![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||
|
In the teeth of Qur'an 4:34. "Chad Struggles to Pass New Family Law," from the VOA News, with thanks to Twostellas:
Chad's government is pushing for a new family law that, among other things, aims to reduce gender disparities by outlawing wife beating and raising the minimum age for marriage. The proposed civil code is facing continued resistance from traditionalists in the largely conservative Muslim society.Chad's president, Idriss Deby, used a recent rally marking the celebration of International Women's Day to express his commitment to pushing the law through, saying the injustices done to women must be repaired.
If adopted, the proposed family code would replace one that has been in place since before the country gained independence from France four-and-a-half decades ago. Proponents hope its passage will help reduce the differences in treatment under the law between Chad's more than nine million men and women.
But the law's future is far from ensured. A human rights activist, Dobian Assingar, says multiple delays in the process highlight divisions in Chad's majority Muslim society over whether women should be treated as equals.
He says the law has now been held up for more than three years in cabinet discussions. It has yet to go before parliament. Mr. Assingar blames the weakness of the state's authority faced with pressure from, what he says is a small number of conservative Muslim leaders.
Religious conservatives say the law contradicts the teachings of Islam.
Yep.
Chadian journalist, Alphonse Mbaindoroum, says that many conservative Muslim men see the new code as a threat.He says conservatives view the family code, whose drafting was partially funded by the United Nations Population Fund, as based on a French model that draws upon the teachings of the Bible.
But it doesn't draw on the Bible all that much:
There have also been objections from some Christians, who reject the code's legalization of polygamy, a practice with a long history in Chad.The public debate over the law, however, is not a topic of
discussion just for extremists.Dalou Mohamet, a self-proclaimed modern Muslim, is getting married in June. And he says, though men and women have different roles to play in society, he believes in equality.
"My fiancé, she's Muslim also. And she knows exactly, for example, her rights. And I know my rights and my duties. We [have] agreed, she and I, that at home, for example, I am the chief. But it doesn't mean that I control all totally. Something concerning family and concerning children, in particular, she has a responsibility also. It's very important," he said.
"I am the chief. But it doesn't mean that I control all totally." Mighty "moderate" of you, Dalou.
Debate over the law has raised the possibility of the creation of two codes, one for majority Muslims, the other for Christians, mainly concentrated in Chad's south.But one Chadian woman says rights for women should be universal and independent of religion. "As a Chadian woman, I would say that the ode must be applied to all women. And there can only be one code in a country that is applied to all women, who should have the same rights. There is no such thing as Muslim women's rights, or southern women's rights. We are all the same. We are all mothers. This code is our right," she said....
Yes. It is.
Posted by Robert at April 16, 2005 5:33 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Old lawyer's trick question:
"Have you stopped beating your wife?"
Answer in Chad:
"No. Why?"
But as the apologists for Islam will chime in:
"It is not Koranic but cultural!"
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Nothing is ever Koranic.
********************************************
And "jihad", of course, means "Defending Islam".
At least according to two Muslim women teachers in Manchester, CT. (-see previous DW article)...
Even though the word doesn't mean that in Arabic but translates more like: "inner wrestling"/"spiritual endeavor"/"my struggle" ['mein kampf' in German].
"Defending Islam" would be a mealy-mouthed metaphorical p.c. stretch, at best. Or, in plain terms, a deceptive pile of manure.
Posted by: BigSleep
at April 16, 2005 8:15 PM
Chad's another African country where the Europeans drew a line embracing both Muslims and the non-Muslims they traditionally looked on as enslavable (like the big one to the east). How convenient.
Posted by: Kepha
at April 16, 2005 10:33 PM
It's funny how that's one of the underlying currents wherever wife-beating is legal:
islam. But, as BigSleep sarcastically illustrates, "it's cultural".
Of course. Islam is a culture, isn't it?
Geoff
Posted by: Geoff
at April 17, 2005 12:38 AM
Islam is a culture when it's convenient. A religion when that's convenient. It's whatever's more convenient at the time. When it comes to proselytizing in our schools, it's a culture, to get around the "no religious proselytizing" rule. It's a religion when it comes to all the privileges & protections that religion gets in Western societies.
It uses the "it's cultural, not Islam" argument when you bring up abhorrent practises done by Islamic societies and countries. Not our fault, it's an ancient, tribal, cultural thing, not Islamic, blah, blah, blah. Yet Islam will always embrace disgusting practises to further its intolerance and hatred. FGM, wife-beating, honor-killings, rapes of women because 'they asked for it': these are very handy tools to subjugate and terrorize women. The last thing Islam wants or needs is empowered, unafraid women who feel free and safe to make their own choices. They deflect the blame from Islam by claiming these are cultural practises, while gleefully practising these things, and encouraging them from their mosques.
Posted by: feralee
at April 17, 2005 3:06 AM
From the article:
He says conservatives view the family code, whose drafting was partially funded by the United Nations Population Fund, as based on a French model that draws upon the teachings of the Bible.
Per Robert
But it doesn't draw on the Bible all that much:
Interesting have you read the proposed Chad "family code", to what degree does it NOT draw upon the Bible.
There have also been objections from some Christians, who reject the code's legalization of polygamy
Of interest here, Puritans in Cromwells Parliament introduced legislation that would have legalized polygamy. It failed by one vote.
The Puritans of course were Calvinists, and the Evangelical movement in the US is Calvinist based and influenced, especially orthodox Presbyterianism aka Dominion Theology or Christian Reconstruction and of course Southern Baptists and the Missouri Synod of Lutherans and even Catholics.
There ain't a dimes worth of difference, from a secular view point between a Dominionist and the agenda of the Christian Reconstruction movement and the mullahcracy of Iran and now Iraq.
at April 17, 2005 6:57 PM


(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)