SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: bentway who wrote (259439)8/30/2014 9:01:07 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone  Respond to of 541457
 
Bentway
Only 100 lashes allowed for women who are raped!


Putannas-s-



As Manji explains, within the Arab honor code, individual rights are secondary to one's status within the family or tribe. Women are reduced to "communal or tribal property." In Pakistan or Nigeria, she says, a man from one tribe or family may rape a woman from another as an act of communal retribution.


Muslim Sharia law does wonders for women. Just what Europe needs-S-



Can Women's Rights Coexist With the Tenets of Islamic Law?Lifting the veil

By Jay TolsonApril 7, 2008 | 2:48 p.m. EDT+ More

Judged by much of the media coverage, the status of Muslim women seems to come down to a matter of clothing: what they are required to wear in countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia or what they were once discouraged from wearing in Turkey. But to veil or not to veil is hardly the question. The fate of women's rights throughout the Islamic world today hinges on matters of far greater substance, from reforms of family and penal codes to new understandings of Islamic law and teaching. In these best and worst of times for Muslim women, it is perhaps not surprising that every promising bit of news seems to come with a disturbing counterpoint.

Take Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian lawyer and former judge who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2003 for her unceasing efforts to promote democracy and women's rights. In response to the jubilant reaction of Iranians throughout the Islamic republic, President Mohammad Khatami—a reformist, no less—dismissed the honor as "not worth all that fuss!"

Not long after that, Morocco's King Mohammed VI proposed a number of significant reforms in family law that stand to improve the lot of women throughout the North African kingdom. But even before he presented the reforms, Islamists took to the streets to denounce them, dwarfing a pro-reform demonstration by roughly 3 to 1. Around the same time, in a Nigerian state that has adopted Islamic law, a religious appeals court overturned the death sentence of a Muslim woman accused of adultery. But other women in Nigeria continue to face adultery charges that, if upheld, will result in death by stoning.

Women's rights face an uncertain future throughout much of the Islamic world—though nowhere more pointedly than in the constitution-making efforts now underway in both Afghanistan and Iraq. In two nations widely viewed as test cases of the compatibility of Islamic and universal values, it remains to be seen whether and how the principles of sharia (Islamic law) will inform their future laws.

Behind those uncertainties loom even broader questions facing Muslim women everywhere. In particular, rights activists wonder, are the foundations of Islamic law and theology compatible with international standards of human rights in general and women's rights in particular? And if so, what must be done to surmount the practical hurdles—including the crucial matter of who interprets the law—that stand in the way of reconciling Islam with universal principles of women's rights?

Muslim women themselves are already actively engaged with these issues. "When I talk with educated women from Morocco to Pakistan," says Ann Mayer, a professor of legal studies at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, "I find that they are much more inclined to evaluate their condition in relation to international standards of human rights. And they say that international standards only reinforce Islamic standards."

That underscores one notable development of the past decade: a new confidence among Muslim feminists that Islamic teachings can support their efforts. This represents a sea change, says Amina Wadud, professor of Islamic studies at Virginia Commonwealth University. As late as 1995, many feminists from Islamic countries insisted women's equality could be attained only by jettisoning religion, including the outward trappings of the faith, such as the veil.

Since then, though, an expanding reform movement within Islam has led more Muslims to explore the sacred writings on their own. This has often reinforced the patriarchal viewpoint of militant Islamists, but it has also supported progressive and feminist interpretations. Wadud insists that it is unnecessary to argue only on the basis of historical precedent, but she finds more in the sacred texts and traditions to support gender equality than to deny it. She notes, for example, that in the period after Muhammad's death, women, including the Prophet's favorite wife, Aisha, played "key roles in preserving traditions, disseminating knowledge, and challenging authority when it went against their understanding of the Koran or the prophetic legacy."

Referring to the decision of Iran's mullahs to remove Nobel winner Ebadi from her judgeship on religious grounds, Wadud notes, "Nowhere is it said that women cannot interpret the law." Ebadi herself, in an interview with Iranian émigré author Amir Taheri, makes the same point in her advice to Muslim women: "Don't believe that you are decreed to have an inferior position. Study the Koran carefully, so that the oppressors cannot impress you with citations and interpretations. Don't let individuals masquerading as theologians claim they have a monopoly on understanding Islam."

Fine words, but have they yet had any practical consequences? The answer, many activists say, is a qualified yes. In that widely followed adultery case in Nigeria, for example, Amina Lawal was exonerated but on several technicalities that may not work for other women. The real problem, says Mayer, is that Nigeria's interpretation of sharia involves a "folkloric version" of Islamic adultery law. First of all, the rules of evidence spelled out in the Koran require either a freely gained confession from the accused or four eyewitnesses to the act of sexual penetration, neither of which was obtained in Lawal's case. Just as important, the maximum punishment for the crime is supposed to be 100 lashes, not stoning.

Of course, even if the Lawal case and others did not involve a corrupted use of sharia, the punishments that Lawal faced would be in violation of both the spirit and letter of the U.N. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which Nigeria has signed and ratified.

But appeals to international agreements have only limited effectiveness in advancing women's rights in the Islamic world. Saudi Arabia signed and ratified CEDAW, but it explicitly stipulates that it will not observe any terms that contradict "norms of Islamic law."

In a more general way, says New York University law Prof. Noah Feldman, a former U.S. adviser to the Iraqi Governing Council, the United States faces a similar challenge in its efforts to guide Afghanistan and Iraq toward becoming democratic and rights-respecting regimes. Feldman points out that as long as America is an occupying power, it can accomplish much "just by suggesting." But, he cautions, "at a certain point you cross the line to coercing people on how to run their lives."

In Iraq, there are good reasons for thinking that Islam and women's rights can coexist. Before the U.S. invasion, says Khaled Abou El Fadl, a professor of law at the University of California-Los Angeles, Iraq was one of the most progressive of Muslim nations in relation to women. Not only were there female jurists and lawyers, but there was also a civil code that blended the best of French and Islamic laws. Among the latter, he points out, was a law allowing a woman the right to divorce her husband and sue for alimony and child support if he decided to take another wife. (A similar expansion of women's prerogatives is one of the reforms that Morocco's king proposed.) Like Feldman, Abou El Fadl worries that attempts to expunge Islam from Iraq's laws will only trigger a stronger urge on the part of many Iraqis to put more of Islam in—and that might mean the most sexist and patriarchal versions of Islam.

Which raises the most important issue: How can Muslim feminists and rights activists win the interpretive struggle against those mullahs and muftis who confuse patriarchal codes and customs with the core principles of the faith? That is a major concern for Irshad Manji, a Canadian author and journalist. Like many other Muslim feminists, she sees the real problem of interpretation as one of overturning Arab traditions of honor that accompanied the spread of Islam and are now being recirculated throughout the world via the Saudi-funded Wahhabi religious establishment.

As Manji explains, within the Arab honor code, individual rights are secondary to one's status within the family or tribe. Women are reduced to "communal or tribal property." In Pakistan or Nigeria, she says, a man from one tribe or family may rape a woman from another as an act of communal retribution.

For Manji, one of the best solutions lies in women's growing participation in trade, commerce, and capitalism, all of which have been valued since Islam's founding. (Muhammad's first wife, Khadija, was an astute businesswoman.) And the economic empowerment of women in the Islamic world is not merely theoretical. It is already underway even in the most Arab of states, Saudi Arabia. In Jidda and Riyadh, respectively, women own a quarter and a third of all businesses. And it is no secret among foreigners working in Saudi Arabia that women are the most educated, able, and productive employees in the kingdom.

By consolidating and advancing their economic position, Manji says, and by becoming tax-paying citizens, women can assert their standing as individuals. This emerging reality is hard to ignore, whether in Saudi Arabia or Iran—though it was a significant blow to Saudi women that they were not allowed to participate in the recent municipal elections. Already in Malaysia, Amina Wadud notes, women have helped reform domestic violence law by promoting what she calls a "nice blend of sharia and civil law."

Still, it is one of the sad ironies of Islam, Manji says, that a religion originally intended to transcend tribalism has, at least in many parts of the world, allowed the tribalist codes to reassert themselves. But Manji refuses to accept that irony as the last word on women's fate within Islam. And she is far from alone.



To: bentway who wrote (259439)8/30/2014 9:11:23 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone  Respond to of 541457
 



To: bentway who wrote (259439)8/30/2014 10:03:25 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 541457
 
FRI JUL 04, 2014 AT 08:00 AM PDT

Supreme Court makes first decision promoting Sharia Law
by mahytabel
Follow

9 Comments / 9 New

For the last few years we've heard the many politicians on the right and far-right, in state governments and our federal government, talking about creating laws to prevent the establishment of Sharia Law in the U.S. On Monday, June 31st, 2014, our Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, began the process of creating American Christian Sharia Law.

Follow me past the Apricot tinted Kos IUD (guaranteed to be the best IUD you ever use or your money back!)...

One of the main tenets of Sharia Law relegates women to lower status with no control over their own bodies and lives. They are second class citizens, unable to vote, hold office, own land or property, or have any control or say concerning their children. They can be killed by their husbands, their families, their husband's families, and by any man deciding they have done something worthy of death. Basically, they have no rights at all and live in constant fear, which is exactly how men in countries that impose Sharia Law want them to be.

Up until this past Monday women in this country were very close to having the same civil rights as men. I say close because there are several issues that hold women back in this country (pay discrepancies, the subjugation of women in media, the ignoring of the rape culture present in this country, etc.) Suffice it to say, compared to countries that impose Sharia-like Laws to control women, we were VERY close to complete equality. On Monday, that all changed.

I woke up Monday morning to find out I had been demoted to second class citizenship in my own country. By my own government. Without my consent. I awoke to find several bricks from the pedestal holding my copy of the Bill of Rights were missing. I awoke to find out my government had given someone a "religious right" to control my life. That this so called religious right is not the religion I practice makes it even harder for me to accept and more angry than I can express.

I awoke on Tuesday to find that this same "religious right" was now being used to try to force my government to allow discrimination against lesbians, bisexuals, gays, transexuals, transgendered people, and anyone who is born with gender identity issues. On top of the shock of that was the news that the Supreme court had not only made the statement that all birth control was covered under their ruling but that now doctors of women in companies that decided to use that "religious right" to deny them basic health care would no longer even be able to talk to them about birth control.

The shock of it all before my first cup of coffee had me in a daze for several minutes. As it gradually sank in I began to cry. I thought of my stepdaughter, my nieces, my sister who has lupus and relies on birth control because another pregnancy would kill her, all my women friends, and then all women. The tears flowed for quite a while as the enormity of this pandora's box became more and more apparent to me.

As I pulled myself together I thought about what the last few years has brought us from the rulings of SCOTUS. The loosening of labor laws, the "humanization of corporations", the repeal of important sections of the Voting Rights Act, the gutting of campaign finance laws, the slow evisceration of unions, and now, the deliberate subjugation of women by their bosses.

With the "religious right" now in control of women's reproductive rights and demanding that our government allow them to openly discriminate against one minority group, how long will it be before they want to begin discriminating against all minorities? How long before the "religious right" decides that only those who believe exactly as they do should be allowed to live?

How long before the US is a country run by the rules of American Christian Sharia Law?



TAGS