Posted on 03/08/2012 6:59:35 AM PST by SeekAndFind
KABUL, Afghanistan — Afghanistan's president on Tuesday endorsed a "code of conduct" issued by an influential council of clerics that activists say represents a giant step backward for women's rights in the country.
President Hamid Karzai's Tuesday remarks backing the Ulema Council's document, which allows husbands to beat wives under certain circumstances and encourages segregation of the sexes, is seen as part of his outreach to insurgents like the Taliban.
Both the U.S. and Karzai hope that the Taliban can be brought into negotiations to end the country's decade-long war. But activists say they're worried that gains made by women since 2001 may be lost in the process.
When the Taliban ruled Afghanistan prior to the 2001 U.S. invasion, girls were banned from going to school and women had to wear burqas that covered them from head to toe. Women were not allowed to leave their homes without a male relative as an escort.
The "code of conduct" issued Friday by the Ulema Council as part of a longer statement on national political issues is cast as a set of guidelines that religious women should obey voluntarily, but activists are concerned it will herald a reversal of the trend in Afghanistan since 2001 to pass laws aimed at expanding women's rights.
Among the rules: Women should not travel without a male guardian and women should not mingle with strange men in places like schools, markets or offices. Beating one's wife is prohibited only if there is no "Shariah-compliant reason," it said, referring to the principles of Islamic law.
Asked about the code of conduct at a press conference in the capital, Karzai said it was in line with Islamic law and was written in consultation with Afghan women's groups. He did not name the groups that were consulted.
"The clerics' council of Afghanistan did not put any limitations on women," Karzai said, adding: "It is the Shariah law of all Muslims and all Afghans."
More evidence we've lost in Afghanistan.
Two minutes after the last American unit exists that miserable excuse for a country, Karzai will be dead and ...
..Well, there's a silver lining there after all.
Barack Hussein Obama, the President who is dumping on all of us for being anti-woman, consigning all Afghan women back into a state of 7th. Century servitude.
But hey, at least he got the war issue off his plate for November.
We are wasting our blood and treasure trying to build a modern government in a 7th century tribal nomadic desert. Way above and out of 'our pay grade'.
Pull ‘em out now. Not this weekend. Now. These people can fend for themselves - our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor are too good for this place and its people.
As I’ve said dozens of times(not to you), you can’t nation build with a pack of 7th century Islamic savages.
IMO, Karzai has been abandoned by the USA. He had a chance at making something decent of Afghanistan when Bush was there, but Obama has screwed the entire nation over. Hell, Obama is the one insisting on appeasing the Taliban. Karzai is being forced into this anti-woman crap.
Obama is giving a death sentence to the women and girls of that country.
Two minutes after the last American unit exists that miserable excuse for a country, Karzai will be dead and ...
..Well, there’s a silver lining there after all.
<><><><
Yea, because whoever follows Karzai is sure to be much more aligned with the West. You know, just like Egypt.
We already PUBLICLY announced our date of withdrawal. Karzai knows this and so do the Afghans who support us.
Why would they want to continue risking their lives supporting us when they know they will be abandoned anyway? They might as well deal with the Taliban for their own personal security knowing that they will be there for the long run.
How long should we stay there? 10, 20, 50 years? Are our troops police for other nations?
And Rush gets all of the attention for calling a slut a slut.
Possibly so, but America won`t be spending blood and treasure safeguarding his sorry ass.
All but one member of Congress (a Democrat from California) voted to authorize the use of force in Afghanistan. But, who knew first President Bush and then President Obama would use this authorization to attempt to “reconstruct” the country?
Obviously, the Republicans in Congress had a problem with criticizing the President when that President was a fellow Republican. Only now, with a Democrat in the White House, do we hear Republicans occasionally say we should now pull out (e.g., Gingrich). (Of course, Ron Paul got off the bus back when the Congress debated authorization of the use of force in Iraq.)
But, with each passing day, it is clear that we made a really bad mistake in allowing mission creep to rule.
See Japan, Germany, etc. We defeat a country, help establish a friendly government, and use it as a base for the future.
Afghanistan isn’t either country. To think so is truly foolish. How did things work out for the Russians?
The Russians were invaders trying to get more access to the sea and influence the Middle East. We were doing neither...so don’t act like we were/are the Russians; that is sophistry.
Also, we had committed to standing with the people, and we are abandoning them.
If you support Obama’s policy of abandoning our allies, you’re entitled to your opinion. I think it is a policty that retards our standing.
They aren’t our allies. They are 7th century Islamic filth. Maybe you should go there until everything works out.
You obviously are unable to understand the difference between friends and enemies—and you’ve been unable to dispute my points on our history with them in the recent past.
The good people there deserve liberty and they deserve what Americans promised them when we routed the Taliban under the Bush regime—a friend and ally until they are capable.
You and Obama apparently want to cut and run. I think we ought to keep our word.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.