majority. Once they hit that majority mark, its fair to say there will be a great many changes in that country, which used to have a Christian majority and still has a system of secular civil law.