Ellen Knickmeyer and Bassam Sebti write in The Washington Post: "The draft says no law can contradict the principles of Islam and leaves it open for individuals to decide whether inheritance, divorce and marriage would be governed by religious or civil law. Opponents say those provisions threaten women's rights, potentially leaving them subject to the edicts of extremist clerics.

" 'Women, they lost hugely in this constitution,' said National Assembly Chairman Hachim Hasani, a Sunni who represented the demands of women's groups during the constitutional debates.

" 'Women had more rights in the past regime than they had now,' Hasani said."

Dexter Filkins writes in the New York Times: "Some secular Iraqi leaders complained Tuesday that the country's nearly finished constitution lays the groundwork for the possible domination of the country by Shiite Islamic clerics, and that it contains specific provisions that could sharply curtail the rights of women. . . .

" 'This is the future of the new Iraqi government - it will be in the hands of the clerics,' said Dr. Raja Kuzai, a secular Shiite member of the Assembly. 'I wanted Iraqi women to be free, to be able to talk freely and to able to move around.'

" 'I am not going to stay here,' said Dr. Kuzai, an obstetrician and women's leader who met President Bush in the White House in November 2003."

Iraq moves towards free democracy: women and children hardest hit.

" 'Women had more rights in the past regime than they had now,' Hasani said."

THAT is frightening and sad. I hope it does not become like Afghanistan where the women are dying in child birth because a male doctor cannot look at a woman or lay his hands on her and they have banned women from practising medicine or working. If this is so, it is a huge step backward. The mark of a society; barbaric or evolved can be judged by how they treat their weakest. Here in the west we treat our animals better than most places treat women, and children or their old.

Without constitutional protections for all, Democracy is nothing more than the tyranny of the majority.

Democracy Is Not Freedom
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul233.html

Democracy is Two Wolves and a Lamb Voting on What to Have for Lunch. Liberty is a Well-Armed Lamb Contesting the Vote
- Benjamin Franklin.

Okay,

Let's put this whole thing into perspective, before things start getting silly, and it does get silly here from time to time. When the U.S. first came into being, slavery was very much a part of Colonialist life. The Preambe to OUR Constitution STATED that ALL MEN were created equal. Yet, slavery was harbored within the U.S. Now, if you know anything about U.S. history, you will realize that if the Founding Fathers went and insisted on abolishing slavery, half the Colonies would've walked out then and there and the U.S. would've been D.O.A. However, the right, the ideal was put in place, so, when the time came, it could be enforced. After the Civile War, America embarked on the long road toward true equal rights between races and sexes.

The same thing is going to have to happen in Iraq and considering the history and religion of that region of the world, it ain't going to happen tomorrow. The Iraqis are way worse off, as far as bringing about a true, free, open, democratic government than the U.S. was. The Founding Fathers were rebelling against a just, responsible government that paid heed to law and morality. This was a model of sorts for American government. Also, the British government allowed for and encouraged, capitalism. Our Founding Fathers, taking their cue from European history, KNEW that it wasn't a good idea for a central government to establish a State Religion. NONE of these things have happened to the Iraqis. They are on a very, very long road to true democracy. They haven't learned why it's a bad idea for a Government to rule from the decrees of Allah, they dont' know the benefits of Capitalism and may be reluctant to learn, and they have yet to form a government that isn't going to become a corrupt dictatorship after their first Presidential election (or whatever the hell they are going to call it) oh, and the Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis really don't like each other at all. So, it's a bit of a mess.

For right now, capitalism has to be encouraged in Iraq, a responsible government has to coalesce that can keep all factions from one another's throats, the religion thing has to be dealt with. If the Iraqis can get that far, I'll be more than satisfied with their progress.

Guys, learn some history, dammit.

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
The same thing is going to have to happen in Iraq

Really, and this will come about how and when and the precipitating factor will be ... capitalism? Capitalism will circumvent their whole belief system...when... how many centuries from now?

Gee sal,

Let me spell it out for you. I said that Iraq is on a very long road to democracy and I said that the things muslims need to learn "ain't going to happen tomorrow." What I mean is that it's going to take a while. Years maybe. The Japanese took some 40 years to fully embrace Western ideas, but they did get the job done.


How the hell should I know how long it's going to take? Do I look like I'm from the "Psychic Friends" network? All I'm doing is spelling out the things the Iraqis are going to have to embrace if they want the wealth, rights, freedoms and dignities we enjoy here in the West. I did mention that it's not going to be easy for the Iraqis to do this, did I not?

Dammit.

How the hell should I know how long it's going to take? Do I look like I'm from the "Psychic Friends" network? All I'm doing is spelling out the things the Iraqis are going to have to embrace if they want the wealth, rights, freedoms and dignities we enjoy here in the West. Yet you presume to know that it will happen for sure...one day or another...kinda set yourself for that one.

What I mean is that it's going to take a while. Years maybe. The Japanese took some 40 years to fully embrace Western ideas, but they did get the job done. The idea that "woman are people to" are not western nor are they so radical that anyone should have trouble figuring such out. The only thing holding such back is the chouvinistic status quo.

a responsible government has to coalesce that can keep all factions from one another's throats, the religion thing has to be dealt with. Just so i get your logic here lemmie try to clarify. the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites (none of whom alone make up more than 50% of the society) must be allowed to repress 51% of the society just to remain buddies?

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
Gee sal,

Let me spell it out for you.

Gee Darth,

You didn't spell it out too well.

I said that Iraq is on a very long road to democracy and I said that the things muslims need to learn "ain't going to happen tomorrow." What I mean is that it's going to take a while. Years maybe. The Japanese took some 40 years to fully embrace Western ideas, but they did get the job done.

While that may be acceptable to you ( a white male living in America) perhaps you can use your imagination for a second in order to try to grasp what that means for this and a few generations of women) you sanctimonious fool.

Do you think that democracy is the end all and be all? If you do you are indeed blind. Democracy has a looooooooooooong way to go to ensure equality and a decent living style for ALL. And perhaps some day we will be able to grasp that there is something even better than democracy/capitalism. For now it is the best that we can do with our limited vision.

How the hell should I know how long it's going to take? Indeed? With your know it all attitude I thought for certain you were some type of visionary.All I'm doing is spelling out the things the Iraqis are going to have to embrace if they want the wealth, rights, freedoms and dignities we enjoy here in the West. And herein lies the rub... you are Assuming they want the same lifestyle as we have here in the west. I did mention that it's not going to be easy for the Iraqis to do this, did I not? You did. However what you obviously do not comprehend is the price that must be paid by the weakest in their society... but hell, just leave your blinders on and pretend you know it all!

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
For right now, capitalism has to be encouraged in Iraq, a responsible government has to coalesce that can keep all factions from one another's throats, the religion thing has to be dealt with. If the Iraqis can get that far, I'll be more than satisfied with their progress.

What type of arrogance does it take to think we need to be "satisfied" as to the progress the Iraqis are making?

Guys, learn some history, dammit.

As long as we're going to school Darth, might I suggest some classes in tact?

Geez, just how long am I going to have to be schooling you guys?


For guerilla and sal, again! :rolleyes:

First off, how do I know that the Iraqis want democracy? Because the "insurgency" whose very job it is to throw American forces and democracy OUT of Iraq has to be kept alive by the influx of Jihadists from other Islamic countries. Now, if the majority of Iraqis really wanted their Saddam back, or their theocracy or to carve out a small piece of Iraq for themselves or whatever, I think you'd find the "insurgents" coming into Iraq for their Jihad would've been helped, aided, sheltered and joined by the local population. It's not happening, there was a jihadist courier that was captured by coalition forces who bore messages of utter frustration at just how little help the "insurgents" were getting from the local populace. You can go and do the multicultural route and start bleating about how the Iraqis may not want democracy or whatever, but the Iraqis, by their very actions, aren't buying it, and neither am I.


About democracy.

Sal's little gem of a quote.

Do you think that democracy is the end all and be all?

Actually, I do and it's very entertaining to sit here and read your ideas that there is something better than democracy, you just have no idea what they would be. Let's see, the United States has been around for just a smidge over 200 year and look at all the wealth and innovation that has sprung up during that time. Why, the world went from the horse and carriage to automobiles, airplanes, electricity, television, the computer, the internet, nuclear power, men on the moon, anti-biotics, refridgeration the Superbowl. People are living longer, healthier lives, they have more wealth, and are better educated (mostly)than just about any other past society you care to choose. This has to tell you something about just how good democracy really is, and what can be done when people are unleashed to be the best they can be. The United States, in its brief history, has accomplished MORE than other countries have in the THOUSANDS of years of existing. Imagine what America can do in a thousand years with the same freedom and innovation it has enjoyed for just over 200. Now, what was this silly argument about democracy not being the best way to live?


The bit about women not having rights under the new Iraqi government. Which was Echo's original thesis not to mention snipe at Bush's foreign policy. I stated that I wouldn't expect a Muslim constitution to give many rights to women and was more concerned about other issues, chiefly seperation of church and state, capitalism and a government that is responsible and responsive to its people. Sal's quote:


While that may be acceptable to you ( a white male living in America) perhaps you can use your imagination for a second in order to try to grasp what that means for this and a few generations of women) you sanctimonious fool.


As a "white male" living in America, I'm well aware of all the abuses the Iraqis had to put up with under Saddam and would like to, first and foremost see a government in Iraq that ISN'T run by some autocratic thug. The White Male Living in America that I am, is well aware that women in Middle Eastern countries have about as many rights as the average black man had in Alabama in 1900. This White Male Living in America, while would like to see women granted the same rights, freedoms, dignities and protections as men would have (hopefully) under the Iraqi constitution, The White Male Living in America realizes that the grandest scheme to do the greatest good well come to nothing if the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. I pointed this out in one of my previous posts, slavery wasn't abolished during the founding of our country because our country wouldn't have been founded in the first place if the Founding Fathers insisted on abolition as a condition of America's founding. Can we just start with a few basic beginings for a democracy in Iraq before we insist on a Utopian society? Can we? Is it possible for you guys to see that?


More on democracy, sal's quote, just for the entertainment:

And herein lies the rub... you are Assuming they want the same lifestyle as we have here in the west.

Yes sal, I'm sure that there are millions of people who are just sitting around saying "no I don't want democracy, I want to be hauled off to the gulag!" :rolleyes: America is one of the freest and wealthiest societies on the planet. Who on Earth isn't going to want the individual freedom, oppurtunity and wealth that America has in abundance. The closest thing you'll find to someone who doesn't want a democracy, is someone who lives a certain way (like a muslim with 14th century views on how life should be lived) and wants to impose that way of life on everybody, but you'll search long and hard to find somebody that wishes to be on the recieving end of a dictatorship.


Dammit.

Vile,

I'm well aware that I've been rude, boorish, bombastic, arrogant and tactless in these posts. Underneath all that bluster is a hell of a lot of passion in seeing that the U.S. is undertaking an endeavor that it cannot afford to have fail. I've posted those views before, and you are aware of them. Please keep that in mind, it's somewhat hard to shout "NO NO NO YOU GOT IT WRONG" and have people, on these boards, hear me, so I resorted to other means of getting people to think. Your observation on my behavior has been noted, and I'll try and keep the boorishness under control in future writings. (I refuse to change this post though!!)

Dammit.

Vile's quote:

What type of arrogance does it take to think we need to be "satisfied" as to the progress the Iraqis are making?

The kind of arrogance? The kind of arrogance that wishes to see the Middle East to wrest itself free of theocratical rule and dictatorial thugs. The kind of arrogance that thinks maybe the Iraqis themselves wish for democracy. The kind of arrogance that believes the U.S. can't afford to fail in Iraq. The kind of arrogance that believes universal freedom will lead to world peace. The kind of arrogance that believes everyone in the world would want the same access to the oppurtunities, freedoms, rights, dignities that I enjoy. The kind of arrogance that believes democracy isn't just for the Western world. The kind of arrogance that is backed up by an ocean of sincerity and passion. The kind of arrogance that WILL stand firm against ANYONE who questions my beliefs! Dammit.

http://www.sltrib.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?article=2973485

Translated text of the Iraqi constitution. Not formated well at all so I haven't tried reading it yet.

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
Vile's quote:



The kind of arrogance? The kind of arrogance that wishes to see the Middle East to wrest itself free of theocratical rule and dictatorial thugs. The kind of arrogance that thinks maybe the Iraqis themselves wish for democracy. The kind of arrogance that believes the U.S. can't afford to fail in Iraq. The kind of arrogance that believes universal freedom will lead to world peace. The kind of arrogance that believes everyone in the world would want the same access to the oppurtunities, freedoms, rights, dignities that I enjoy. The kind of arrogance that believes democracy isn't just for the Western world. The kind of arrogance that is backed up by an ocean of sincerity and passion. The kind of arrogance that WILL stand firm against ANYONE who questions my beliefs! Dammit.

Well said Darth, but it doesn't change the fact that you are willing to impose what you see as "best" upon others. You see it as "offering opportunity", and that may be the case, but you're still going by what you "believe".

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
Geez, just how long am I going to have to be schooling you guys?

It is tempting to lower myself and be equally rude about the above sentence but I won't be. Feel superior, and have a great day with that! ;)

Sal's little gem of a quote.

Do you think that democracy is the end all and be all?

If we all thought like you Darth, democracy would not have come about since all would have been caught up in bowing to their current system.

Actually, I do and it's very entertaining to sit here and read your ideas that there is something better than democracy, you just have no idea what they would be. Let's see, the United States has been around for just a smidge over 200 year and look at all the wealth and innovation that has sprung up during that time. Are you suggesting that democracy is a product of your founding fathers?Can we just start with a few basic beginings for a democracy in Iraq before we insist on a Utopian society? Can we? Is it possible for you guys to see that? Just a small "schooling for you here Darth, when you want to win a point, do not belittle those addressing you. It lowers your presentation immediately and while it may inflame emotions (perhaps that was your intent), it does nothing to further the discussion nor open anyone's mind to receiving your ideas.

I will not answer another post of yours till you can be civil. I think you have lost the concept of democracy in it's entirety.

Originally posted by ~Sal~
Are you suggesting that democracy is a product of your founding fathers? Just a small "schooling for you here Darth, when you want to win a point, do not belittle those addressing you. It lowers your presentation immediately and while it may inflame emotions (perhaps that was your intent), it does nothing to further the discussion nor open anyone's mind to receiving your ideas.

I will not answer another post of yours till you can be civil. I think you have lost the concept of democracy in it's entirety.

You go girl. :D

And very well said btw. :)

Originally posted by Vilepagan
You go girl. :D

And very well said btw. :)

:D thanks

And where you be? I been missing you...you are scarce lately...(sniff)

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal

The kind of arrogance that wishes to see the Middle East to wrest itself free of theocratical rule and dictatorial thugs.

How would you feel if another country came in and decided we need to be freed from our christian theocratical rule? Don't bother saying we don't have one because we do. Christianity and christians are a driving force within our government. What small steps we have taken to keep church and state separate are very minimal and constantly being threatened. The majority of people in this country are christian and they are a very powerfull force. They force their christian morality on us, they are constantly trying and force their superstitions to be taught in school at the expense of science, Getting elected in this country is imposible if one isn't christian.

The majority of people in this country would by fighting mad if a superpower decided that incorporating christianity into our laws was oppressve and therefore our government should be overthrown?

(Actually not a bad idea).

You cannot deny that this is a religious war. Islam holds the belief that religious law should be the ruling power. Thus, anything we do to take the poewer away from Islam is seen as a shot against Islam.

Oh geez,

There are times when someone going off on you can be such entertainment. Take sal's latest post here calling me to task over being rude. I spent a good twenty minutes laughing over it. Here are some of her highlights;



It is tempting to lower myself and be equally rude...but I won't be. Feel superior, and have a great day with that!... I will not answer another post of yours till you can be civil.

Yet sal went and called me a "sanctimonious fool" and that I was "assuming" to know what the Iraqi's wanted, being very careful to bold print the a-s-s. I really don't want to engage in finger pointing, or try to justify my actions, but I can point out that if one is out to search for people, on these boards, who are lilly white and never indulge in name calling, you are going to be searching a while. It's a fact of life on these boards, I draw the line when it comes to attacking someone personally (which Sal did do incidently), I DON'T like that, but attacking one's ideas are fair game. Also, my feeling "superior" isn't from the fact that I got to be rude to others, it's born from this passion I have in my beliefs. It's an expression of my confidence in the rightness of my beliefs and that I can defend my core values against all comers.

I will not answer another post of yours till you can be civil. I think you have lost the concept of democracy in it's entirety.

Actually, vigorous debate is very, very democratic. Civlity tends to fly out the window when serious matters get discussed. Look at the debates here on just about anything remotely to do with Bush or the Iraq war. Shouting, cussing, arm waving and much worse have long been a part of the American Democratic process.

One of our neighboring towns had these two rival town officials who were arguing over the way things should be done. Joe and Jack Politician. Joe decides to let the town know what he thinks about Jack's proposal and parks a manure spreader in the townhall parking lot on the day Jack calls a town meeting, and Jack retaliates bringing toilet bowls to the town hall parking lot where citizens can stuff Joe Politician's leaflets into. Shenanigen's went on like this for weeks on end. And it's very American to do so, our society is built of compromise, and when people have to compromise what they believe, tempers passions get inflamed and tempers get short. Dammit.

Is there really going to be someone else who is going to tell me that democratic debate is actually CIVIL??


Sal, you can choose to ignore all my future posts, and I'd even recommend doing so if all I did was insult others. I don't, I come up with very strong points. It would be better for you to learn to defend what you believe. If your ideas are sincere, and come from the heart, it is very, very difficult for someone's rudeness/arrogance to affect you in any way. Dammit.

Dammit.

It's not all bad news... there's actually an article in the Iraqi Constitution that guarantees women equal rights:

Article (14): Iraqis are equal before the law without discrimination because of sex, ethnicity, nationality, origin, colour, religion, sect, belief, opinion or social or economic status.

There's also this one:
Article (20): Citizens, male and female, have the right to participate in public matters and enjoy political rights, including the right to vote and run as candidates.

Even though the constitution does say that laws cannot contradict "the undisputed laws of Islam," they also cannot contradict the above two articles or any other part of the constitution.

Now I personally would have been happier if there was no mention of Islamic law at all, but hey, it's their country.

The full text of the Iraqi Constitution can be found here (in better formatting that the one previously posted):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/..._05_constit.pdf

I recommend that you all give a read.

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
I come up with very strong points.
Cocky are we? :o

How would you feel if another country came in and decided we need to be freed from our christian theocratical rule? Darth - I assume you abhor 'liberal elitism'. Did it ever occur to you that you are engaging in 'National Elitism'? or do you think that that kind of elitism is OK?

I don't know if this has been said but... the people who are drafting the constitution were elected by Iraqis. There is nothing wrong or unfair about the constitution simply because of that. Women, if I recall, make up 55% of the country and if they were so worried about their rights being trodden on, they should have voted differently at the election. That being said I can only assume that the majority of the women of Iraq are not worried and the people saying things like 'I am not going to stay here' are simply a vocal minority.

My guess would be that many of the women in Iraq voted just as their husbands or fathers told them to. Remember we are talking about women who have never been allowed to make decisions and are kept on a VERY, VERY short leash by their male relatives. Many were probubly to scared to vote against their oppresors will.

Originally posted by Echo2
My guess would be that many of the women in Iraq voted just as their husbands or fathers told them to. Remember we are talking about women who have never been allowed to make decisions and are kept on a VERY, VERY short leash by their male relatives. Many were probubly to scared to vote against their oppresors will.

Yes that must be it! Iraqi men are so much worse than men in Western countries! The women, out of fear, voted for the religious factions!

Sorry, seems a little to simplistic for me, especially when the vote was secret ballot ;)

Originally posted by Saladin
Yes that must be it! Iraqi men are so much worse than men in Western countries! The women, out of fear, voted for the religious factions!

Sorry, seems a little to simplistic for me, especially when the vote was secret ballot ;)

Not simplistic in the least. It is a well built fear mentality based upon hundreds of years of indoctrination. In fact it is very complex. You might have a different perspective if your ankles were showing and got wacked by a guy with a stick because your berka was too short. That may sound hilarious to some but it is reality for thousands of women. So is having to cover every piece of flesh when appearing in public. The man's word is law. There is no negotiating.

Originally posted by Saladin
Yes that must be it! Iraqi men are so much worse than men in Western countries! The women, out of fear, voted for the religious factions!

Sorry, seems a little to simplistic for me, especially when the vote was secret ballot ;)

I have no idea who they voted for. But I will bet that many of them voted out of fear for whomever their husbands told them to. Don't assume that all husbands told them to vote for religious factions. And don't assume that they were in a private booth to vote. Customes in that part of the country do not allow women to go ANYWHERE outside of the house unacompanied.

It is a very strong possibility and not one that would be considered simplistic by people educated in the ways and customs of Islam.

Originally posted by ~Sal~
Not simplistic in the least. It is a well built fear mentality based upon hundreds of years of indoctrination. In fact it is very complex. You might have a different perspective if your ankles were showing and got wacked by a guy with a stick because your berka was too short. That may sound hilarious to some but it is reality for thousands of women. So is having to cover every piece of flesh when appearing in public. The man's word is law. There is no negotiating.

Originally posted by Echo2
I have no idea who they voted for. But I will bet that many of them voted out of fear for whomever their husbands told them to. Don't assume that all husbands told them to vote for religious factions. And don't assume that they were in a private booth to vote. Customes in that part of the country do not allow women to go ANYWHERE outside of the house unacompanied.

It is a very strong possibility and not one that would be considered simplistic by people educated in the ways and customs of Islam.

So your saying the women of Iraq have been indoctrinated and blinded into voting the way men want? That men have created so much fear in much of the 12 million Iraqi women that the results are distorted? So much fear in fact that the secret ballot isn’t a secure way for them to vote? That is what you are saying. Those would be the numbers needed.

Sorry but No. Iraqi men are not all bastards (the majority are just like us) and you both are overestimating the coercion of women in the election. You seem to be generalising one regime’s actions (Taleban- their famous for smacking women for showing flesh, Iraq isn't) to that of another completely different culture. For someone (Echo2) so educated “in the ways and customs of Islam” it is ludicrous to think, Iraq is anything like Afghanistan under the Taleban. I mean Islam was hardly encouraged under Saddam. Also, do you really think covering up your body to reduce the changes of adultery is thought of by Iraqi women as serious oppression? You must be aware that men in Islam are required to cover up as well right? I always think its funny that people from the US think that if Iraqi women are given the choice between “showing flesh” (and other Western "benefits") and a cleric that emphasises respect for women’s appearances, being loving mothers (no I don’t think this should be exclusively a women’s role), and serving God that they would choose the first. It’s even funnier when they don’t as people immediately think “Oppression! They’re not acting like us! They don’t think the West is best! They must have been brainwashed!” So much cultural bias…

Let me tell you what I think: after over 30 years of baathist-socialist-western oppression, after 100 years of western domination and suppression of Islam, after 1400 years of believing in an Islam (Shiaism) that is seen as blasphemy by the majority, the people of Iraq, men and women, voted to elect the people that always fought for them and who represent their faith, all to exert their freedom.

(Btw, both the US and the UN monitored the elections, and secret ballot would have been made mandatory and enforced).

Originally posted by Saladin
So your saying the women of Iraq have been indoctrinated and blinded into voting the way men want? That men have created so much fear in much of the 12 million Iraqi women that the results are distorted? So much fear in fact that the secret ballot isn’t a secure way for them to vote? That is what you are saying.

I think the society in general is misogynistic period.

Sorry but No. Iraqi men are not all bastards (the majority are just like us)

When you say "like us", I assume you are speaking of the western male in general? Um, what are you basing this upon? I have an Muslim girlfriend. Even here in the west her brothers control her life. And she is liberated... no hijab...no berka. Since you are concluding from personal experience please explain your stance.

You seem to be generalising one regime’s actions (Taleban- their famous for smacking women for showing flesh, Iraq isn't) to that of another completely different culture.

That was included in my post not Echos so I will address your quote. I am not generalizing regimes at all. I am speaking of the treatment of Muslim women in general. It is not a different "culture" and the said incident does not only take place only in Afganistan.

Directed to Echoso educated “in the ways and customs of Islam” it is ludicrous to think, Iraq is anything like Afghanistan under the Taleban. Actually Saladin, you seem to think you know so much about females in these cultures why not enlighten us as to how you know this is ludicrous, since my experience and reading is otherwise. :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Saladin
So your saying the women of Iraq have been indoctrinated and blinded into voting the way men want? That men have created so much fear in much of the 12 million Iraqi women that the results are distorted? So much fear in fact that the secret ballot isn’t a secure way for them to vote? That is what you are saying. Those would be the numbers needed.

Not at all, I am saying that it is very posible that many of the women in Iraq voted the way their husbands told them to. You are jumping to conclusions when you infer that their husbands wishes were more on one side than the other. And you are also jumping to conclusions if you think that "secret ballot" has the same meaning there as it does here. You must consider the culture this is all happening in.

Sorry but No. Iraqi men are not all bastards (the majority are just like us) and you both are overestimating the coercion of women in the election.

I don't recall useing the word "bastard" anywhere. Please show me where you are referring to.

Also, do you really think covering up your body to reduce the changes of adultery is thought of by Iraqi women as serious oppression? You must be aware that men in Islam are required to cover up as well right? I always think its funny that people from the US think that if Iraqi women are given the choice between “showing flesh” (and other Western "benefits") and a cleric that emphasises respect for women’s appearances, being loving mothers (no I don’t think this should be exclusively a women’s role), and serving God that they would choose the first.

If you remove your head from your rectum you may possibly start drawing some reasonable conclusions rather than just piping off about things you do not understand.

It’s even funnier when they don’t as people immediately think “Oppression! They’re not acting like us! They don’t think the West is best! They must have been brainwashed!” So much cultural bias…

This is your cultural bias. You are trying to define their actions with western thought process's.

the people of Iraq, men and women, voted to elect the people that always fought for them and who represent their faith, all to exert their freedom.

I agree and never stated anything different. You are trying to read into my post about women in Iraq as some sort of anti America thing.

(Btw, both the US and the UN monitored the elections, and secret ballot would have been made mandatory and enforced).

If a couples religion tells them that it is immoral for a woman to be alone in any public place then the united nations or anyone else is not going to be able to inforce it. The man would rather leave his wife home than have her put into a situation that goes against Islamic law.

Try a little comprehension when you read posts. Don't try to put words or meanings into other peoples posts and try to think out of the box once in a while. Western thought, culture and morality is very different from the middle easts.

The idea that Iraqi women don't have and will not have (for a long time) western freedoms is understood. It takes generations to change a culture. The U.S. and the U.N. and anyone else can help them set up a constitution that states they have it, but it is how the people feel and think that is going to make the difference. A culture cannot be changed overnight. Especially one so ingrained inreligion.

Originally posted by ~Sal~

I think the society in general is misogynistic period.

I disagree.

When you say "like us", I assume you are speaking of the western male in general? Um, what are you basing this upon? I have an Muslim girlfriend. Even here in the west her brothers control her life. And she is liberated... no hijab...no berka. Since you are concluding from personal experience please explain your stance.

When I say like us, I meant not in our society in general, but actually you and me. I am assuming you respect the opposite sex and are a relatively kind person? That is the same for the majority of Iraqi men.

Concerning your girlfriend. You shouldn’t generalise the actions of her brothers to that of Muslims in general. In Iraq, of course men keep track on their female family members, buts its not to a degree where they’re in fear, forced to follow orders and not being allowed to think for themselves.

My personal experience? Well growing up as an educated Muslim and being in contact with a lot of people from around the Muslim world, I must say has given me a lot of insight into this subject.

That was included in my post not Echos so I will address your quote. I am not generalizing regimes at all. I am speaking of the treatment of Muslim women in general. It is not a different "culture" and the said incident does not only take place only in Afganistan.

Directed to Echo Actually Saladin, you seem to think you know so much about females in these cultures why not enlighten us as to how you know this is ludicrous, since my experience and reading is otherwise. :)

I really don’t think a woman getting beaten in public is the norm in Islamic societies. Strange men are not even allowed to touch other women and have no rights over them. Its illegal. In Iran, during the revolution, my uncle was locked up for being a commie and throwing a Molotov cocktail into a Mullahs home. My Grandmother, thinking he was dead, took off her hijab, walked across town and, well, “made a scene”. Point is, no one dared touch her. The Mullah dared not. The guards dared not. The people dared not. This is one of the only few theocratic states in the world and was during the revolution. The only place I’ve heard of women getting beaten was in Afghanistan.

Originally posted by Echo2
Not at all, I am saying that it is very posible that many of the women in Iraq voted the way their husbands told them to. You are jumping to conclusions when you infer that their husbands wishes were more on one side than the other. And you are also jumping to conclusions if you think that "secret ballot" has the same meaning there as it does here. You must consider the culture this is all happening in.

The secret ballot is just that. Only one person is allowed to enter at one time. It was illegal in Iraq to have two people enter. And this was enforced by the US and UN. Too say otherwise means the elections were not free or fair.

I don't recall useing the word "bastard" anywhere. Please show me where you are referring to.

I apologise. It was just the vibe I was getting.

If you remove your head from your rectum you may possibly start drawing some reasonable conclusions rather than just piping off about things you do not understand.

Yes that refuted my point…

This is your cultural bias. You are trying to define their actions with western thought process's.

Well from being a Muslim, albeit a “Western” one, and speaking to Iraqis regularly, and seeing how many people seemed in the thread to be implying men were somehow instilling fear in women and making them vote for “whomever their husbands told them to”. I got the feeling that everyone was implying that this is only due to Islamic culture and cultural bias came to mind.

I agree and never stated anything different. You are trying to read into my post about women in Iraq as some sort of anti America thing.

No I’m not. I actually like the US very much and have never really thought of myself as anti-American. What was being implied here was that women voted the way they did due to coercion whereas in reality they voted that way overwhelmingly freely to exert their independence.

If a couples religion tells them that it is immoral for a woman to be alone in any public place then the united nations or anyone else is not going to be able to inforce it. The man would rather leave his wife home than have her put into a situation that goes against Islamic law.

Try a little comprehension when you read posts. Don't try to put words or meanings into other peoples posts and try to think out of the box once in a while. Western thought, culture and morality is very different from the middle easts.

No. I read women voted in great numbers in the elections. Maybe some men didn’t let their wives vote but this seems to be a minority. If the men did let the women votes but followed them, he would have not been allowed into the booth. As well it was illegal. He would have stayed just outside allowing the women to vote the way she wanted. But even so, as I have made clear, it is only natural for women to have voted for the religious parties. They wouldn’t have been forced too. If she had a mind to vote another way and her husband was forcing her to vote his way, she still would had the chance to vote anyway she wanted. Point is: the elections were overwhelmingly free and fair. Women voted in great numbers. The constitution is what they wanted. And the male coercion is overrated.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Saladin


This single statement alone tells the story of how women are treated in Iraq.

[b].....but this seems to be a minority.

Can you prove this. Do you have any statistics on this? Or is this just your assumption?

Originally posted by Echo2
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Saladin
[B Maybe some men didn’t let their wives vote.....

This single statement alone tells the story of how women are treated in Iraq.

.....but this seems to be a minority.

Can you prove this. Do you have any statistics on this? Or is this just your assumption? [/B]

Can you prove the opposite? Do you have any statistics on this? Or is this just your assumption?

Personally, all I know of the election is what comes out of Iraq, BBC news, PBS, CNN, people I meet and the internet. I conceded that point as it is highly likely for it to happen- just an assumption though- clearly not something to be generalised or something that "tells the story of how women are treated in Iraq". According to news outlets the great majority of women voted so I reckon only a small minority couldn't, thus having minimal affect on the overall results. All I can say though is at least I don't make assumptions based on what I think their culture is like.
On a side note: In the last US election, I recall, there was one report of a man holding his girlfriend against her will as she wanted to vote Kerry, another of a man chasing a women by car a she displayed a pro-Bush sticker, etc, and I'm sure there were more. Am I to assume that is the norm?

Originally posted by Saladin
I disagree.

Ok...we will agree to disagree...

When I say like us, I meant not in our society in general, but actually you and me. I am assuming you respect the opposite sex and are a relatively kind person? That is the same for the majority of Iraqi men.

I would say I respect people in general as far as viewing them as "equal" regardless of race, religion or sex etc. Just so you know... I am female... :D

Concerning your girlfriend. You shouldn’t generalise the actions of her brothers to that of Muslims in general. In Iraq, of course men keep track on their female family members, buts its not to a degree where they’re in fear, forced to follow orders and not being allowed to think for themselves. Saladin, I have not lived as a Muslim, nor have I lived in a Muslim country. In this life, I have only lived as a Canadian female. :) As such I am interested in the rights of women world wide. It is abysmal the way many women, Muslim, Christian, etc. are forced to live. Here in the west, for the most part all we know is equality...well many of us anyway. It is not so for most of the world. Women dialogue. We cross cultures and belief structures and countries to exchange our ideas because we are still not viewed as equal in many, many countries. It is not just my girlfriend who I am basing this on. She is not Iraqi anyway. She is Libyan but she was raised Muslim. Her brothers are well educated and now live here in the west. But there are some boundaries not yet broken. Wish all you want but it is not so. Sorry, it just isn't. And many men do not understand why women get so infuriated with their attitudes. Not you in particular but many men are just insensitive to the problem for they have not seen it first hand or heard about it.

really don’t think a woman getting beaten in public is the norm in Islamic societies. Strange men are not even allowed to touch other women and have no rights over them. Its illegal. In Iran, during the revolution, my uncle was locked up for being a commie and throwing a Molotov cocktail into a Mullahs home. My Grandmother, thinking he was dead, took off her hijab, walked across town and, well, “made a scene”. Point is, no one dared touch her. The Mullah dared not. The guards dared not. The people dared not. This is one of the only few theocratic states in the world and was during the revolution. The only place I’ve heard of women getting beaten was in Afghanistan. I am sorry, I was unclear. I was not speaking of her being beaten. I was speaking of the men whose job it is to stand on the street corner with a stick and decide whether or not the hijab is long enough.

Your uncle and your grandmother showed great courage in standing up for their beliefs. You come from a good line...:)

I think the society in general is misogynistic period. It is. The US's is still too, just not nearly as bad. It takes much longer to undo wrongs then it is to set them into motion.

Proof? Honor killings., or 'honor' as a whole. Somehow if some asshole rapes a woman it is she who is shamed in societies eyes moreso than the man.

Women are looked down upon in the workplace, or their husbands because their wives are working.

The new constitution is pretty good evidence.

You speak of election but it wasn't really one. What kind of election has secret candidates and platforms. Where certain parties are banned from even running. In a country tha is occupied by a foreign invader. There was no real election, merely a entertainment diversion.

Welcome to allforums Saladin, it's nice to have more Muslims here...especially educated ones. :)

Echo and Sal...while I share your outrage over the treatment of women in Afghanistan under the Taliban, Iraq was perhaps the most secular of the Middle Eastern states when it came to the treatment of women. If I'm not mistaken, they weren't required to wear the burka, and many women held positions in business and politics.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
Iraq was perhaps the most secular of the Middle Eastern states when it came to the treatment of women. If I'm not mistaken, they weren't required to wear the burka, and many women held positions in business and politics.

That is true, somehow things wandered a tad as they sometimes do on these threads...:)

Originally posted by Saladin
I apologise. It was just the vibe I was getting.
Don't apologize, Saladin, that's exactly what she was implying. This one just loves to play word games...

Oh, and welcome to Allforums. :)