[DAWN] When the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) ruled that, according to their interpretation of Sharia Law, rape victims could not use DNA reports as primary evidence, and instead rely on the testimony of four witnesses, it was obvious that they had only begun Marty McFlying Pak women's rights back to the cavemen era.
Sadly, the CII have in the last few days delivered two more blows to Pak women's rights.
The first was when the CII suggested that the Pak government should amend the national marriage law so that men interested in remarrying, no longer need the written permission of their first wives. The second and more shocking was when the CII ruled that Pak laws which outlawed underage marriage were not Islamic.
As many agree, the biggest problem with the CII's interpretation of the rape law is that the Council is relying on a decree on adultery which ruled on consensual sex, not forced sex. Moreover, it was from a time when science did not have a better answer.
The first wife's consent
Allowing Pak men to take on more wives without the consent of their first wife is ridiculous for a wide variety of obvious reasons.
Marriage is a partnership, and allowing a man to be the sole decision maker in this regard means that a woman has no say in her life, hence opening up the field for a husband to abuse the law. Although, the caveat here is that the man must do justice to all of his wives by treating them equally, let's be honest, how is that possible? Ask any mother, as much as she loves all her children, she has a favourite child.
Of course, a well-meaning man interested in taking on a second wife may, on some level believe that he will love all of his wives equally, but how is he expected to make this informed decision before the experience of actually having multiple wives?
What's more, there is a grave psychological impact on any person asked to share their partner. Of course, if you ask the men of the CII if they would be willing to let their wives marry a second husband, they would respond with the typical counter-argument that this privilege should not be lent to their wives, as women with two husbands would be unable to tell who the father of their child is.
For argument's sake, let's say that these wives could take on second husbands in a marriage that was strictly platonic. With the father/child argument out of the window, would the men of the CII then allow their wives to enter second marriages? I suspect that they would not out of both jealousy and possessiveness.
Here, my question to the men in the Council of Islamic Ideology is, does a women not have a right to these feelings as well? Does she not also have a right to believe that her husband is only hers?
As for the CII's ruling on underage marriage, this law benefits no one, except sick individuals who wish to sexually exploit minors.
Interpretation and education
I think it is important to swallow the hard fact that for many who identify with certain ideologies, interpreting the more ambiguous beliefs in these ideologies in a manner that suits their world view is instinctive. For example, for better or worse, some of the staunchest supporters of a political party will interpret their leader's more controversial views in a manner that doesn't offend them even if evidence is to the contrary.
From my research on Islamic laws on rape, second marriages, and underage nikkahs, I have noticed that the actual laws are ambiguous, and can be forcefully argued either way as to what is actually the correct interpretation of the law. I am neither religious nor an Islamic scholar, but I have had some educated well-meaning friends argue that these controversial interpretations are correct, even before the CII made public its views. So clearly, there are others also interpreting these rules in the same manner as the CII.
So, what's the solution here?
I feel that the CII sincerely believes that their interpretation is in line with Islam. I also dare say that the outrage over this issue is absolutely useless, as it only preaches to the choir. No member of CII's ruling body will be influenced, in the least by any outrage on the internet. Conversely, the CII's rules will not cause most of the educated public to suddenly go out and marry underage girls without the permission of their wives. Essentially, we are like two bubbles with little crossover.
Yet, for us, the CII's decisions are important, not because they influence the social media class, but because they influence the masses; the very people who form the roots of this country. This constitutional body is responsible for giving legal advice on Islamic issues to the Pak government, and although they don't dictate government ruling by law, it is important that they interpret laws in line with the 21st century for the betterment of this nation.
Pakistain desperately needs its influential religious leaders to come from educated backgrounds, which is the only way to win the war against religious extremism. Of course, this won't happen overnight, as our 'extreme' makeover didn't happen in days, but decades.
Charity worker Greg Mortenson, who has been responsible for opening countless schools in the remote areas of Pakistain and Afghanistan was witness to our nation's careful religious indoctrination, which was boosted by wealthy Middle Eastern men. While there have been some unproven allegations against Mortenson for fabricating facts in his book Three Cups of Tea, I accept his accounts of Middle Eastern influence to be true, because they have been backed by similar accounts from others.
Mortenson told us how one of his employees explained why massive madrassahs were popping up in Pakistain's remote locations, "The sheikhs come from Kuwait and Saudi with suitcases of rupees. They take the best student back to them. When the boy come back to Baltistan he has to take four wives."
Mortenson added, "For the first time I understood the scale of what they are trying to do and it scared me. Every time I visited to check on one of our projects, it seemed 10 madrassahs had popped up nearby overnight...some of them seem to exist only to teach turban jihad."
Journalist Ahmed Rashid noted in his best-selling book about the Taliban that students in these schools were not provided with a formal education, and that the Islamic education provided in these madrassahs was interpreted by barely literate teachers. What's more, varying accounts state that there are between 20,000-30,000 such schools in Pakistain.
Regardless of how accurate these figures are, surely we need to take control of how religion is taught within our borders so that men can no longer abuse laws that harm Pak women.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/14/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#4
>that students in these schools were not provided with a formal education, and that the Islamic education provided in these madrassahs was interpreted by barely literate teachers.
Sounds like the western state schooling system to me.
[DAWN] TALK is again emerging from the PTI camp about allowing the banned Pak Taliban to open an 'office' in order to facilitate the dialogue process, though the turban outfit has reportedly said it is not interested in the offer. On Tuesday, the KP chief minister renewed his government's offer to the hard boyz to open an office in the province, adding that the KP government would "cooperate with them" in this regard. Meanwhile, ...back at the desert island, Bert was realizing to his horror that he'd had only one bottle for one message, and he'd forgotten to include a return address... on Monday, Imran Khan ... aka Taliban Khan, who is the lightweight's lightweight... had said he would take up the TTP office issue with the federal government. The PTI chief had last year caused quite a stir when he first floated the idea of having a TTP office, comparing it with the opening of a bureau representing the Afghan Taliban in Doha. Back then the party was quick to distance itself from the suggestion, with a big shot saying the remarks did not reflect party policy. In this case, so far there's been little effort by the PTI to forget the idea.
The federal government has done well to shoot down the renewed calls for granting the TTP a piece of state-sanctioned office space in order to let it conduct its business. The state minister for interior told the Senate on Tuesday that the centre would not allow such a move. There has been valid criticism of the state's treading too softly when it comes to dealing with the turbans. But engaging with the hard boyz in dialogue is one thing; facilitating the creation of an office for them quite another. It amounts to legitimising the hard boyz and recognising them as equal partners. Would the politicians then also consider allowing other officially banned outfits espousing various sectarian, religious and secessionist causes to open their respective bureaus in order to streamline their affairs? Let us not forget that the TTP wants to remake Pakistain in its own image through fire and the sword. Do those who want to help the group acquire real estate wish to aid them in this aim?
Posted by: Fred ||
03/14/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11125 views]
Top|| File under: TTP
[Daily Caller] A Health and Human Services official has resigned after dealing with the frustration of the profoundly dysfunctional federal bureaucracy, which left him offended as an American taxpayer. Yes, same outfit which is attempting to run Obamacare.
In a resignation letter obtained by ScienceInsider, David Wright, director of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) which oversees and monitors possible research misconduct offers a scathing rebuke of the unwieldy and inefficient bureaucracy that he dealt with for the two years he served in the position.
In his letter to Assistant Secretary for Health Howard Koh, Wright explains that the 35 percent of his job that was spent working with science-investigators in his department has been one of the great pleasures of my long career. The majority of his duties, however, represented his worst job ever.
The rest of my role as ORI Director has been the very worst job I have ever had and it occupies up to 65% of my time, he wrote. That part of the job is spent navigating the remarkably dysfunctional HHS bureaucracy to secure resources and, yes, get permission for ORI to serve the research community. I knew coming into this job about the bureaucratic limitations of the federal government, but I had no idea how stifling it would be.
According to Wright, activities that in his capacity as an academic administrator that took a day or two, took weeks and months in the federal government.
He recalled an instance in which he could not get approval for a $35 cost to have cassette tapes converted into CDs. He eventually was able to get them converted in 20 minutes for free by a university. And another instance in which he urgently needed to fill a vacancy, but was told there was secret priority list. Sixteen months later, he wrote, the position was still unfilled. "Secret priority list"....nothing to do Affirmative Action goals and objectives. Nothing at all.
On another occasion I asked your deputy why you didnt conduct an evaluation by the Op-Divs of the immediate office administrative services to try to improve them, he wrote. She responded that that had been tried a few years ago and the results were so negative that no further evaluations have been conducted. We don't 'do' negative feedback well.
Wright closed by saying he plans to publish his daily log to further shed light on his work. An obvious surprise meter candidate article.
h/t Sarah Hoyt
Good causes sometimes have bad consequences. Blacks, women, and other historical out-groups were right to demand equality before the law and the full respect and liberties due to any member of our civilization; but the tactics they used to raise consciousness have sometimes veered into the creepy and pathological, borrowing the least sane features of religious evangelism.
One very notable pathology is a form of argument that, reduced to essence, runs like this: Your refusal to acknowledge that you are guilty of {sin,racism,sexism, homophobia,oppression } confirms that you are guilty of {sin,racism,sexism, homophobia,oppression }. Ive been presented with enough instances of this recently that Ive decided that it needs a name. I call this general style of argument kafkatrapping, and the above the Model A kafkatrap. In this essay, I will show that the kafkatrap is a form of argument that is so fallacious and manipulative that those subjected to it are entitled to reject it based entirely on the form of the argument, without reference to whatever particular sin or thoughtcrime is being alleged. I will also attempt to show that kafkatrapping is so self-destructive to the causes that employ it that change activists should root it out of their own speech and thoughts.
[Victory Girls blog] Recently the New Brunswick faculty council at Rutgers University protested having Condoleezza Rice as their commencement speaker. Fox News commentator, Juan Williams, described it as another example of the left's "hatred and bigotry against African-Americans who dare to challenge liberal orthodoxy." Fortunately, Rutgers University President, Robert Barchi, has a pair and refused to cave to the demands of the intolerant faculty council.
A similar experience happened last year when Dr. Ben Carson, a world famous Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon was scheduled to be the Commencement Speaker for Johns Hopkins University. Carson was forced to step down because liberals at the school were so outraged that Carson dared to criticize Obamacare and because he said he opposed gay marriage.
Juan Williams wrote:
I am not a conservative but I have spoken out for years against the staggering amount blind hatred directed at black conservatives by liberals.
Liberals are shockingly quick to demean and dismiss brilliant black people like Rice, Carson, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC), Professor Walter E. Williams and economist Thomas Sowell because they don't fit into the role they have carved out for a black person in America.
Black Americans must be obedient liberals on all things or risk being called a race traitor or an Uncle Tom. The truth can be refreshing.
#2
Oh, how can you slack lipped, drooling, fly-overs ever hope to understand the subtleties of our group-think uber mind.
(I would turn off the sarc tag but . . . )
#4
Again just as the socialists have pushed the big lie that Nazis were 'conservative', they have also stole the name 'liberal'. They are not liberals. They are common intolerant authoritarian socialists. For them, it's never been about principle or liberties, but power.
#5
Nazi's and most fascist groups are born in liberal political organizations. It all starts the same, "The ruling elite are keeping us down" Then they take power and allow themselves to be corrupted by it and consumed with power. Its really not socialism, although they like to wear the socialist cloth along with the liberal one, but behind the curtain its fascism being born, pure, hate filled, and unapologetic.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
03/14/2014 13:27 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Liberals want their slaves on the plantation except when needed to vote. They don't want those negroes getting uppity and thinking for themselves.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
