New regressive laws in Afghanistan

April 7, 2009 | By | 2 Replies More

As reported by Marie Cocco at Alternet:

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has just signed a law that forces women to obey their husbands’ sexual demands, keeps women from leaving the house — even for work or school — without a husband’s permission, automatically grants child custody rights to fathers and grandfathers before mothers, and favors men in inheritance disputes and other legal matters. In short, the law again consigns Afghan women to lives of brutal repression. . .

The ugly truth is that Afghanistan has long been sliding back into the violent chaos that is friendly political ground for the Taliban and other extremist groups. Women have, as usual, been among the chief victims.

Share

Tags: , , ,

Category: Bigotry, Civil Rights, Law, The Middle East

About the Author ()

Erich Vieth is an attorney focusing on consumer law litigation and appellate practice. He is also a working musician and a writer, having founded Dangerous Intersection in 2006. Erich lives in the Shaw Neighborhood of St. Louis, Missouri, where he lives half-time with his two extraordinary daughters.

Comments (2)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Karl says:

    These fundamental theist's just can't be trusted nor reasoned with.

    Their dogma needs to be taken out of their government and culture, so that the women, atheists, gays, lesbians and other second rate citzens aren't taken out back and shot for not following the commands of Allah.

    And you think its bad in America. Its really tough to be a member of the minority class when the Holy Clerics control the aspects of both goverment and church.

    How would an atheist or an agnostic deal with this?

    Pray tell if you have some kind of a solution that reveals your compassion for scoundrels while showing them their holy dogma is certainly out dated and old school.

  2. TonyC says:

    Karl

    Thanks for trying to make 'us' the bad guys again. Why does everything have to be through the lens of your religion?

    But to answer your question – this is NOT an athiest question. Secular government has been a central contributory factor behind the growth and success of western nations. This has been the case, in greater of lesser degree, since the enlightenment.

    I would hope that every democratic government that wished to be worthy of the name was secular. Religion should be personal. Whenever a governmenet becomes religiously based, that government is no longer representative of anything other than dogma. (Religious Right & US Christian PACs – take note)

    Note – this should be the desire of EVERY thinking person, irrespective of their personal perspective on religion. If you believe in democracy, no other course is valid.

    So – by asking your question, you are exposing your biased belief that – somehow – atheists would have a different perspective on this issue of government than a christian.

    How shallow, and how uninformed. Unless of course you desire a religiously motivated government? In which case I believe you to be an enemy of democracy.

Leave a Reply