For Afghan Woman, Justice Runs Into Unforgiving Wall of Custom

Source: NY TIMES

KABUL, Afghanistan — When the Afghan government announced Thursday that it would pardon a woman who had been imprisoned for adultery after she reported that she had been raped, the decision seemed a clear victory for the many women here whose lives have been ground down by the Afghan justice system.

But when the announcement also made it clear that there was an expectation that the woman, Gulnaz, would agree to marry the man who raped her, the moment instead revealed the ways in which even efforts guided by the best intentions to redress violence against women here run up against the limits of change in a society where cultural practices are so powerful that few can resist them, not even the president.

The solution holds grave risks for Gulnaz, who uses one name, since the man could be so humiliated that he might kill his accuser, despite the risk of prosecution, or abuse her again.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/world/asia/for-afghan-woman-justice-runs-into-the-static-wall-of-custom.html?_r=1&hp

---

Forced to marry the person who raped you? No words describe how horrific that is.

No way.

This is truly horrifying.

He should be in prison for raping her.

Disgusting, all of it.

Forced to have the baby after being raped. Just as sick if not sicker.

Islam grew out of Christianity and Judaism. If we let the Religious Right continue to take over our government, we could end up with a similar legal system.

Islam evolved from Judaism and Christianity, but added a whole lot more "scripture" along the way

to mention boring, so I do not claim to know everything that is in it. Far from it.

However, I am not familiar with the requirement you refer to. Then again, I read the King James version, which does not contain the so-called "apochryphal" books in the Jewish and Catholic versions of the Old Testament.

Can you please furnish the book of the bible and the chapter of that book that contains the requirement to which you refer?

So how'd that turn out?

the Iraqi Constitution, women did not have rights in the U.S. for well over a century after adoption of the U.S. Constitution.

The distinction between adopting a Constitution in the 18th century and adopting one in the 21st century had apparently escaped our fearless leader.

IOW, how it worked out was Americans got more Bushshit justifications, at least as to Iraq.

But listen, he also had the idea of dropping bombs on Afghanistan by night and peanut butter by day. So, you know he was always thinking.

Imagine.


John Lennon.

Surely, the results could be no worse than they are after we guide it by our alleged self interest.

(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)



If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

And thank you for the reference.

:hi:

This was was a law for the protection of the woman, not her persecution. The assumption being that if a woman was not a virgin she could not be married to another man. At this time women needed to be married to function in society and live a normal life. She is also considered a monetary asset to the father, that is why the raper has to pay monetary damages. He has in effect devalued the father's property in a legal manner. Forcing the raper to marry the woman and never letting him divorce here is the rest of the man's punishment. He is now responsible for the care and upkeep of said "damaged property" for her benefit and so the father isn't burdened with taking care of her the rest of her life.

The Rambam (Rabbi Moses ben-Maimon) "states explicitly that a rape victim or her father have the prerogative to refuse the marriage." This is laid out clearly in the Oral Torah (Talmud) the other half of the Torah (Scriptures).

This was never meant to be a forced marriage to punish the woman. It has been twisted into dark places by ignorant people.