Rape legalized in Afghanistan by US-Puppet Government

[TC]

The U.N. warns that Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai has legalized rape.

Directed towards the Shia minority, the Shia Family Law allows for sexual intercourse between married couples without consent and requires a husband's permission for a woman to leave the home, work or pursue education. And in the event of divorce, the father or grandfather is granted custody of the children.http://www.care2.com/causes/womens-rights/blog/afghanistan-legalizes-rape/



KABUL – A new Afghan law makes it legal for men to rape their wives, human rights groups and some Afghan lawmakers said Thursday, accusing President Hamid Karzai of signing the legislation to bolster his re-election prospects. Critics worry the legislation undermines hard-won rights for women enacted after the fall of the Taliban's strict Islamist regime.
The law — which some lawmakers say was never debated in parliament — is intended to regulate family life inside Afghanistan's Shiite community, which makes up about 20 percent of this country of 30 million people. The law does not affect Afghan Sunnis.
One of the most controversial articles stipulates the wife "is bound to preen for her husband as and when he desires."
"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."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090403/ap_on_re_as/as_afghan_womenAfghan women's legally enforced status as sexual slaves of their husbands: paid for by the U.S.A!

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Afghanistan has problems. If the United States were theoretically a benevolent government looking out for the interests of other nations, I wouldn't know what to do with Afghanistan if I was dictator with unlimited resources. Education is important, I know that.

[BobKKKindle$]

The irony of this, of course, is that one of the main arguments used to justify the war by the imperialist powers was that it would lead to the liberation of women by ending reactionary laws and allowing Afghan women to pursue projects outside the home - and yet not only have women failed to receive significant benefits from the occupation, they have also been some of the main victims of the war, as they continue to suffer under reactionary laws such as this, have a total lack of access to medical facilities, and are faced with the burden of having to provide for the needs of their children with no outside help when their male relatives have been killed.

[Matina]

I was at a local demo today against the war in Afganistan. Some Journalist took an interview of me about why we oppose the war etc. Among other thing I outlined the hypocricy of NATO, which claims that it is liberating women (Many people still support the war because of this).

"NATOs puppuet government is legalizing marital rape, how the fuck is this a step forward for Afghani women? " I told the Journalist. Of course she was shocked because she wasn;t aware of this. She told me that she won't air it because of the word "fuck", but she said she can edit it and put it on the website.

[Patchd]

Exactly what Bob and Matina said here, one of the so called reasons for war was the protection of female "liberties", even in a bourgeois sense of the word, being that they would receive the vote and the right to be oppressed and exploited as equally as anyone else.

I wonder if the Alliance for Workers' Liberty will continue to stand by their "Troops In Iraq and Afghanistan" position, seeing as they supported it on the same grounds as the Imperialists.

[pastradamus]

Good stuff Matina.

The US government has not only put in place a system of pro-US businessmen and ex-taliban warlords but also warlords that were too extreme and cruel even for the Talibans liking. So at the start of the Talibans rule, they actually looked like liberators by removing these warlords. Many member of the present "government" are ex-Taliban leaders who are actively involved in promoting such cruelties as rape and forced wearing of the burqua. Lets face it- Karzai didnt come up with this decision on his own. Afghanistan is a black hole at the moment. Opium production is at an all time high and the golden cresent area is booming. It is a system of oppurtunists and bandits. Everything and anything in the said country is up for grabs. The ruling puppet regime have little control over the country and local chieftans have all the say over the locality they run.

[The Intransigent Faction]

Yeah, I made a post about this below.
What's left to say? These laws are awful, and a testament to NATO's hypocrisy, as was said above.
This is a cruel irony.

[Bitter Ashes]

I'm absolutly speechless.:(

[Dimentio]

http://www.care2.com/causes/womens-rights/blog/afghanistan-legalizes-rape/

Afghan women's legally enforced status as sexual slaves of their husbands: paid for by the U.S.A!

Yes. But it is not that the USA likes sexism and imposes it upon an unwilling population. It is really so that USA gives shit in human rights, as long as they could have a base near Central Asia.

The Soviet did the mistake to try to make progressive policies in Afghanistan. And look where that brought them.

[Bandito]

Easier to rule enslaved when you make them think they want something that awful.
Better yet,when you convince the opressed(in this case women) that it's what they want,situation is clear to rule. But it surely doesn't matter what they think.
Humaira Namati,a member of the Parliament,said that this law is worse than in the Talban era.
Darkness.

[Dr Mindbender]

Its not really new news. In Pakistan, if a woman wants to press charges against a rapist she needs 4 male witnesses. However, because of the invariable cultural wall of silence it effectively means rape is legal there too.

[Devrim]

Its not really new news. In Pakistan, if a woman wants to press charges against a rapist she needs 4 male witnesses. However, because of the invariable cultural wall of silence it effectively means rape is legal there too.

Well yes, one would imagine that nothing has really changed at all here. Has there ever been a prosecution of an Afghan Shia man for raping his wife? I would sort of doubt it.

Devrim

[Pawn Power]

While this is a horrendous law, it is just one blow against the right wing arguments (like David Harowitz and his 'Islamofascism Awareness Week') that the US occupation in Afghanistan has 'liberated' women or that an outside US force is needed to relinquish Islamic fundementalism control over women.

[Pawn Power]

Trading Afghan Women's Rights for Political Power (http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/04/06)

[Dimentio]

Easier to rule enslaved when you make them think they want something that awful.
Better yet,when you convince the opressed(in this case women) that it's what they want,situation is clear to rule. But it surely doesn't matter what they think.
Humaira Namati,a member of the Parliament,said that this law is worse than in the Talban era.
Darkness.

Well, but if that gives them the illusion of self-government... so what.

Will be funny what Obama will say when they bring this up. The media.

[ibn Bruce]

Its not really new news. In Pakistan, if a woman wants to press charges against a rapist she needs 4 male witnesses.

Really? That's odd, in traditionalist Sha'riah the 4 witness requirement is for adultery, not rape. In the case of a sexual assault, all that is needed is the woman's word.

[Bandito]

The traditionally racist western "civil society" are applauding inside themselves about this.
They see it as a quiet proof that their racism(which they will never accept that they have) was right.

[Atrus]

I don't believe it's racism to say that Sha'ria law contains many aspects which are simply unacceptable in a good world. It is not insulting a race, a religion or any group of people. I believe it is fact and nothing less that this level of sexism is horrific.
The UN should have outlawed laws like this a long time ago, but it would appear too racist, I imagine. That is, if they even hold the power to achieve something like that.

[ibn Bruce]

I don't believe it's racism to say that Sha'ria law contains many aspects which are simply unacceptable in a good world. It is not insulting a race, a religion or any group of people. I believe it is fact and nothing less that this level of sexism is horrific.
The UN should have outlawed laws like this a long time ago, but it would appear too racist, I imagine. That is, if they even hold the power to achieve something like that.

The fact that you seem to claim a knowledge of exactly what the Sha'riah constitutes makes your assertion that it is 'simply unacceptable in a good world' absolutely insulting to me personally.

The assertion that this law, or Afghanistan's law (nor or under the Taliban) represents Sha'riah, will be extremely insulting to the vast majority of Muslims who follow the Sunni tradition.

These things are a perversion of Islamic thought, a sick twisted parody, removed from the beauty of Islam.

Of course, the law in question is also a Shia one, Shia making up approximately 8% of Muslims, and in Afghanistan 15%. Shia students in the Hazarajat region made up the core of the Maoist movements in Afghanistan before the soviet invasion. Again, defining such Shia laws as the 'Sha'riah' is extremely problematic.

[Rebel_Serigan]

People act like this is something new. I know other countries have that law but did you know that is legal in four US states? No joke. I did a whole debate on it last year at a debate competition. One of the main states that allows husbands to rape thier wives is Idaho. That's right Idaho still sucks.