And you know that's where babies come from. No, wait... Sharia Alert. "Islamic clerics oppose women`s reservation," from Indo-Asian News Service, March 12 (thanks to Twostellas):
Not only certain political parties, but even some influential Islamic scholars and clerics are strongly opposed to the women`s reservation bill.
Their opposition seems to stem from the fact that such a provision will not only entitle but also encourage more and more Muslim women to take a plunge into politics, where it would not be possible for them to strictly adhere to the tenets of the Shariat.
Maulana Saeed-ur Rehman, principal of the Lucknow-based internationally renowned Nadwat-ul-Ulema seminary, told IANS: "It was un-Islamic for any Muslim woman to contest an election in a secular nation."
"Muslim women could contest elections in theocratic Islamic states because they would have to necessarily remain in `purdah` while there was no such restriction in secular societies."
The principal of the institution that remains a host to students from leading Islamic nations across the globe, contended Islam did not permit participation of women in people`s parliament simply because that would mean close interaction with men. "They could, however, join the proceedings of a parliament where there was ample provision for `purdah` and proper segregation of women," he said.
Asked whether that would not lead to creating more illiteracy among Muslim women, he shot back: "Islam is not against education of women, but the idea is to let them acquire education but remain within the confines of their homes, as Islam clearly prescribes `purdah` for them and holds that they must look after their homes."
No, they're not against education for women, just any chance for them to obtain and use it. Anyway, a modicum of dissent:
City`s Naib Imam Maulana Khalid Rasheed, who also heads Lucknow`s oldest Islami seminary Firangi Mahal, feels otherwise. "There is nothing wrong about a Muslim women participating in active politics and contesting elections. After all, so many Muslim women have done well in politics", he said.
"However, I am opposed to the women`s reservation bill as it was contradictory to the fundamental provisions of any democratic society," he argued. "In fact, reservation within reservation was against the spirit of the Indian constitution," he stressed.
Leading Shia cleric and scholar Maulana Kalbe Jawwad, however, believed in the line adopted by the Nadwa principal. Asked how an Islamic state like Iran allowed women to participate in various political activities, he replied: "Well, Iran does have women members of parliament, who go through the process of elections, but they strictly follow the `purdah` system."
"Even when they sit in their parliament, they observe complete seclusion," he said, adding this could not be possible in Indian parliament.
"Any woman entering the electoral fray would have to go into lanes and bylanes, stand on dais and brush shoulders with men. How can Islam permit all that?" he asked.
"It was un-Islamic for any Muslim woman to contest an election in a secular nation."
"Muslim women could contest elections in theocratic Islamic states because they would have to necessarily remain in `purdah` while there was no such restriction in secular societies."
....................
And that's why there were so many Muslim women involved in politics under the Taliban—no, wait..or in Somalia...uh...
The above is just the sort of crap they feel duty-bound to say in a democracy like India, to show how "egalitarian" Islam really is, under the "right" circumstance.
They make no such claims in full-Shai'ah hellholes, where the women keep quiet if they know what's good for them...
Well don't really care in this instance. This bill is stupid. Reserving 30% of seats based on something you're born with is illiberal and stupid.
Simple solution: Muslims who don't want to endure the presence of women not in purdah should simply stay out of Parliament. Why not just run females as the Muslim candidates? That should satisfy everybody.
"... but the idea is to let them acquire education but remain within the confines of their homes..."
In other words, he wants them to be educated about how to cook and clean and be a sex slave to their husbands.
Any woman entering the electoral fray would have to go into lanes and bylanes, stand on dais and brush shoulders with men. How can Islam permit all that?" he asked.
How you ask?
The same way it allows the to be molested by grown man when they are only child brides.
Than same way it allows them to spend their entire lives in bondage.
The same way it requires them to provide sex whenever their husbands demand it without with no free will.
The same way it allows them to be beaten up and live in shame.
The same way it allows them to be stoned to death on a mere accusation of adultery and requiring them to have 4 male witnesses to testify otherwise.
The same way it allows them to be brutally killed by family
members to pledge their honor.
The very same way they are allowed to be subjected to female genital mutilation.
The same way they are treated far as less than their male Muslims, and deprived of a decent education and their God given free will to enjoy freedom and peace.
The very same way.
That may be debatable given the unlevel playing fields for men and women in India. However, the dhimmitude of India and Western countries are similar in that people in power and position ignored (thoughtfully) this medeival Mo mentality.
islam is truly evil by the way it constantly controls women, this fear of women by muslim men needs to be used against them.
Get enough Women in Parliament and they can produce Bills calling for their emancipation.
This is sad to see in India.
They must have become very dhimmified since Indira Gandhi was the prime minister of India from 1966 to 1977, and from 1980 until her assassination in 1984, a total of fifteen years. She was India's first, and only, female prime minister.
I doubt there will be another.