For years, there has been growing discomfort over the loss of American lives and treasure in Afghanistan while the government moves increasingly toward a Taliban-like legal system that rejects most of the rights that we consider fundamental for all humanity. Those concerns have been magnified this week with a new Afghan law that makes it legal for men to rape their wives. Under the law, a woman “is bound to preen for her husband as and when he desires.”
President Hamid Karzai signed the legislation that says: “As long as the husband is not traveling, he has the right to have sexual intercourse with his wife every fourth night,” Article 132 of the law says. “Unless the wife is ill or has any kind of illness that intercourse could aggravate, the wife is bound to give a positive response to the sexual desires of her husband.”
The law allows for the raping of wives in a country where women already face tremendous abuse, including widespread incidents of rape. So, we are now sacrificing to preserve a medieval system where women are treated as chattel and subject to discretionary rape.
In another demonstration of how ridiculous this legal system has become, laws are passed only to govern parts of the populace. This law governs the Shiite community, which makes up about 20 percent of this country of 30 million people, but not Afghan Sunnis.
One of the drafters of the legislation, Sayed Hossain Alemi Balkhi, a Shiite lawmaker, insists that women have more rights in Afghanistan than in Britain or the United States. Sure, that is why the National Organization of Woman is relocating to Kabul — it is a female wonderland of rights and recognition. Nevertheless, he insisted that the law makes women safer by ensuring that the husband is obliged to provide for his wife — after raping them that is.
It is good that we are passing out viagra to the local warlords.
Good post. It is interesting how US politicians will ignore these legislative changes if they do not meet the current foreign policy agenda.
What were those people screaming as they jumped from the World Trade Center Towers?
Free Iraq?
Free Afghanistan?
Did it ever REALLY matter?
This is what you get when you practice the philosophy of Bush. All people want democracy so we give them democracy and they vote for the Taliban. Bush is an idiot, and a bunch of good young men and women have died for his stupidity and arrogance.
We should have gone in there killed all the taliban and Osama and then bombed hell out of Iran and Saudi Arabia and been done.
This kind of BS is why I no longer vote republican.
Fundamentalists are so far gone in their beliefs that they are incapable of recognizing the bitasedter irony of their actions. The question that seems to need asking is why Shiites husbands need this kind of law? Could it be that brutally forcing a woman to performs sexually is not pleasing to her and breeds resistance? It indicates that the Shiites in Afghanistan are generally poor lovers and so need the law to get their jollies, which I’m sure leaves many sexually unsatisfied women. Much of the dominant theme of patriarchy is based on getting women to comply with men’s desires. This leads me to conclude that Patriarchy and its companion Fundamentalism are supported by men whose concept of their own manhood and attractiveness are poor. Perhaps if they actually showed respect and vulnerability with their women they wouldn’t need rules and laws to be satisfied sexually.
This cannot be factual–April Fool’s Day was 2 days ago…
what about bob:
“So all the schmart people here just ate this story up without even guessing that it as 1) politics and 2) mostly made up by the media.”
Not at all.
It’s simply another opportunity to point out the bullshi+ stemming from making 9/11 the “holiest day in the nazi calendar.”
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/99feier.htm
You’ll never forget?
LOL
No one cared to investigate it so much as a class B misdemeanor.
After all, what good is a shakedown if you know when the next one’s (allegedly) coming?
what about bob,
Good to see that you are spreading out to other threads. We need your kind of dumb vitriol here to provide us with comic relief. None of the preceding comments were irrelevant whether this had become law or not, so your glee was misplaced and irrelevant.
WAB,
Did you actually read JTs post, or just make assumptions about what it said? JT mentions the fact that it only applies to part of the country (an inherently absurd idea).
“In another demonstration of how ridiculous this legal system has become, laws are passed only to govern parts of the populace. This law governs the Shiite community, which makes up about 20 percent of this country of 30 million people, but not Afghan Sunnis.”
Furthermore, the fact that this is even being discussed seriously is an indication of just how bad things are in Afghanistan.
what about bob:
Unfortunately, you are not nearly as funny as your namesake’s movie. Let’s review the facts:
1) It is law (Karzai signed it).
2) It was not debated at all in Parliament (according to ‘some lawmakers’)
3) Even if this is tasteless pandering to a certain political constituency, it still says something about both that constituency and the politicians that were willing to do so
4) This is a tremendous setback for women in Afghanistan, and orthogonal to the US’s stated aims in the country.
5) This was not ‘made up by the media.’ I’m not sure what standard you are using to evaluate that claim, but you are displaying the intellectual capacity of a five year old. Nay, that’s an insult to the world’s children.
WAB, your defense of the idiocy of our policies in Afghanistan suffers from the same inadequacy that attended the views of the Bush administration, complete ignorance of twelve hundred years of history. This is a medieval tribal society; it is not a budding democracy. It is not going to abandon theocratic laws or principles of governance because we donate copies of The Federalist to its public libraries. It is not going to recognize women as equals because Laura Bush drops in for a visit. The Karzai government will continue to permit our presence if we protect it from its enemies and bring lots of money. There have been many posts on this site regarding the outrages of Sharia law as applied throughout the Middle East. Your comments regarding “family law” are silly; in tribal societies it is all family law. As long as you support governments that tolerate honor killings, rape, stoning and the prohibition of education for women, you are unlikely to find allies among people with any intelligence. You might try a few of the white supremacist or religious fundamentalist sites.
On a lighter note, I have on occasion raised with my spouse the question of a woman’s duty to submit to her husband. Her only printable response has been, “You should live so long.”
MikeA:
Well said.
She probably would have left you sans scrotum and contents there in.
WAB,
You just won the grand-prize in the non sequitur category. It was a close tie between you and the guy who tried to argue torture was o.k. because we should have bombed Berlin at the start of WWII, but the comment about abortion just shot you into the lead.
Congratulations, you don’t make any sense.
wab,
I was an orphan and worked my way through college and grad school. what about you, did you even go to college? At 64 i hardly qualify as young. No one has supported me since I was 18 and most of my work life I had to work two jobs and my wife had to work just to raise my kids. What about you? If your life has been as tough, then you lack compassion for your fellow human beings and if religious you are a hypocrite. My folks weren’t wealthy and they too had to struggle nothing has been handed to me, but because of that I can feel compassion for others.
You on the other hand as a definite Bush/Cheney supporter bow down on your knees to these men who were raised in wealth and had everything handed to them. Why is that? For one I think it’s because you’re too stupid to understand what is going on. The too perhaps you are “the products of spoiled people” who gave you everything. Lastly, perhaps you’re just on of those jerks that thinks politics is like people and you root for Team Republican. If that is the case I can see a picture of you in my minds eye of some beer bellied fat guy, shirt of in 20 degree weather, face painted in team colors, mindlessly rooting for people who wouldn’t give you the time of day. You don’t deserve Democracy, you deserve some kingdom where you can bow down and kiss the shoes of your masters.
I sympathize with our readers here who feel outrage at the impact of this legislation and believe it to be a concession to a foreign and primitive religious culture. We should realize that when I came to the Bar not so very long ago, a wife IN VIRGINIA, USA could not claim rape against her husband regardless of the brutality of the act nor her lack of consent. The law was finally changed to permit the charge only in the cases of serious bodily injury and with the spouses living apart and then only if the act was committed through use of force or under threat of force or intimidation. The law was finally brought out of the 12th Century when spousal rape was treated as any other rape, and special provision made for counseling to preserve the family unit. Religious foolishness is thus not too far removed from our shores as well.
Text of Original Draft of Proposed White House Joint Resolution
(September 12, 2001) Joint Resolution
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
Whereas on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and
Whereas such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and
Whereas in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and
Whereas such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States,
Now, therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the “Authorization for Use of Military Force.”
SECTION 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) IN GENERAL. — That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism
against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
(b) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS —
(1)SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION — Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
——————-
Amusing when you really analyze the language in light of the actions taken to date; isn’t it?
Dare I say comical.
What About Bob:
First off I am a conservative and did not grow up with a silver spoon. I am married and my parents and inlaws dont fill my freezer.
Now with that out of the way we can proceed to your assertions about their being democracy in Afghanistan-if you think that you are incorrect. Bush made a false assumption about democracy being exportable and I was on board at the beginning. But the very idea about allowing some 10th century barbarians to practice “democracy” is laughable at best. They will vote in the other 10th century barbarians and practice Sharia Law which is pretty much what they have done. I am very disillusioned about what Bush has done and wish that I could recall my vote. Many decent young men and women have been sacrificed for Sharia Democracy. We should have eradicated the Taliban and left the country to its own devices. Those people were not worth one drop of American blood and they certainly dont deserve our treasure either.
The more I think about what has happened in Afghanistan and Iraq the madder I become. I dont think I can get behind trying Bush for war crimes but I could get behind trying him for getting us into these 2 stupid wars in the first place.
Think about how ludicrous the idea of bringing “democracy” to these people was/is. Most of them cant even read or write, they are barbarians as was evidenced by the murder of Nick Berg and Dan Pearl. They have a sick society, rotten at its core because of their philosophy of life and you think you are going to bring enlightenment principles to people like that, you must be joking.
What have they accomplished as a society recently? Are there any Noble Prize winners among them, how many books has their society produced (I am talking about middle eastern Islam in general), what major works of art, how about medical break throughs, any great construction projects (well Dubai but that king is trying to upgrade his society), the Saudis have to use western technology to pump oil from their own land. These people are nothing better than mystical savages praying to the sun god and cowering in terror when the sun is eclipsed.
It took me a long time to admit it but these wars were very foolish from the begining and were fought for the wrong reasons, the proper reason would have been for the defence of America, the wrong reason was to bring democracy. We fought the wars incorectly too, worrying about civilians more than our own troops, civilians I might add that probably voted for Sharia “democracy”. Bush and his “just war theory” what a load.
Honey, pack up the kids. We’re moving to Kabul!!!!
My wife hasn’t preened for me in years.
Seamus,
You have a great talent that I’ve come to appreciate more and more as you post comments. You are able to present broad concepts, in minimal words and be totally amusing at the same time. You see with me I can’t even praise you in less than a paragraph and would probably do 10 more, if I wasn’t writing about the example you set.
I could be wrong and often am, but I’ve a hunch WAB has shot his load, prematurely of course.
Mike Spindell
bitasedter? Curious. What is this?
Whoolie,
That is the sign of someone who doesn’t proofread his stuff. My cursor has a funny habit of jumping upwards as I type. Since I’m not looking at the screen mostly, when a jump happens sometimes I miss it. “Bitasedter” was actually supposed to precede irony as bitter, but the “ased” from based a few sentences below skipped up after bit and so you have “bitasedter” irony. Unfortunately, I forget to proofread a lot and I presume my writing a second comment to explain the error in the first comment is tedious for people, so I let it pass and depend on peoples good will to realize I goofed.
However, if you don’t like that explanation perhaps I was using the Yiddush “bitasedter” which means “bitter beyond belief and lost track of the language switch. Of course if you believe that, then I can make you a great deal on a bridge going from Manhattan to Brooklyn….real cheap….honestly.
Mike
Thanks, going with the Yiddush.
Friday,
I fail to see how this is relevant to anything preceding it on the thread. How much did you make for this bit of trollery?
More important what point are you making? I take from your context that you are a Bush supporter. In which case you followed an alcoholic, draft dodger, who lied to the extent that he has literally murdered more than 4,000 of our brave troops, put money into the pockets of war profiteers who build showers that electrocute soldiers, lowered the benefits that returning soldiers receive and killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Your support puts blood on your hands. You are not a patriot. You are anti-American and probably have treason on your mind since you supported people who committed it. Now what were you saying about numbers?
First we have WAB spreading a little nonsense and then we hear from the latest troll named Friday. Hopefully Mike S’s response has dispatched him/her from this site. What is the reasoning for someone to disparage people and their families that he/she doesn’t even know?
Seamus, I have to look into this “preening” thing!
I was going to say something about these sharia laws destroying any possible joy in life, even the joy of being sincerely loved. Mike Spindell, you covered that beautifully.
I missed Wab, but here’s a little tidbit for you if you dare. This is extremely explicit. Ursula Drucker performing an a cappella version of her “What a Woman Must do.”
Wab, can you handle a few minutes of real honesty? I hope this link works.
Funny how our Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, didn’t see this coming.
I guess Hillary is not doing her job.
Hasshole,
If men in Afghanistan are such terrible lovers that they have to legislate love, or a pretense at love, do you really think it’s Hillary’s job to fix THAT?!!!!
LindyLou:
“If men in Afghanistan are such terrible lovers that they have to legislate love, or a pretense at love, do you really think it’s Hillary’s job to fix THAT?!!!!”
*******************
Well maybe, she certainly got Bill’s libido up!
i have been reading many site lately
and it seems like a lot of comments
are made be people who do not think they just expose what the media says
there were mistakes and we have to decide do we try and show the other countries what can be done or should we just bloe them off the face of this earth you cant have it both ways
you wanted change with the new adm. but read the white house web page all you see is well the other adm. did and were wrong that adm. is over do something or shut up.
the countries we are involve with have had years of nothing but hate the did attack us and they would kill every us citizen they could they could care less man women child we have to either convert them and educate them to become human or we have to destroy them i would like them to be changed but if necessary
destroy them when they do something dispickable we need to act
when they learn we reward. but no pandering or apoligising.