Concept of Gender Equality Against Islamic Principles: Panel

[swanson]

I thought this article might prove to have some interest here.

I continue to be amazed at the Islamic religion's lack of acceptance of the idea of equality, and our nation's tolerance or blind eye to the impacts of the sharia law that accompanies it.

What are your thoughts?

swanson

http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?id=647531

International

PAK-WOMEN

Concept of Gender Equality Against Islamic Principles: Panel

Islamabad, Dec 16 (PTI) Challenging the concept of gender equality, an influential religious panel in Pakistan has said it goes "against" Islamic principles.

The Council of Islamic Ideology, a constitutional body that advises the legislature on whether laws are in line with Islamic principles, has recommended to the government that provisions referring to gender equality should be deleted from laws.

The body made the recommendations in the course of reviewing the working of the National Commission on the Status of Women, Dawn News channel reported today.

The council's recommendations questioned the concept of gender equality in Pakistani laws and described it as "impractical and against Islamic principles".

It also said gender equality is a "vague" term and should be replaced by "equity and justice".

The panel added that the concept of gender equality was impossible to implement because of differences in the physical and mental capabilities of men and women.

The body's recommendations are expected to be submitted to the Law Ministry by the weekend, the channel reported.

The Council also opposed the current composition of the National Commission on the Status of Women (NCSW) and proposed the inclusion of clerics in the panel.

The NCSW was set up in 1983 to ascertain the rights and responsibilities of women in Islamic society to suggest how these rights could be safeguarded.

The official website of the commission describes it as an initiative to "overcome obstacles being faced regarding gender equality".

[chris]

Some of these people are so 12th century. I'd like to Wife Swap with one of them for a month. A day with my wife and he'd wake up drowning in the blood from his own sack, stuffed in his mouth.

My dentist is a Muslim woman, educated, attractive, and a capitalist. She married a white Christian doctor.

I continue to be amazed at the Islamic religion's lack of acceptance of the idea of equality

I think we make a mistake to define all Muslims by the action of only one group. Are all Mormons like the FLDS? Are all Christians like Fred Phelps?

[swanson]

chris,

I think we make a mistake to define all Muslims by the action of only one group. Are all Mormons like the FLDS? Are all Christians like Fred Phelps?

I agree with your assessment and the dangers of lumping everyone together in a blanket bias. Thanks for pointing that out.

...but on the other hand- WOW - do these folks need to come along a bit as a culture and recognize their women as true counterparts.

I know I have a Western bias to this argument, and that my opinion is as jaded as it comes on this topic.

My wife would put the Islamic world ablaze before, before submitting her freedoms to the yoke of this type of gender born tyranny.

swanson

[chris]

I agree with your assessment and the dangers of lumping everyone together in a blanket bias. Thanks for pointing that out.

...but on the other hand- WOW - do these folks need to come along a bit as a culture and recognize their women as true counterparts.

That should have read ...

WOW   - do these folks need to come along a bit as a culture and recognize their women as true counterparts.

Or maybe bigger and redder even.

[Pokethis]

This issue is a huge hurdle for me as I would be killed at the soccer stadium really quick.  This is a fundemental opposition that can not be reconciled easily if at all.  Also, so called "honor" killings.  Seems we are hurtling headlong into the biggest culture clash ever.  England is in big trouble as the islamic population is trying to make the English accept their culture instead of assimilating.  This can only lead to large conflicts eventually.

[BigDanInTX]

There is some very serious issues at stake here.  The closest thing you can compare it to is the Catholic religion (and the best analogy I can think of, having been raised Catholic).  Back in the day, you ate absolutely no meat on Fridays.  It took until the Second Vatican Council in 1962 to decide that for nutritional reasons, they would allow it through the year, but limit it during Lent.  Likewise, it took until this meeting to allow the local language to be used in Masses rather than Latin, which was the only language allowed until that time.  The Catholic Church is very slow to change.

Now, let us get to Islam.  The country of origin is Saudi Arabia.  In Saudi, the Koran is not only the basis of a religion, but also the basis of their government.  That said, everything they do, the social and gender order is based on its teachings.  The rest of the Islamic world follows that example, but from a religious aspect.  While there are some Muslims who have been westernized and allow their wife (or wives) certain freedoms, the majority of Muslims follow the teachings.

If you think a simple religion is hard to change with the times, imagine a country whose culture has religion worked into it.  And have this country's core being be used as religion elsewhere in the world.  They are the keepers of the Islamic faith and the two Holy Cities are within its borders (Mecca and Medina).

I've lived in Saudi Arabia (grew up there, 18mo-6yo and I returned as a teenager, 16yo-20yo) and I've seen how it is.  Women have no rights outside of the home.  They cannot drive, they cannot be seen (hence the Abaya covering their clothes and the veil covering their face), they cannot really interact with others unless they are shopping for the family.  This is something that is never given a second thought by them.  To us it is odd and backwards.  To them, it is just following the law of the land.  We can say how wrong it is or how archaic, but to them what we do and allow is very odd to them.

I think that given enough time, the conservatives of the country will make gender less of an issue.  For now, not much will change.

In other countries, it may be quicker to change given that it is just a religion.  This may also influence things back in Saudi, but who knows.

[juneau]

Just thinking about this today, considering the appointment of Henry Du (I think that's his name) to Obama's administration, and his belief in transnationalism (i.e., international law, including Sharia law). I recently read Reading Lolita in Tehran, which was eye-opening and now, there's a movie being released in the next week or 2 - www.thestoning.com. Americans must continue to fight for the rights of women in countries who follow Sharia law.

[Jimbo]

"This issue is a huge hurdle for me as I would be killed at the soccer stadium really quick." 'GHAN FLASHBACKS!!!  Drove by the &*(^%$##@!!!Kabul soccer stadium beaucoup times in 03-04 and 07-08. 

[Angie]

Pokethis is right.  If a man in their culture doesn't like the way you look at him - you might find yourself beheaded in a soccer field, or beaten to death, or burned alive.  All of these things have happened in Islamic controlled countries.  The most outrageous is that if a women's husband dies, she cannot work to make a living.  She is reduced to begging, along with her children.

I simply could not imagine living under that system.  I think I might welcome beheading.

[shangrily]

i wish we could have nuked them when we had the chance
i know i know there are civilians that would be nuked too but seems like everyone of them is insane anyway

[Juggernaut]

i wish we could have nuked them when we had the chance
i know i know there are civilians that would be nuked too but seems like everyone of them is insane anyway

its not like their bad people, but with all the propaganda and pretty much brain washing these people have gone through, yeah they are insane

[BigDanInTX]

i wish we could have nuked them when we had the chance
i know i know there are civilians that would be nuked too but seems like everyone of them is insane anyway

Wow...  Okay, so let me get this right...  It's bad for Muslims to be intolerant of Americans, but it's okay for Americans to be intolerant of Muslims??  Saying "Nuke 'em all" will solve nothing and will, in fact, promote our negative image even further.  Just because some of them have warped their interpretations of the Koran doesn't mean we need to subject the entire country to extermination.  What about the extreme Christians who have warped views on things?  Should we "Nuke 'em all" too?

Just with any radical movement, anything said or done towards them will not change them.  They are immovable.  They are simply an enigma that will go through their course and then vanish to be replaced by another seemingly "insane" group.  For this reason, we have to just accept they exist, take note of the fact that we can't change them and just agree to disagree on their viewpoints.

[Angie]

Kudos Big Dan

Well said.

[TexDaddy]

I respectfully submit we must allow them to wake up on their own.  Gender equality it a newish concept even in the west.  Much less than 100 years old.  Once the tipping point was reached, it happened fairly quickly.

In the west, women were the driving force in gaining their own equality within the system.  It was not forced from the outside.

If we push too hard, they will only dig in deeper.  The movement has begun.  (See current events in Iran.) The more the "Great Satan" (us) tells them what they should do, regardless of the issue, the more they will want to do the opposite.

They are in the early stages of the Islamic Reformation.  Not long ago, it was taught women were inferior in Christianity.  Let us not hold them back by trying to push them forward too hard.

[sage0925]

Well, that's all well and good...good points, everybody...but I will go out shooting if anybody ever tries to stuff me into a burqa. I am not wearing a black bedsheet in high summer for any-damn-body!   

[TexDaddy]

Sage,

When in Rome...., I am sure no one will ask you to wear a burqa, so long as you go not go into a Taliban controlled area.

[sage0925]

I didn't mean to imply that anybody here would try to stuff me into a burqa...I was making a joke, dearie.

I have no intention of visiting a terrorist controlled area or any other area that implements Sharia law...my father raised a lot of crazy children, but we aren't stupid.

[“Mark”]

Pokethis is right.  If a man in their culture doesn't like the way you look at him - you might find yourself beheaded in a soccer field, or beaten to death, or burned alive.

Been to Compton or Detroit lately?

The most outrageous is that if a women's husband dies, she cannot work to make a living.  She is reduced to begging, along with her children.

I agree with you totally there.

[LvsChant]

BigDaninTX said:  "There is some very serious issues at stake here.  The closest thing you can compare it to is the Catholic religion (and the best analogy I can think of, having been raised Catholic).  Back in the day, you ate absolutely no meat on Fridays.  It took until the Second Vatican Council in 1962 to decide that for nutritional reasons, they would allow it through the year, but limit it during Lent.  Likewise, it took until this meeting to allow the local language to be used in Masses rather than Latin, which was the only language allowed until that time.  The Catholic Church is very slow to change."

... I have never heard that nutritional reasons had anything to do with it... and Catholics are still obligated to either abstain or perform some other penitential act on Fridays all through the year... not just during Lent (but this would seem to a non-Catholic to imply a punishment of sorts... the whole reason for it is our own spiritual growth -- the denying of something good to ourselves in order to grow spiritually -- a spiritual discipline that is never required for the young, old, or infirm).

Also, there are many discussions and points of view about the change from Latin to the vernacular... not all the changes are viewed positively. Perhaps the Church should be even more slow to change? I love the Latin and feel it is much more universal for such a diverse and multicultural Church. What a unifying factor the use of Latin worldwide could be... a common language and the same words and responses in the liturgy, no matter what the culture and background. The use of the vernacular has made us much more ... um... parochial (if you don't mind the term). And... although many don't know it... Latin's use at Mass was never abolished... the change was that the vernacular would be permitted in addition to the Latin. We've had a whole host of problems due to the rush job there was in the translation of the liturgy into English...

But perhaps this is not the place for this discussion... I can see that you are making the analogy between Catholicism and Islam, but I don't think it is a good comparison... for many reasons, but mostly because I feel Catholicism is being held up as another bad example in your analogy (perhaps that wasn't your intent). Yet, in the analogy, there were assumptions based on incorrect or incomplete information.

I cannot do any sort of apologetics for Islam, since I don't know as much about it as I do about Catholicism... but it may be that there are as many incorrect assumptions about what the Quran teaches that are made here as are there might be about Catholicism. I don't like what I see in the trends that seem to be resultant of radical Islam, but am reluctant to make assumptions about their beliefs without a thorough understanding.

As with any religion, its adherents almost always deviate from the true teachings in some ways... we are human and fallible. We cannot hold up the actions (or the personal beliefs) of any one individual or small group of individuals and assume that they know and completely follow what their religion teaches. In Catholicism that goes for any group within the whole (priests, laypeople, nuns). You can't assume that what an individual proclaims speaks for the whole Church.

Likewise, don't you think we have to assume that those radical individuals who spew hatred and evil can't be speaking what the essence of Islam is?

[LdMorgan]

In my opinion, Islam is a weapon of war.

It was created to give "The Faithful" the ability to conquer their neighbors, and then assimilate them like some kind of 12th Century Borg.

And when they finally assimilated the entire world, they would be all set to settle back into the perfect Two-Party System: Masters and Slaves.

The Masters would be the Islamic Clergy, and the Slaves would be everyone else.

But Islam does have true gender equality! Really! It just doesn't have the kind most Americans would think of: the kind based on freedom.

The religion of Islam does to its men exactly what it does to its women. It enslaves both to exactly the same degree. Which is to say: completely.

It deprives them of all freedom, demands absolute conformity, eliminates all original thought, and expends them at the whim of the religion--as interpreted by the Islamic Clergy.

An Islamic woman wearing a bhurka is exactly as free as an Islamic man wearing a beard. In both cases, it's death if they don't.

Both are equal in their slavery, though different in the trappings of their slavery.

There is nothing in either one's life that is not mandated, forbidden, or otherwise directly controlled by their religion.

The point here is that equality (of gender or any other kind) is not the real issue. The real issue is freedom.

[Pathfinder]

In my opinion, Islam is a weapon of war.

It was created to give "The Faithful" the ability to conquer their neighbors, and then assimilate them like some kind of 12th Century Borg.

And when they finally assimilated the entire world, they would be all set to settle back into the perfect Two-Party System: Masters and Slaves.

The Masters would be the Islamic Clergy, and the Slaves would be everyone else.

But Islam does have true gender equality! Really! It just doesn't have the kind most Americans would think of: the kind based on freedom.

The religion of Islam does to its men exactly what it does to its women. It enslaves both to exactly the same degree. Which is to say: completely.

It deprives them of all freedom, demands absolute conformity, eliminates all original thought, and expends them at the whim of the religion--as interpreted by the Islamic Clergy.

An Islamic woman wearing a bhurka is exactly as free as an Islamic man wearing a beard. In both cases, it's death if they don't.

Both are equal in their slavery, though different in the trappings of their slavery.

There is nothing in either one's life that is not mandated, forbidden, or otherwise directly controlled by their religion.

The point here is that equality (of gender or any other kind) is not the real issue. The real issue is freedom.

Bingo!!!!!

That sums it up in a nutshell, and why the western world and its concepts of personal freedoms will never be at peace with the islamic world. It is that significant a difference.