Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on April 04, 2009, 11:30:27 AM
-
Where exactly is the controversy? The State Department is "reviewing" the law? What the heck? ??? Bunch of cavemen.
Afghan Law That Legalizes Rape Poses Problem for Obama and Clinton
Obama administration officials are struggling to respond to the recent signing of a law in Afghanistan that critics say gives Shiite men the legal right to rape their wives.
By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
FOXNews.com
Saturday, April 04, 2009
WASHINGTON -- As first lady, senator and then Democratic candidate for president, Hillary Clinton was vocal in her fight for the rights of women in Afghanistan.
But, as President Obama's secretary of state, Clinton now finds herself in the uncomfortable position of watching as the U.S.-backed Afghan president signs a law that critics say gives Shiite men the right to rape their wives.
International criticism pressure forced President Hamid Karzai to say Saturday that the law is under review, and he has spoken to Clinton about it.
The developments come as Obama seeks NATO support in Europe for his plan to ramp up the war against terrorists in Afghanistan. Back at home in Washington, administration officials have struggled this week with how to respond to Karzai's signing of the so-called Shia Family Law without debate in the Afghan parliament. The law's most controversial provisions address sexual intercourse in marriage.
"As long as the husband is not traveling, he has the right to have sexual intercourse with his wife every fourth night," Article 132 of the law says. "Unless the wife is ill or has any kind of illness that intercourse could aggravate, the wife is bound to give a positive response to the sexual desires of her husband."
Such a law runs contrary to the stated goals of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan -- to pursue human rights and to help liberate women from religious oppression. It is a cause that has been championed by previous administrations, and particularly by previous first ladies.
The details of the law surfaced this week, just days after one of those former first ladies, Clinton, told the International Conference on Afghanistan at The Hague, Netherlands: "Women's rights are a central part of American foreign policy in the Obama administration; they are not marginal; they are not an add-on or an afterthought."
State Department spokesman Robert Wood said Thursday that officials were "reviewing the legislation." He suggested that its legality might be in question.
"We urge President Karzai to review the law's legal status to correct provisions of the law that ... limit or restrict women's rights," Wood said. He added that "President Karzai is well aware of our views with regard to this legislation."
Karzai said Saturday that "measures will be taken," though it is unclear what changes, if any, he has in mind. He said he hadn't seen "any problems" with the law when he previously studied it.
Afghanistan's constitution, which was passed in 2004, calls for equal rights for all men and women. But the constitution also says that no law can contradict the laws of Islam. And in situations where the constitution lacks provisions, courts are allowed to use Islamic law, which critics say does not allow for equal rights.
Reports suggest Karzai pushed through the law on behalf of powerful fundamentalist Shiite leaders, whose support he needs ahead of his country's August elections. The law will affect only Shiites, estimated by various sources to be between 10 and 30 percent of the population. The law will not affect Afghanistan's Sunni majority.
In a written statement, the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), said the law "legalizes the rape of a wife by her husband.... The law violates women's rights and human rights in numerous ways."
The law also has drawn fire from women in the Afghan parliament, as well as groups inside and outside Afghanistan, who say it rolls back the gains they made after the U.S. military ousted the Taliban government in 2002.
"All the efforts that were made in the last seven years to enhance women's rights will be undermined," said Afghan lawmaker Fawzia Kufi.
"This law comes as very little surprise to me. It is literally the price we've paid for dealing with fundamentalists," said Sonali Kolhatkar, who co-directs the Afghan Women's Mission in the U.S.
"In order to build a robust civil society in Afghanistan we need to push and pull the Afghans on basic human rights," said Ann Marlowe, an American author who has reported frequently from Afghanistan. She has said Karzai is not "at heart a supporter of women's rights."
Seven years into the war in Afghanistan, the Taliban is clinging to power in swaths of the country and in neighboring Pakistan, and Obama administration officials acknowledge that women are still struggling against violence, illiteracy and poverty. But many believe the U.S. will have to negotiate with Islamist warlords -- or perhaps even the Taliban -- to achieve political or military success.
"The contradiction between political rhetoric and policy reality has often been the American way," columnist Marie Cocco wrote for RealClearPolitics.com. "But now we have Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state. When she was first lady, she championed the rights of women oppressed by the Taliban long before most Americans had ever heard of that radical regime."
David Isby, the Washington-based author of several books on Afghanistan, says it should be no surprise that Shiite fundamentalist leaders want this new law, and that Karzai, seeking re-election, would grant it. He says there was an inherent conflict in trying to impose Western values on the Muslim nation to begin with. As for negotiating with fundamentalists, he said, "If they talked with only people we approve of, you would have six Afghans to work with."
But critics like Marlowe and Kolhatkar aren't buying it. They say there are plenty of progressive Afghans who are unhappy about the shifting tide but never get a seat at the table. They say the Obama administration must be steadfast in its position that Afghanistan needs to honor human rights.
Said Kolhatkar: "Any real power deals done between the U.S. and these forces, neither option really works for women. Women are constantly being subordinated."
"Certainly it is a wonderful thing to champion women's rights," said Kolhatkar, "but put your money where your mouth is."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/03/obama-administration-struggles-afghan-law-legalize-rape/
-
There is no such thing as RAPING YOUR WIFE....
More american games/lies to demonize other nations...
-
There is no such thing as RAPING YOUR WIFE....
More american games/lies to demonize other nations...
Are you serious?
-
The timing of this is suspect in my opinion. This law comes out while more and more American troops are getting pumped into the country. This story makes people want to see the country get pummeled with no objection to war.
-
the timing of this is suspect in my opinion. This law comes out while more and more tropps are getting pumped into the country. This story makes people want to see the country get pummeled with no objection to war.
You hit it perfectly on the head Bindare...sadly Beach Bum has no clue
-
Are you serious?
YES I AM SERIOUS...How the HELL can you RAPE YOUR WIFE????
You wanna see rape...ask a well off american man what happens to him when he divorces the tramp he married. THough the whore never worked a day in her life somehow she is entitled to half of what he busted his ass for all of his life???
NOW THAT IS TRULY RAPE!!!!!
-
The timing of this is suspect in my opinion. This law comes out while more and more American troops are getting pumped into the country. This story makes people want to see the country get pummeled with no objection to war.
Could be.
-
YES I AM SERIOUS...How the HELL can you RAPE YOUR WIFE????
I don't understand what you're getting at? If you have forcable sex with an unwilling person, including a wife, that is rape.
-
I don't understand what you're getting at? If you have forcable sex with an unwilling person, including a wife, that is rape.
Agreed.
Hey, I always wanted to know: what does your name mean?
-
YES I AM SERIOUS...How the HELL can you RAPE YOUR WIFE????
You wanna see rape...ask a well off american man what happens to him when he divorces the tramp he married. THough the whore never worked a day in her life somehow she is entitled to half of what he busted his ass for all of his life???
NOW THAT IS TRULY RAPE!!!!!
You're an idiot. And I don't say that often on this board.
-
I swear there are states in America where it wasn't considered rape if people were married up until very recently.
-
I don't understand what you're getting at? If you have forcable sex with an unwilling person, including a wife, that is rape.
It is called the DUTIES OF MARRIAGE... meaning like it or not there are times you have to perform the functions of marriage regardless of whether or not you like it. How many husbands would like to say to their boss KISS MY ASS and quit their jobs??? Plenty, but they don't becasue they realize they have a family to support...it is a part of the duties of a husband. Now in all honesty how much sex is a man getting from his wife? Is it so terrible or so long that she can not tolerate it? Women think and try to control a relationship/husband by exercising such antics...funny though...as soon as that husband goes after another woman the wife all of a sudden has a change of heart on the matter and greats him with open arms (and legs) any day he desires. IMO since she can not or does not want to perform the duties of marriage...then put her out and let her find someone else. And when she leaves she leaves with only what she brought...which in the case of Afghanistan, IS NOTHING!!!!!
Wanna see the divorce rate plummet in america...put into law that a woman can only take from the marriage what she absolutely brought into it....divorece wold go down to practically ZERO OVERNIGHT.
-
I swear there are states in America where it wasn't considered rape if people were married up until very recently.
No states considered it rape until the lesbian controlled national organization of women became involved and introduced this nonsense of a husband RAPING HIS WIFE...WTF??? The goal of NOW is to break up marriages anyway and hopefully change the wife to a lesbian. Give me a break...
-
Agreed.
Hey, I always wanted to know: what does your name mean?
Nothing really, just a joke on some guy I used to work with.
-
It is called the DUTIES OF MARRIAGE... meaning like it or not there are times you have to perform the functions of marriage regardless of whether or not you like it. How many husbands would like to say to their boss KISS MY ASS and quit their jobs??? Plenty, but they don't becasue they realize they have a family to support...it is a part of the duties of a husband. Now in all honesty how much sex is a man getting from his wife? Is it so terrible or so long that she can not tolerate it? Women think and try to control a relationship/husband by exercising such antics...funny though...as soon as that husband goes after another woman the wife all of a sudden has a change of heart on the matter and greats him with open arms (and legs) any day he desires. IMO since she can not or does not want to perform the duties of marriage...then put her out and let her find someone else. And when she leaves she leaves with only what she brought...which in the case of Afghanistan, IS NOTHING!!!!!
Wanna see the divorce rate plummet in america...put into law that a woman can only take from the marriage what she absolutely brought into it....divorece wold go down to practically ZERO OVERNIGHT.
Where do you live?
-
Samson you have officially surpassed Matt T as the dumbest member of getbig. Rape is rape. In America husbands have been prosecuted for raping their wives on numerous occasions. If your wife doesnt want to have sex with her, you think its ok to force yourself on her?
The more you post, the more I suspect your muslim.
-
It is called the DUTIES OF MARRIAGE... meaning like it or not there are times you have to perform the functions of marriage regardless of whether or not you like it. How many husbands would like to say to their boss KISS MY ASS and quit their jobs??? Plenty, but they don't becasue they realize they have a family to support...it is a part of the duties of a husband. Now in all honesty how much sex is a man getting from his wife? Is it so terrible or so long that she can not tolerate it? Women think and try to control a relationship/husband by exercising such antics...funny though...as soon as that husband goes after another woman the wife all of a sudden has a change of heart on the matter and greats him with open arms (and legs) any day he desires. IMO since she can not or does not want to perform the duties of marriage...then put her out and let her find someone else. And when she leaves she leaves with only what she brought...which in the case of Afghanistan, IS NOTHING!!!!!
Wanna see the divorce rate plummet in america...put into law that a woman can only take from the marriage what she absolutely brought into it....divorece wold go down to practically ZERO OVERNIGHT.
Wrong, it is mostly women filing for divorce trying to milk their husbands for all they are worth...
-
If your wife doesnt want to have sex with her, you think its ok to force yourself on her?
No woman should refuse lesbian sex for the pleasure of her man.
-
It is called the DUTIES OF MARRIAGE... meaning like it or not there are times you have to perform the functions of marriage regardless of whether or not you like it. How many husbands would like to say to their boss KISS MY ASS and quit their jobs??? Plenty, but they don't becasue they realize they have a family to support...it is a part of the duties of a husband. Now in all honesty how much sex is a man getting from his wife? Is it so terrible or so long that she can not tolerate it? Women think and try to control a relationship/husband by exercising such antics...funny though...as soon as that husband goes after another woman the wife all of a sudden has a change of heart on the matter and greats him with open arms (and legs) any day he desires. IMO since she can not or does not want to perform the duties of marriage...then put her out and let her find someone else. And when she leaves she leaves with only what she brought...which in the case of Afghanistan, IS NOTHING!!!!!
Wanna see the divorce rate plummet in america...put into law that a woman can only take from the marriage what she absolutely brought into it....divorece wold go down to practically ZERO OVERNIGHT.
Samson you have officially surpassed Matt T as the dumbest member of getbig. Rape is rape. In America husbands have been prosecuted for raping their wives on numerous occasions. If your wife doesnt want to have sex with her, you think its ok to force yourself on her?
The more you post, the more I suspect your muslim.
Actually, He makes a valid point about "duties of marriage".
You know that you can file for divorce based upon "unable to form spousal duties"... Ie... refusing to have sex. That is only very recent... There was a time up until VERY recently... like the late 70s / 80s where you legally could not rape your wife... It wasn't possible.
Laws have changed since then, but in reality... SAMSON is correct.
A man takes care of the family and does whatever he's supposed to do, just for some chick to say she doesn't want any and then files for divorce and takes his money.
The system in the US when it comes to divorce and women is a sham... They want equal rights, but when they underperform, they expect a man to make up for it.
-
Actually, He makes a valid point about "duties of marriage".
You know that you can file for divorce based upon "unable to form spousal duties"... Ie... refusing to have sex. That is only very recent... There was a time up until VERY recently... like the late 70s / 80s where you legally could not rape your wife... It wasn't possible.
Laws have changed since then, but in reality... SAMSON is correct.
A man takes care of the family and does whatever he's supposed to do, just for some chick to say she doesn't want any and then files for divorce and takes his money.
The system in the US when it comes to divorce and women is a sham... They want equal rights, but when they underperform, they expect a man to make up for it.
totally agree and not just in marriage in general women want equal rights but still want the benefits of not being equal at the same time...However that still doesnt mean that rape cant exist in marriage ::) forcing yourself on someone is rape whether they are married or not.
-
totally agree and not just in marriage in general women want equal rights but still want the benefits of not being equal at the same time...However that still doesnt mean that rape cant exist in marriage ::) forcing yourself on someone is rape whether they are married or not.
It can... TODAY.
30 years ago it couldn't... RAPE is a law... Forcing sex upon a spouse wasn't considered "rape" 30 years ago... It's just the way it was.
Remember... women were property until not that long ago so to speak... You can't commit rape on your property.
It's yours... you can do what you want with it.
I'm not talking about whether or not it's morally right or wrong... I'm simply saying that rape in and of itself is a law... nothing more.
-
Actually, He makes a valid point about "duties of marriage".
You know that you can file for divorce based upon "unable to form spousal duties"... Ie... refusing to have sex. That is only very recent... There was a time up until VERY recently... like the late 70s / 80s where you legally could not rape your wife... It wasn't possible.
Laws have changed since then, but in reality... SAMSON is correct.
A man takes care of the family and does whatever he's supposed to do, just for some chick to say she doesn't want any and then files for divorce and takes his money.
The system in the US when it comes to divorce and women is a sham... They want equal rights, but when they underperform, they expect a man to make up for it.
It works both ways.
For every case of a gold-digging lazy woman, bilking a man of his $$$$$ via a divorce settlement, you can find far more cases of a selfish, whore-mongering man who dumps his wife and mother of his kids, to run off with his secretary or some other younger female.
Should she be left with nothing, because her husband broke the marriage vows?
-
As for this rape law, when is Obama going to get it through his skull, that his fancy talk don't impress the Taliban (or any other terrorist group, for that matter)?
He's going to have to put some muscle behind his rhetoric if he and Clinton really want to help those women in Afghanistan.
-
It works both ways.
For every case of a gold-digging lazy woman, bilking a man of his $$$$$ via a divorce settlement, you can find far more cases of a selfish, whore-mongering man who dumps his wife and mother of his kids, to run off with his secretary or some other younger female.
Should she be left with nothing, because her husband broke the marriage vows?
Really? When the hell has that happened?
You watch too much Lifetime television.
Trust me... It's not the case. 95% of all divorces are a decent guy getting fucked by the system.
-
It works both ways.
For every case of a gold-digging lazy woman, bilking a man of his $$$$$ via a divorce settlement, you can find far more cases of a selfish, whore-mongering man who dumps his wife and mother of his kids, to run off with his secretary or some other younger female.
Should she be left with nothing, because her husband broke the marriage vows?
Yeah and we hear this propaganda way too often; fact is, women have EVERY advantage when it comes to divorce and marriage; read this book.
http://www.imprint.co.uk/books/TWR.html
-
Yeah and we hear this propaganda way too often; fact is, women have EVERY advantage when it comes to divorce and marriage; read this book.
http://www.imprint.co.uk/books/TWR.html
And I get accused of thinking women are inferior, ???
If there's any "propaganda", it's coming from selfish, shallow, insecure men like you who cower from responsibilities like marriage, for fear that women won't cater to your "urges" on cue.
It also may shed some light on the foolish choice you may tend to make, when dealing with the fairer sex.
-
And I get accused of thinking women are inferior, ???
If there's any "propaganda", it's coming from selfish, shallow, insecure men like you who cower from responsibilities like marriage, for fear that women won't cater to your "urges" on cue.
It also may shed some light on the foolish choice you may tend to make, when dealing with the fairer sex.
You seriously believe this?
Seriously?
Every thing in society is about how bad men are and how good women are... How they were abused for so long, and are still oppressed.
It's bullshit.
Domestic abuse advertisements... Lifetime and the O network... All of the reverse sexism... Women need more help with this and that.
Complete crap.
-
Really? When the hell has that happened?
It happens quite frequently. I've seen it firsthand, as a friend of mine and my wife had her husband drop her for a younger woman. To top it all off, he ended up with primary custody of their son.
As I've said beforehand, it workds both ways.
You watch too much Lifetime television.
HARDLY!!!!
Trust me... It's not the case. 95% of all divorces are a decent guy getting fucked by the system.
I beg to differ. The divorce laws, unfortunately, have been abused on both sides. Gold-diggers have scammed good men out of their assets; and good women have been left high and dry by their adultering husbands. And, if I were a betting man, I'd wager that the percentages are HARDLY as lopsided as you claim they are.
-
You seriously believe this?
Seriously?
Every thing in society is about how bad men are and how good women are... How they were abused for so long, and are still oppressed.
It's bullshit.
Domestic abuse advertisements... Lifetime and the O network... All of the reverse sexism... Women need more help with this and that.
Complete crap.
It appears that YOU'RE the one who watches too much Lifetime (and the O network).
Take a wild guess at to what the other ones tend to advertise. Men "pimping" women, telling them in not-so-subtle terms that, at the end of the day, their primary purpose in life is sexual gratification of men.
It sounds to me as if you're bitter, simple because a handful of women used that mentality against some of their male counterparts, successfully, collecting a healthy amount of coin in the process. If you're going to call them whores, then that's exactly what they'll be.....only the price for their performance just went up.
-
You seriously believe this?
Seriously?
Every thing in society is about how bad men are and how good women are... How they were abused for so long, and are still oppressed.
It's bullshit.
Domestic abuse advertisements... Lifetime and the O network... All of the reverse sexism... Women need more help with this and that.
Complete crap.
Exactly my point bro, ALL we EVER hear is how shitty men are and how great women are...this book, it is a real eye opener, an intelligent man calling it like he sees it. MCWAY is a fundy nutjob, ignore him.
-
And I get accused of thinking women are inferior, ???
If there's any "propaganda", it's coming from selfish, shallow, insecure men like you who cower from responsibilities like marriage, for fear that women won't cater to your "urges" on cue.
It also may shed some light on the foolish choice you may tend to make, when dealing with the fairer sex.
::) ::) ::)
Haha. AS IF everyone HAD to get married and it is some essential human obligation!? What a boatload of fucking bullshit! Only in your twisted fundy head is stuff like that MCWAY. I am not getting married, nothing to gain from it and everything to lose. No one has to get married, those times thankfully are gone!
-
Exactly my point bro, ALL we EVER hear is how shitty men are and how great women are...this book, it is a real eye opener, an intelligent man calling it like he sees it. MCWAY is a fundy nutjob, ignore him.
This coming from a shallow, insecure little punk, who yearns to be with foreign women, particularly Asian ones, because he thinks they'll stroke his ego, quench his flaiming loins, and keep their mouths shut, essentially doing the very things that the Taliban wants their women to do.
If that's all you ever hear, you might want to invest in some Q-Tips or the Whisper 2000.
Overall, it's but little more than the foolish murmuring of spineless, selfish "men", who think that their satisfaction of their libidos trump everything else in life.
-
::) ::) ::)
Haha. AS IF everyone HAD to get married and it is some essential human obligation!? What a boatload of fucking bullshit! Only in your twisted fundy head is stuff like that MCWAY. I am not getting married, nothing to gain from it and everything to lose. No one has to get married, those times thankfully are gone!
There was no claim that everyone had to get married, Deicide. But, your cowardice about the situation, because marriage entitles duties other than your getting your rocks off, simply speaks for itself. It's in your twisted skeppy head that you think that there are some secret conspiring society of women, trying to rob you of what little money you may or may not have.
-
It appears that YOU'RE the one who watches too much Lifetime (and the O network).
Take a wild guess at to what the other ones tend to advertise. Men "pimping" women, telling them in not-so-subtle terms that, at the end of the day, their primary purpose in life is sexual gratification of men.
It sounds to me as if you're bitter, simple because a handful of women used that mentality against some of their male counterparts, successfully, collecting a healthy amount of coin in the process. If you're going to call them whores, then that's exactly what they'll be.....only the price for their performance just went up.
It happens quite frequently. I've seen it firsthand, as a friend of mine and my wife had her husband drop her for a younger woman. To top it all off, he ended up with primary custody of their son.
As I've said beforehand, it workds both ways.
HARDLY!!!!
I beg to differ. The divorce laws, unfortunately, have been abused on both sides. Gold-diggers have scammed good men out of their assets; and good women have been left high and dry by their adultering husbands. And, if I were a betting man, I'd wager that the percentages are HARDLY as lopsided as you claim they are.
So really, you're just saying all of this because you had 1 friend who had this happen to them.
I can show you 15 guys I know personally who have had been fucked over by the system and some women who decided "she wasn't in love".
-
This coming from a shallow, insecure little punk, who yearns to be with foreign women, particularly Asian ones, because he thinks they'll stroke his ego, quench his flaiming loins, and keep their mouths shut, essentially doing the very things that the Taliban wants their women to do.
If that's all you ever hear, you might want to invest in some Q-Tips or the Whisper 2000.
Overall, it's but little more than the foolish murmuring of spineless, selfish "men", who think that their satisfaction of their libidos trump everything else in life.
You don't have a clue MCWAY; I've been cured of yellow fever for months now and it was just an after effect of having lived in Asia for over 2 years.
All I care about is my freedom...it's not about fucking or anything even remotely related, it's mobility without some nagging wench giving me stress for not doing x at some random time during the day. Never liked American women anyway, loudmouthed, nasal, irritating voices....calling me a punk is new one for you MCWAY, good for you...hopefully you'll start swearing soon. ;)
And btw, I find it amazing that you are so blind that you INSIST that everyone HAS to get married and if they don't want to, they are spineless, insecure punks...the fundy is really there in you... ::)
-
It is called the DUTIES OF MARRIAGE... meaning like it or not there are times you have to perform the functions of marriage regardless of whether or not you like it. How many husbands would like to say to their boss KISS MY ASS and quit their jobs??? Plenty, but they don't becasue they realize they have a family to support...it is a part of the duties of a husband. Now in all honesty how much sex is a man getting from his wife? Is it so terrible or so long that she can not tolerate it? Women think and try to control a relationship/husband by exercising such antics...funny though...as soon as that husband goes after another woman the wife all of a sudden has a change of heart on the matter and greats him with open arms (and legs) any day he desires. IMO since she can not or does not want to perform the duties of marriage...then put her out and let her find someone else. And when she leaves she leaves with only what she brought...which in the case of Afghanistan, IS NOTHING!!!!!
Wanna see the divorce rate plummet in america...put into law that a woman can only take from the marriage what she absolutely brought into it....divorece wold go down to practically ZERO OVERNIGHT.
Be careful what you wish for......
Last time I checked, more women were in college than men were (and more of them are walking out with degrees). So, it stands to reason that, if this trend continues, women may actually exceed men in income. How many fragile male egos will be able to put up with that?
-
So really, you're just saying all of this because you had 1 friend who had this happen to them.
I can show you 15 guys I know personally who have had been fucked over by the system and some women who decided "she wasn't in love".
Exactly. You would think a fundy Christian would not be spouting the usual propaganda we hear all the time but honestly even men have been brainwashed by this bullshit...sad really.
-
So really, you're just saying all of this because you had 1 friend who had this happen to them.
I can show you 15 guys I know personally who have had been fucked over by the system and some women who decided "she wasn't in love".
That example I gave was hardly an exhaustive one. You're acting as if men don't do the same thing, namely wanting to trade in their wife of several years for a newer, younger model.
Again, it goes both ways. Are there too many gold-digging, callous women who take men for their loot? YEP!!
Are there whore-mongering men, who ditch their wives, for the next young piece of tail that comes their way? YEP!!!
-
That example I gave was hardly an exhaustive one. You're acting as if men don't do the same thing, namely wanting to trade in their wife of several years for a newer, younger model.
Again, it goes both ways. Are there too many gold-digging, callous women who take men for their loot? YEP!!
Are there whore-mongering men, who ditch their wives, for the next young piece of tail that comes their way? YEP!!!
The point is MCWAY, that we ONLY hear about the men doing it...that is the bias.
-
You don't have a clue MCWAY; I've been cured of yellow fever for months now and it was just an after effect of having lived in Asia for over 2 years.
All I care about is my freedom...it's not about fucking or anything even remotely related, it's mobility without some nagging wench giving me stress for not doing x at some random time during the day. Never liked American women anyway, loudmouthed, nasal, irritating voices....calling me a punk is new one for you MCWAY, good for you...hopefully you'll start swearing soon. ;)
In other words, it's all about you ducking responsibility, because for some strange reason you're scared to death about putting up with a woman's bad mood (just as a woman would, no doubt, HAVE TO PUT UP WITH YOURS).
American women tend to be more liberated than most. And, a number of them would hardly put with you, and your callous behavior, which would explain why (whichever your flavor-of-the-month happens to be) you keep yearning for women who will simply bow down to your desires, be they sexual or otherwise; so that you can dispose of them, once they no longer amuse you.
And btw, I find it amazing that you are so blind that you INSIST that everyone HAS to get married and if they don't want to, they are spineless, insecure punks...the fundy is really there in you... ::)
Get your eyes fixed!!! I never insisted that everyone has to get married. What I stated was aimed specifically at YOU, based on your woefully cowardly, extremely self-centered, self-absorbed statements regarding marriage and women, in general.
-
The point is MCWAY, that we ONLY hear about the men doing it...that is the bias.
Again, get the Whisper 2000 or some Q-Tips, because that's hardly the case. I've heard it from both sides, personally and courtesy of our media.
-
In other words, it's all about you ducking responsibility, because for some strange reason you're scared to death about putting up with a woman's bad mood (just as a woman would, no doubt, HAVE TO PUT UP WITH YOURS).
American women tend to be more liberated than most. And, a number of them would hardly put with you, and your callous behavior, which would explain why (whichever your flavor-of-the-month happens to be) you keep yearning for women who will simply bow down to your desires, be they sexual or otherwise; so that you can dispose of them, once they no longer amuse you.
Get your eyes fixed!!! I never insisted that everyone has to get married. What I stated was aimed specifically at YOU, based on your woefully cowardly, extremely self-centered, self-absorbed statements regarding marriage and women, in general.
Clueless...
-
Clueless...
You must be in hall of mirrors.......again!!
-
Exactly. You would think a fundy Christian would not be spouting the usual propaganda we hear all the time but honestly even men have been brainwashed by this bullshit...sad really.
What's really sad is how pathetically insecure and immature your statements are. I can say that quite easily, because I once had that same mentality some 15 or so years ago.
Fortunately, I've put that foolishness behind me. I've learned how to see past the curves and judge a woman's character. When you learn to separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff, you save yourself a lot of heartbreak and pain, as I have.
-
It can... TODAY.
30 years ago it couldn't... RAPE is a law... Forcing sex upon a spouse wasn't considered "rape" 30 years ago... It's just the way it was.
Remember... women were property until not that long ago so to speak... You can't commit rape on your property.
It's yours... you can do what you want with it.
I'm not talking about whether or not it's morally right or wrong... I'm simply saying that rape in and of itself is a law... nothing more.
rape is a concept bro, it was still rape 30 yrs ago even though it wasnt prosecuted does not negate the fact that it was rape.
-
Good grief. Some of you guys sound like a bunch of sissies. The big bad women taking advantage of poor little men. Give me a friggin break. ::)
Rape is never okay, marriage or not.
-
Good grief. Some of you guys sound like a bunch of sissies. The big bad women taking advantage of poor little men. Give me a friggin break. ::)
Rape is never okay, marriage or not.
This is not about rape, it's about wome sucking the soul from men, financially or otherwise.
-
This is not about rape, it's about wome sucking the soul from men, financially or otherwise.
Yes, the thread is about rape.
Man up dude. Quit crying about men being victims. Geeze. What kind of sissies are we raising in this country? :-\
-
Yes, the thread is about rape.
Man up dude. Quit crying about men being victims. Geeze. What kind of sissies are we raising in this country? :-\
That's right; it's the women who are victims...
-
rape is a concept bro, it was still rape 30 yrs ago even though it wasnt prosecuted does not negate the fact that it was rape.
See my previous post about how raping a possession was impossible.
-
See my previous post about how raping a possession was impossible.
LOL bro i understand what you are saying your missing my point, it was STILL RAPE no matter whether or not it was legal or illegal or prosecuted or not it was still rape...
-
LOL bro i understand what you are saying your missing my point, it was STILL RAPE no matter whether or not it was legal or illegal or prosecuted or not it was still rape...
I think we have a difference in philosophy.
-
it's all fun and good...
but what if your SISTER married some idiot who assraped her all day? Wouldn't you want to bludgeon the guy?
-
It is called the DUTIES OF MARRIAGE... meaning like it or not there are times you have to perform the functions of marriage regardless of whether or not you like it. How many husbands would like to say to their boss KISS MY ASS and quit their jobs??? Plenty, but they don't becasue they realize they have a family to support...it is a part of the duties of a husband. Now in all honesty how much sex is a man getting from his wife? Is it so terrible or so long that she can not tolerate it? Women think and try to control a relationship/husband by exercising such antics...funny though...as soon as that husband goes after another woman the wife all of a sudden has a change of heart on the matter and greats him with open arms (and legs) any day he desires. IMO since she can not or does not want to perform the duties of marriage...then put her out and let her find someone else. And when she leaves she leaves with only what she brought...which in the case of Afghanistan, IS NOTHING!!!!!
Wanna see the divorce rate plummet in america...put into law that a woman can only take from the marriage what she absolutely brought into it....divorece wold go down to practically ZERO OVERNIGHT.
you must be a pretty repulsive person if you think being able to legally rape your wife can work to your advantage...
but who cares what they do? let them rape and kill each other. as long as it stays within their borders i really dont give a fuck.
-
Where's Slapper to say islamic law isn't evil, it's the people who enforce the law OR commit crimes against that law? :D
-
you must be a pretty repulsive person if you think being able to legally rape your wife can work to your advantage...
but who cares what they do? let them rape and kill each other. as long as it stays within their borders i really dont give a fuck.
And, therein lies the problem. That mess ain't going to stay within their borders. Take a good look at Europe. Their people have the same attitude.
Now, Muslims are moving to European countries and setting up shop there, and some are already making moves to implement Sharia law there.
What happens when laws like this end up in Spain, The UK, or France?
-
And, therein lies the problem. That mess ain't going to stay within their borders. Take a good look at Europe. Their people have the same attitude.
Now, Muslims are moving to European countries and setting up shop there, and some are already making moves to implement Sharia law there.
What happens when laws like this end up in Spain, The UK, or France?
They won't. Some concern is warranted but Europe is no where close to falling under Sharia law or any such thing, believe me.
-
They won't. Some concern is warranted but Europe is no where close to falling under Sharia law or any such thing, believe me.
Funny considering the UK just established a Sharia Law court last year. ;)
-
They won't. Some concern is warranted but Europe is no where close to falling under Sharia law or any such thing, believe me.
Says who? If the Muslims make the push, who's going to stop them? When the rubber meets the road, are the aforementioned countries ready to take off the gloves? Or, are they simply going to cower away and impose worthless sanctions and resolutions?
Funny considering the UK just established a Sharia Law court last year. ;)
My point exactly!!! And what did the folks there do about it? NOT A DARN THING!!!
What makes you think France, Spain, or Germany are going to stand up to them?
-
Funny considering the UK just established a Sharia Law court last year. ;)
They actually didn't establish Sharia Courts like you guys make it sound. It's basically third party arbitration. No party can be forced into it. It's for non criminal disputes where both parties agree to arbitration. The laws allowing this have been around a long ass time. There are religious "courts" here. The Jews have had their same arbitration "courts" in England and here for a long time. 100 years in England. Arbitration is legally binding however; I would think, but I don't know, that an arbitrator could not render a verdict that breaks laws of the land. Maybe our resident lawyer can chime in and expand on it.
"The 1996 Act does not seek to define or describe those matters that are
capable of settlement by arbitration (i.e., arbitrable). The 1996 Act
simply preserves the common law position in respect of arbitrability
(section 81(1)(a)). However, the 1996 Act expressly applies to noncontractual
as well as contractual disputes (section 6(1)).
Under English common law, a multitude of non-contractual claims
(including claims in tort, disputes concerning intellectual property
rights and certain statutory claims) are capable of settlement by
arbitration. Arbitration is, however, limited to civil proceedings.
Criminal matters are not capable of settlement by arbitration."
http://www.wilmerhale.com/files/Publication/b1e5ef63-a1a0-436b-a71a-21df3d9567fe/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/9d7e2ed4-3224-444d-b05f-2d6152fb1bd0/IA08_Chapter%2018_England%20and%20Wales.pdf
-
Funny considering the UK just established a Sharia Law court last year. ;)
The UK is not Europe. I don't know why everyone lumps it in with Europe.
So what I was saying is that there is no worry on CONTINENTAL Europe.
Europeans have fought for liberal (in the classical/European sense) values for centuries, have shed much blood over it and suffered. We won't give up those values just because a bunch of primitives demand it of us.
-
Says who? If the Muslims make the push, who's going to stop them? When the rubber meets the road, are the aforementioned countries ready to take off the gloves? Or, are they simply going to cower away and impose worthless sanctions and resolutions?
My point exactly!!! And what did the folks there do about it? NOT A DARN THING!!!
What makes you think France, Spain, or Germany are going to stand up to them?
See my post below. Taking off the gloves DOES NOT HOWEVER mean that we need to fly over to other countries, bomb them and occupy them; waste of time and resources. If issues crop up in Europe then Europeans will address them in the European context. I see it that way and many of my friends fo as well.
-
The UK is not Europe. I don't know why everyone lumps it in with Europe.
So what I was saying is that there is no worry on CONTINENTAL Europe.
Europeans have fought for liberal (in the classical/European sense) values for centuries, have shed much blood over it and suffered. We won't give up those values just because a bunch of primitives demand it of us.
Hahaha, whatever helps you rationalize your fallacious point. The fact is that countries like France have even more Muslims than the UK and it's only a matter of time until Sharia is introduced there.
-
Hahaha, whatever helps you rationalize your fallacious point. The fact is that countries like France have even more Muslims than the UK and it's only a matter of time until Sharia is introduced there.
::) ::) ::)
The author's following novel, Plateforme (2001), earned him a wider reputation. It is a romance, told mostly in the first-person by an aging male arts administrator, with many sex scenes and an approbation of prostitution and sex tourism. The novel's depiction of life and its explicit criticism of Islam and the Muslim faith, together with an interview its author gave to the magazine Lire, led to accusations against Houellebecq by several organisations, including France's Human Rights League, the Mecca-based World Islamic League and the mosques of Paris and Lyon. Charges were brought to trial, in circumstances reminiscent of the controversy over Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses at the end of the 1980s; but a panel of three judges, delivering their verdict to a packed Paris courtroom, acquitted the author of having provoked racial hatred, ascribing Houellebecq's opinions to the legitimate right of criticizing religions.
If you knew anything about the legal system in France you would realise that SECULAR values hold sway there ultimately. They were fought for and bled for. That won't change.
-
::) ::) ::)
If you knew anything about the legal system in France you would realise that SECULAR values hold sway there ultimately. They were fought for and bled for. That won't change.
The question remains, will the French fight ang bleed for those "SECULAR values" NOW?
Or, will they bow like little punks to their Muslim counterparts, once they get the muscle and the means to impose Sharia law?
-
The question remains, will the French fight ang bleed for those "SECULAR values" NOW?
Or, will they bow like little punks to their Muslim counterparts, once they get the muscle and the means to impose Sharia law?
Yes, they would fight and bleed if it came to it, but I doubt it will any time soon.
-
::) ::) ::)
If you knew anything about the legal system in France you would realise that SECULAR values hold sway there ultimately. They were fought for and bled for. That won't change.
The french lost their balls after 1918...they have areas of Paris that the Cops..backed by their anti-terror police, won't go because of the ragheads. The French would fold and be praying to Mecca in a heartbeat if seriously threathened.
-
::) ::) ::)
If you knew anything about the legal system in France you would realise that SECULAR values hold sway there ultimately. They were fought for and bled for. That won't change.
No offense but it's easy for these values to change if ultimately no one values them. Look around the UK mate, don't tell me for a second these people want to integrate. Sure some do, but honestly in your heart of hearts what do you see?
The UK is the origin of the Magna Carta and English Common Law so to say France will never change is something you can't say. Parts of sharia law have been implemented in UK, something you would never have believed would happen not too long ago, and the simple reason is demographic change.
Frances capital has been held hostage by muslims several times quite recently, so I don't see any logic in you denying the possibility exists.
-
No offense but it's easy for these values to change if ultimately no one values them. Look around the UK mate, don't tell me for a second these people want to integrate. Sure some do, but honestly in your heart of hearts what do you see?
The UK is the origin of the Magna Carta and English Common Law so to say France will never change is something you can't say. Parts of sharia law have been implemented in UK, something you would never have believed would happen not too long ago, and the simple reason is demographic change.
Frances capital has been held hostage by muslims several times quite recently, so I don't see any logic in you denying the possibility exists.
The real danger in France is not Sharia law but violent North Africans (who probably are the realy danger in Belgium and Germany as well); they are the worst immigrants; personally been assaulted thrice by them, a friend was assaulted, others I know robbed and broken into; that has nothing to do with Islam or Sharia law, just filthy criminal scum from North Africa.
-
The real danger in France is not Sharia law but violent North Africans (who probably are the realy danger in Belgium and Germany as well); they are the worst immigrants; personally been assaulted thrice by them, a friend was assaulted, others I know robbed and broken into; that has nothing to do with Islam or Sharia law, just filthy criminal scum from North Africa.
Yes, but these immigrants happen to be uneducated muslims which bring many more problems, this is the problem with the UK, uneducated muslims who still go around wearing man-skirts and living off welfare - and the REAL problem is the easy to manipulate socialist welfare system which makes these people NOT WANT to change for the better. Honestly, it's a dangerous cocktail and the potential really is there. Western society has made MANY concessions for islamic values and I don't see it stopping any time soon.
-
Afghanistan 'rape' law puts women's rights front and center
KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) -- "In Afghanistan, the sacrifice in the political game is women and children," female Afghan parliamentarian Fawzia Koofi said.
Koofi says that is exactly what happened when the Afghan parliament recently passed a bill intended to give the minority Shiite community their own identity. But critics say the latest draft strips Shiite women of rights as simple as leaving the house without permission from a male relative and as extreme as allowing a man to have sexual intercourse with his wife even when she says, "No."
These critics wonder how what amounts to rape in marriage could be passed by parliament and signed into law by President Hamid Karzai.
Amid blistering criticism from the West, Karzai addressed the law over the weekend, saying that key elements of the bill were misinterpreted by Western news organizations. Watch Karzai react to controversial law »
"We understand the concerns of our allies and the international community. Those concerns may be due to an inappropriate, not-so-good translation of the law, or misinterpretation," Karzai told reporters in Kabul.
He added that the Minister of Justice will study the "Shiite state law," line by line, to make sure it follows the nation's constitution, which requires equal rights to both sexes.
"If there is anything that is of concern to us, then we will definitely take action in consultation with our [religious clerics] and send it back to the parliament. You be assured of that. This is something that we're also serious about and should not allow," he said.
However, Karzai did not address the most controversial part of the bill, dealing with rape of a wife. Watch a report on the law »
The Shiite state law was debated by 249 members of the lower house, including 68 women, some of whom voted for the bill. It was then sent to the upper house. Even some lawmakers are baffled at the manner in which it passed.
"Most members of the parliament did not know what they were going to vote for," Koofi said. "Even some of my friends, MPs sitting with me, voted in favor without knowing what happened."
U.S. President Obama called the law "abhorrent" and said his administration has made it clear to the Karzai government that it objects to the law. Human rights groups and the international community have condemned the law and say it could undermine efforts to support basic human rights in the war-torn nation.
"We very much hope that the draft piece of legislation is to be withdrawn," German Chancellor Angela Merkel said during a NATO summit on Afghanistan over the weekend. "It is unacceptable if such a law were to be passed in Afghanistan and become a part of Afghan legislation."
According to lawmakers who opposed the bill, conservative legislators are pushing back any progress made for women's rights in Afghanistan after the brutal oppression under the Taliban regime.
From 1996 to 2001, under the Sunni fundamentalist government of the Taliban, women were not allowed to leave their homes without being escorted by a male relative, and girls were not allowed to go to school.
When women did leave their homes, they were required to wear a blue burqa, which covered their bodies from head to toe. The only opening was a small net that provided an eyehole for the women to see through.
Women remember those days with despair.
One female teacher, who asked not to be named, said that during the Taliban regime, she was stopped at the market by the Taliban and beaten with a whip. Her crime: She wore a shawl covering her body instead of a burqa. She says she was too poor to purchase a real burqa.
After that beating, she was stuck in her home for months until someone was able to give her a used burqa. But even then, she didn't know how to function wearing the suffocating fabric.
"I remember stepping out of a taxi with my son, and my foot was caught inside the burqa, making me fall out of the taxi onto mud. And everyone started laughing. It was humiliating," she said.
Women in Afghanistan can still be seen wearing burqas. But Koofi says advances have been made for women's rights in recent years. In some cases, it's as simple as putting on makeup and walking down city streets.
But she fears that the rights of women and children could slowly be eroded, the "victims of political games," as she puts it. "I mean, they don't have a gun to fight [with], they cannot create a mess," Koofi said.
That's a sentiment echoed by rights groups. "The reported new law on women's rights could be about to seriously undermine women's rights for millions of Afghanistan women," Amnesty International said in a statement.
The new law was intended to give the minority Shiite community its own identity within the predominantly Sunni country. Shiites have been practicing their form of Islam for centuries in Afghanistan, but they agree that there needs to be a governing Islamic law for Shiites alone, one recognized by the central government.
Koofi welcomes international support in fighting the new law, telling CNN that international investments in Afghanistan should go beyond financial donations.
"I don't ask that the international community come and make laws for us, but they have to make the government of Afghanistan accountable for their commitment to women and children ... and basically the human rights situation in this country," she said.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/04/06/afghanistan.law/index.html
-
McWay and Deicide = secret lovers.
-
The french lost their balls after 1918...they have areas of Paris that the Cops..backed by their anti-terror police, won't go because of the ragheads. The French would fold and be praying to Mecca in a heartbeat if seriously threathened.
How does Jean-Pierre Abdul Muhammad sound?
;D