Friday, August 26, 2005

Iraqi Women Worse Off?

There are some leftists who seek to scorn the efforts of the administration in regards to the establishment of a democratic government in Iraq, and will look for any excuse to do so. One of the more recent assertions by them is the myth that women will be "worse off than before" in the new Iraqi government.

Let's take a look at the draft of the constitution now being debated in the newly formed democratic government in Iraq:




FIRST: Civil and political rights.

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

Article (15): Every individual has the right to life and security and freedom and cannot be deprived of these rights or have them restricted except in accordance to the law and based on a ruling by the appropriate judicial body.

Article (16): Equal opportunity is a right guaranteed to all Iraqis, and the state shall take the necessary steps to achieve this.

Iraqis are equal before the law without discrimination because of sex.

How clear does it have to be? Have the aforementioned leftists actually read the draft of the Constitution? It surely doesn't appear that way, does it?

So, why in the world would they say such a thing? Can they not read it for themselves? What part of "Iraqis are equal before the law without discrimination because of sex" don't they understand?

I seem to remember that Saddam Hussein and his son's weren't too nice to women in general. Didn't Uday and Qusay rape and torture women routinely? Weren't women required to wear those "burka" things and weren't they prohibited from almost everything that men were allowed to do? So, in what way will they be worse off if they are being treated as equals?

From this:To this:

I have been doing some studying on Islam recently and one thing that surprised me is that the Muslim Holy Book, the Qur'an, makes no distinction between women and men when it comes to being treated fairly and with respect. It seems to me that the new constitution is validating the Qur'an.

Wait. I just had a thought. Maybe this is wishful thinking on the left's part. Maybe they want to keep women down just so they can point to the Bush administration and say he made things worse. Maybe they are hoping that women will be worse off so it will make them look like they are the good guys.


I don't know. I'm just your humble friend and uneducated blogger, but if there is something in the new constitution that proves their point that women would be worse off under the new regime, I surely would like them to show it to me.

In other news, I found this on some web site somewhere. I don't remember where:

Los Angeles - Sacha Baron Cohen aka Ali G was dunked in the sea by Pamela Anderson's bodyguards - after rugby-tackling the actress at her dogs' wedding.
The Ali G star was dressed as his other creation, Kazakhstani TV journalist Borat, when he pulled the stunt.
Cohen, 33, in trunks, leather jacket and Village People-style cap, emerged from the surf on an inflatable turtle.
His rugby tackle sent Pam, 38, hurtling to the sand on the beach at Malibu, California.
Concerned security men grabbed the comedian and dragged him into the sea.
Pam was presiding over the nuptials of her Golden Retriever Star to Chihuahua Luca.

A wedding for her dogs? And the Hollywood people think they're normal.

Lie Of The Day: (from Laura Ingraham's web site)
"As the only woman on the committee, I have an additional role to play, representing the views and concerns of 145 million American women during this hearing process," claimed Dianne Feinstein, as she forged heavy drama about John Roberts and Roe V. Wade at the L.A. Bar Association.

A California liberal represents all women? Now that's funny.


Fitch said...

I'm sick of hearing how this means Iranian style theocracy. It's just, anything to try and turn success into failure to make bush look bad. It seems like a fair constitution to me. In fact, they seem to be getting a handle on things way better than we did 200 some years ago. Insolublog had a similar pictorial idea when Screamin' Dean said Iraqi women were worse off now than before. I loved your comment over at MoxArgon. I agree too.

Poison Pero said...

Honestly, I could care less.......I'm all for the attempt at democracy in Iraq, and hope it survives, but have little faith in it as long as there are Muslims in Mesopotamia.


I'm one of the few honest enough to say, the only thing I wanted from Iraq was Sodom, his buddies and his kids removed, some oil, a permanent military base, and a permanent naval force on the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean. --> All 4 are necessary for our survival, and the last 2 will be necessary the next time the Islamists get loose here in the U.S.

It sure would be nice to get some of that oil, though. --> We don't need to take it from them, as long as they sell it at a reasonable price.
As far as the Iraqi women go, they are screwed once we leave there.

Sheila said...

Speaking of being realistic. Who are we to dictate what is good for the Iraqis?

I may wish all good things for the Iraqi women, but the Saudis have just given women"Some Rights" not all. They are one of maybe one more who allow women "Rights". They look at these rights and taking care of these precious commodities.

I know the establishment of what looked our democracy would have been great. But the Administration ignored basic culture and that the Quran plays just as an important role as our Bible for a foundation in government.

Unfortunately for women, they will get the short end of the stick again.

BUT! you can look at it realisticaly. Women want heat, food, water, education, and a home for their children. At this point they are working toward being safe. These are important and if women have never had equal rights, maybe they will have strength on their own in the future to gain equal rights. That's how the Saudi women were finally able to go to school and hold a job. Courageous women pushed little by little.

We just have to let this new country evolve on it's own at some time and maybe the time is now.

Mark said...

2 points:

In Islam, religion and law are inseperable. The law of the religion is the law of the country and if we try to create a separation of church and state in Iraq, there will be trouble. Bit "we" are not dictating what goes into their constitution, so no problem.

The other point is one already stated in my post. According to the Qur'an women are considered equal in the sight of Allah to men. If the Law of the state is the same as the law of the religion and practiced literally, it will work.

Sheila said...


Your right in theory and ideal, but we have to say this. Culture plays such an important role in who is equal and what kind of equal that is.

After all, our country in it's infantcy had issues on if a Negro was even a man and if there was equality there. It took another century or so to acknowlege equal rights for African Americans and so much painful growth in white society as well as the violence influicted on them.

Equal rights for women was more gender cultural and it took a movement of changing the mind set of men and women for this to come about. It didn't just start with the right to vote.

In Great Britain it happened the same way only a little later than even our country for women.

So we have say, yes it will work with the Quran as well as the Bible. But with cultural evolution in both.

Mike's America said...

As much as I would like to see a more Western style constitution granting full and equal rights to women, I have to place it all in perspective.

How many women had their babies cut from their wombs in front of their husbands and both left to die under the current regime?


O.K. SO the current evolution of Iraqi liberty isn't perfect. But we've been at this democracy thing for over 200 years and people are still whining about how unfair it is.

They took my magic wand away after I waved it and wished for every defeatist socialist be transported to Guantanamo, so I can't do any better than to support the current process any way I can.

Lisa said...

Ok, I'm not going to pretend I know anything whatsoever about lefties and righties and politicalness...sooo, I'm going to skip commenting on the top half and only read the bottom lol

Although I have a lot of trouble understanding Ali G when he's talking, I'm disappointed that he didn't manage to drag Pammie into the water. Her dogs wedding?? Good Lord, what a load of crap some of these celebrities do to fill up their days.

Sheila said...

Hey Mike,

I get most of what your saying and think we are on the same track.... :)

But in case you haven't seen the latest. The US struck a deal with all the countries involved. that criminals being held in GITMO will be transfered to their countries of Origin for prison there. Only the big ones will stay in GITMO.

The transfer is due to take place in the next six months. Oh this is also for the places around the globe that we don't know about. So maybe that's why your wand didn't work. :)

Lores Rizkalla said...

Mark, well done. The Iraqis are moving forward. Women in Iraq no longer fear torture and rape chambers. They have a long way to go. But, keep in mind that when our constitution was originally ratified, it declared that a slave was the equivalent of 3/5 of a non-slave. it was decades later before the 13-15th amendments were added to repair the damage (on paper) and we still have to work towards the protection of civil rights.

Just some perspective...