Posted tagged ‘Islam and females’

Tunisian Religious Reforms Challenge Egypt’s Al Azhar

September 19, 2017

Tunisian Religious Reforms Challenge Egypt’s Al Azhar, Investigative Project on Terrorism, Hany Ghoraba, September 19, 2017

(Please see also, Look Who’s Fighting Extremism. — DM)

Essebsi is implementing reforms he deems necessary for his country’s social progress. These reforms already are having a ripple effect in the region and might lead to further social progress. Essebsi has done what al-Sisi called for about for more than two years ago, but never took any tangible steps to implement. These reforms may be not exactly what al-Sisi wanted when he called for a complete change of Islamic rhetoric that shuns all forms of extremism and violence. Nevertheless, Essebsi’s reforms are a bold step forward for total social and religious reforms that the Middle East desperately needs.

*********************************

Tunisian President Beji Caid Essebsi marched straight into a battle with Egypt’s highest Sunni authority, Al-Azhar’s mosque and university, when he proposed social and religious reforms giving women more freedom in marriage and guaranteeing them equal inheritance rights.

A substantial part of that agenda became law last Thursday when Tunisia’s parliament ended the ban on Muslim women marrying non-Muslim men. It is a direct result of controversial reforms Essebsi proposed, ending a ban imposed in 1973.This was done while proposing new law to secure gender equality in inheritance rights.

Egypt’s Al Azhar has ferociously condemned these reforms as un-Islamic, contradicting what it called the “Fundamentals of the Faith.” Marriage to non-Muslims may harm Muslim women due to differences in faith and traditions and could lead to women being prohibited from practicing their faith freely, said Al Azhar Deputy Imam Abbas Shoman.

Essebsi’s proposals mark the first time the leader of a Muslim-majority nation personally announced critical social reforms, which also include giving women equal inheritance to men despite traditional Shari’a-based laws. These reforms aim for gender equality in Tunisia.

Al-Azhar also opposes the inheritance changes, Shoman said, saying they contradict the Quran’s guidance. “Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male, what is equal to the share of two females,” it says.

Though not wielding the same influence as the Vatican Pope’s over Catholics, the moral authority wielded over Muslims by Al Azhar’s grand imam is recognized in all four corners of the globe. Al Azhar once represented a pillar of modernity and moderation in the Islamic world, but that changed when ultra-conservative Wahhabism and Muslim Brotherhood Jihadist doctrine ascended during the 1950s. More radical Salafi doctrines became part of the core curriculum.

Opposing Modernity

Essebsi’s call for gender equality is a step toward a secular path, which is a radical departure from most predominantly-Muslim countries. It’s not surprising, therefore, that it generated a storm of protest and condemnation from the Al Azhar sheikhdom (administration). To them, Tunisia’s reforms counter straight-forward Quranic versesconcerning the distribution of the inheritance between women and men and marriage to non-Muslims.

Those verses dictate that a man receives twice as much inheritance as a woman. That’s because men traditionally pay for the expenses of the house that includes the family’s women until they get married and move into their own homes. Thus, a man should acquire twice as much as his sister or women counterpart to carry on with his duties. That mayhave made sense 1,400 years ago, but in the 21stcentury that is hardly the case anymore.

Women have attained huge milestones in the past two centuries and even in the Muslim majority nations. For example, Egypt’s feminist movement started in the early 20th century, and by the 1950s, Egyptian women had voting rights even before women in Switzerland. Egypt has a major representation of women in all political, economic and social fields. Countries such as Pakistan, Indonesia, and Turkey had a female presidents or prime ministers.Today, more than a third of Egyptian households are financed by women, the Egyptian National Centre for Social and Criminological Research (NCSCR) reports.

The issue of Muslim women marrying non-Muslims has been a source of debate and conflict for centuries. Advocates of Tunisia’s reforms argue that the Quranic verses governing marriage outside the faith apply to men and women. The only prohibition is marrying an atheist or a follower of polytheistic religions.

Nevertheless, for more than 1,400 years it became the norm that Muslim women are prohibited from marrying non-Muslim men. Scholars argued Muslim women who married outside the faith might not be free to practicing their religion. Reform advocates believe that 21st century women freely choose their own life partners and are aware of any consequences.

Renouncing Al Azhar’s criticism, Essebsi condemned “foreign interference” in internal Tunisian affairs. Tunisian religious bodies, including the Diwan of Fatwa, support his reforms.

Counter-Reform Syndicate

Al Azhar Grand Imam Ahmed Al Tayeb was reputed to be a moderate Sufist who many in Egypt hoped would counter the growing influence of the university’s radical alumni. Alas, he has faced criticism from liberal Egyptian intellectuals and secularists for blocking any tangible Islamic reforms. During his reign, Al Azhar has waged witch hunts against Egyptian Islamic reformers such as Islam Al-Beheiry. Al-Beheiry spent a year in prison for blasphemy because he dared to condemn some major Islamic traditionalist scholars’ works, calling them the source of modern terrorist ideologies. He was later released after being granted a presidential pardon.

More than two years ago, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi made a historic call for a religious revolution targeting interpretations and misconceptions of religious scripture that drives jihadist ideologies. Al-Azhar’s sheikhdom met the call with defiance, despite displaying fake enthusiasm for the government and the media. As a result, no new laws have been introduced and no curricula have changed with Al Azhar’s influence on Egyptian state affairs is growing stronger.

Yet al-Sisi is not challenging the religious institution enough out of fear that the Muslim Brotherhood and Egyptian Salafists might use the pressure to restore their influence in Al-Azhar. However, a confrontation with Al Azhar seems inevitable since it has already been infiltrated by the very Salafists and radicals whose influence al-Sisi wishes to eradicate.

Ironically, Tunisia’s Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Ennahda Party has been mostly vague about the social reforms. Despite the protest of some of its main leaders, no official statement has been issued Ennahda vice President Abdel Fattah Mourou said that marriage is a matter of personal freedom under Tunisia’s constitution.

Ennahda, which rose to power after the 2011 Arab Spring, was voted out just three years later. Now it is trying to appear as moderate as possible to regain its strength and weather the storm of anti-Islamist sentiment prevailing in many Middle Eastern nations.

Essebsi is implementing reforms he deems necessary for his country’s social progress. These reforms already are having a ripple effect in the region and might lead to further social progress. Essebsi has done what al-Sisi called for about for more than two years ago, but never took any tangible steps to implement. These reforms may be not exactly what al-Sisi wanted when he called for a complete change of Islamic rhetoric that shuns all forms of extremism and violence. Nevertheless, Essebsi’s reforms are a bold step forward for total social and religious reforms that the Middle East desperately needs.

Hany Ghoraba is an Egyptian writer, political and counter-terrorism analyst at Al Ahram Weekly, author of Egypt’s Arab Spring: The Long and Winding Road to Democracy and a regular contributor to the BBC.

Europe’s Cities Absorb Sharia Law

August 2, 2017

Europe’s Cities Absorb Sharia Law, Gatestone InstituteGiulio Meotti, August 2, 2017

London Mayor Sadiq Khan banned advertisements that promote “unrealistic expectations of women’s body image and health”. Now Berlin is planning to ban images in which women are portrayed as “beautiful but weak, hysterical, dumb, crazy, naive, or ruled by their emotions”. Tagesspiegel‘s Harald Martenstein said the policy “could have been adopted from the Taliban manifesto”.

The irony is that this wave of morality and “virtue” is coming from cities governed by uninhibited leftist politicians, who for years campaigned for sexual liberation. It is now a “feminist” talking point to advocate sharia policy.

To paraphrase the American writer Daniel Greenfield, the irony of women celebrating their own suppression is both heartbreaking and stupefying.

Within days after the Islamic State conquered the city of Sirte in Libya two years ago, enormous billboards appeared in the Islamist stronghold warning women they must wear baggy robes that cover their entire bodies, and no perfume. These “sharia stipulations for hijab” included wearing dense material and a robe that does not “resemble the attire of unbelievers”.

Two years later, Europe’s three most important cities — London, Paris and Berlin — are adopting the same sharia trend.

Paris has said au revoir to “sexist” ads on public billboards. The Paris city council announced its ban after the Socialist Mayor Anne Hidalgo said the move meant that Paris was “leading the way” in the fight against sexism. London Mayor Sadiq Khan also banned advertisements that promote “unrealistic expectations of women’s body image and health”. Now Berlin is planning to ban images in which women are portrayed as “beautiful but weak, hysterical, dumb, crazy, naive, or ruled by their emotions”. Der Tagesspiegel‘s Harald Martenstein said the policy “could have been adopted from the Taliban manifesto”.

The irony is that this wave of morality and “virtue” is coming from cities governed by uninhibited leftist politicians, who for years campaigned for sexual liberation.

There is a reason for this grotesque campaign banning these images. These cities host significant Muslim populations; and politicians — the same who frantically are enacting mandatory multiculturalism — want to please “Islam”. It is now a “feminist” talking point to advocate sharia policy, as does Linda Sarsour. The result is that, today, few feminists dare to criticize Islam.

It is happening everywhere. Dutch municipalities are “advising” their employees to not wear mini-skirts. There are women-only hours at Swedish swimming pools. German schools are sending letters to parents asking children to avoid wearing “revealing clothes”.

The first to suggest calling for a ban on posters or advertisements that “reduce women or men to sexual objects” was German Justice Minister Heiko Maas, a Social Democrat.

“To demand the veiling of women or taming of men,” said Free Democratic Party leader Christian Lindner, “is something known among radical Islamic religious leaders, but not from the German minister of justice.”

In 1969, Germany was overwhelmed by a debate on introducing into schools the “Sexualkundeatlas”, an “atlas” of sexual science. Now the effort is to desexualize German society. The newspaper Die Welt commented:

“Thanks to Justice Minister Heiko Maas we finally know why on New Year’s Eve, at Cologne Central Station, about a thousand women were victims of sexual violence: because of sexist advertising. Too many eroticized models, too much naked skin on our billboards, too many erotic mouths, too many miniskirts in fashion magazines, too many wiggling rear-ends and chubby breasts in television spots. It is another step in the direction of a ‘submission'”.

Instead of nipples and buttocks, Die Welt concludes, “should we urge the use of burqa or veil, as Mrs. Erdogan does?”

The same German élites who suggest banning “sexist” billboards censored the crude details of the mass sexual assaults in Cologne. Meanwhile, a liberal Berlin mosque, which banned burqas and opened its door to gays and to unveiled women, is now under police protection after threats from Muslim supremacists.

Europe’s élites have adopted a double standard: they are proud to host an exhibit of a Christian crucifix submerged in urine, but quickly capitulate to Muslim demands to censor cartoons of the Islamic Prophet Mohammed. The Italian authorities went to great efforts to spare Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani a view of nudity on ancient sculptures in the Capitoline Museums of Rome.

The Western public appears fascinated by Islamic veils. Ismail Sacranie, a founder of Modestly Active, the manufacturer that designs burkinis, told the New York Times that 35% of their clients are non-Muslim. Aheda Zanetti, a Lebanese woman living in Australia who invented the burkini, claims that 40% of her sales are to non-Muslim women. The Western public, which has been romanticizing Islam, is apparently absorbing the pieties of Islamic law. The Spectator called it “a new puritanism” and “why some feminists make common cause with Islam”.

To paraphrase the American writer Daniel Greenfield, the irony of women celebrating their own suppression is both heartbreaking and stupefying.

Europe might soon have to apologize to the Mayor of Cologne, Henriette Reker. She was criticized — denounced — for advising women to keep “at an arm’s length” from strangers to avoid sexual harassment.

If the West keeps on betraying the democratic value of individual freedom on which Western civilization is based, Islamic fundamentalists, like those who imposed burqas on Libyan women, will start imposing them on Western women. They may even begin with those feminist élites who first created the sexual revolution to emancipate women in the 1960s, and who are now infatuated with an obscurantist garment that hides women in a portable prison.

If the West keeps betraying the democratic value of individual freedom, Islamic fundamentalists, like those who imposed burqas on Libyan women, will do the same to Western women. (Photo by Alexander Hassenstein/Getty Images)

 

NO groping, Damn it!

July 23, 2017

NO groping, Damn it! Power LineJohn Hinderaker, July 22, 2017

The Perchtoldsdorf signs are out of date in one respect. Here in the U.S., it is no longer true that men should stay out of women’s showers. The “enlightened” view of such matters is that men are perfectly welcome to shower with teenage girls and adult women, as long as they say, if asked, that they are “trans.” Watch for this sign of social progress to make its way to Austria before long.

*********************************************

American liberals want to take in lots of Islamic refugees from the Middle East and Africa, presumably because that policy has been so successful in Europe. This is, of course, a dubious premise, as we have noted many times.

This story comes from Austria, and it must be legit because it is reported in the Sun. Heh. As best I can tell, though, it is authentic:

A swimming pool has stuck up signs targeted at migrants telling them not to grope women or enter the female changing room.

The signs were posted in a swimming pool in Perchtoldsdorf, a market town a short distance from the Austrian capital of Vienna.

Here is the sign, click to enlarge:

Apparently the signs have been posted because some Islamic refugees don’t understand–or, more likely, pretend not to understand–that men shouldn’t enter the ladies’ shower, and you’re not supposed to fondle women to whom you haven’t been introduced:

One sign shows a man entering the women’s dressing room with the word “STOP!” and “entry is forbidden in non-designated areas” written next to it.

Another sign show a picture of a young teen in a bikini with three hands seemingly wanting to grope her.

It reads “NO!” and explains that “physical contact with other guests is forbidden”.

And while the signs featured English, French and Arabic text, there was no German translation, with the sign clearly not intended for local visitors.

The Austrians assume, apparently, that their natives already understand that you aren’t supposed to fondle strange women.

The Perchtoldsdorf signs are out of date in one respect. Here in the U.S., it is no longer true that men should stay out of women’s showers. The “enlightened” view of such matters is that men are perfectly welcome to shower with teenage girls and adult women, as long as they say, if asked, that they are “trans.” Watch for this sign of social progress to make its way to Austria before long.

In the meantime, it is reasonable to wonder whether copying Angela Merkel’s refugee policy is a good idea for the U.S.

Kamala Harris Goes Silent When Confronted with True Sex-Based Oppression

June 24, 2017

Kamala Harris Goes Silent When Confronted with True Sex-Based Oppression, Power LinePaul Mirengoff, June 23, 2017

Last week, Sen. Kamala Harris became the left’s designated victim of the month because she was interrupted by Republican Senators during a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Harris kept interrupting the witness, Attorney General Jeff Session, so it’s debatable whether she had a genuine grievance. Nonetheless, the Democrats and their media allies were quick to level hackneyed allegations that, once again, sexist patriarchs have tried to silence a woman “speaking truth to power.”

The next day, two women with genuine grievances of sexism testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, of which Harris, regrettably, is a member. The women were our friend Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Asra Q. Noman.

Both were born into deeply conservative Muslim families. Ayaan is a survivor of female genital mutilation and forced marriage. Asra defied Shariah by having a baby while unmarried.

Both have been threatened with death by jihadists for things they have said and done. Ayaan cannot appear in public without armed guards.

You might have thought that Sen. Harris would show considerable interest in what these victims of sexism had to say. If so, you don’t grasp that Harris’ slavish adherence to the left’s taboo against calling out Islamists trumps any real commitment she may have to women’s rights.

Here, as told by Ayaan and Asra in the New York Times, is what happened:

The Democrats on the panel, including Senator Harris and three other Democratic female senators — North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp, New Hampshire’s Maggie Hassan and Missouri’s Claire McCaskill — did not ask either of us a single question.

This wasn’t a case of benign neglect. At one point, Senator McCaskill said that she took issue with the theme of the hearing itself. “Anyone who twists or distorts religion to a place of evil is an exception to the rule,” she said. “We should not focus on religion,” she said, adding that she was “worried” that the hearing, organized by Senator Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin, would “underline that.” In the end, the only questions asked of us about Islamist ideologies came from Senator Johnson and his Republican colleague, Senator Steve Daines from Montana.

Ayaan and Asra nail the meaning of what went down:

[W]hat happened that day was emblematic of a deeply troubling trend among progressives when it comes to confronting the brutal reality of Islamist extremism and what it means for women in many Muslim communities here at home and around the world.

When it comes to the pay gap, abortion access and workplace discrimination, progressives have much to say. But we’re still waiting for a march against honor killings, child marriages, polygamy, sex slavery or female genital mutilation.

They will be waiting for a long time.

Ayaan and Asra continue:

[W]hen we speak about Islamist oppression, we bring personal experience to the table in addition to our scholarly expertise. Yet the feminist mantra so popular when it comes to victims of sexual assault — believe women first — isn’t extended to us. Neither is the notion that the personal is political. Our political conclusions are dismissed as personal; our personal experiences dismissed as political.

That’s because in the rubric of identity politics, our status as women of color is canceled out by our ideas, which are labeled “conservative” — as if opposition to violent jihad, sex slavery, genital mutilation or child marriage were a matter of left or right. This not only silences us, it also puts beyond the pale of liberalism a basic concern for human rights and the individual rights of women abused in the name of Islam.

Why aren’t leftists willing to call out Islamic extremism? Ayaan and Asra offer this explanation:

Partly they fear offending members of a “minority” religion and being labeled racist, bigoted or Islamophobic. There is also the idea, which has tremendous strength on the left, that non-Western women don’t need “saving” — and that the suggestion that they do is patronizing at best. After all, the thinking goes, if women in America still earn less than men for equivalent work, who are we to criticize other cultures?

This is extreme moral relativism disguised as cultural sensitivity. And it leads good people to make excuses for the inexcusable.

The silence of the Democratic senators is a reflection of contemporary cultural pressures. Call it identity politics, moral relativism or political correctness — it is shortsighted, dangerous and, ultimately, a betrayal of liberal values.

Ayaan and Asra have said it all. Almost. Another point needs to be made.

Sen. Harris and her fellow female committee members are cowards. If they believe Ayaan and Asra are presenting a misleading picture of Islam, based on their “exceptional” experiences, then take them on. Make the point by asking probing questions, the way Harris’ cheerleaders think she did with Jeff Sessions.

Harris wouldn’t do it. She probably recognized that Ayaan would have carved her up to the point that even her cheerleaders couldn’t have declared her the victor. So the supposedly fearless ace ex-prosecutor took the coward’s way out and tried to minimize the extent to which Ayaan and Asra were heard.

Ayaan and Asra conclude:

We believe feminism is for everyone. Our goals — not least the equality of the sexes — are deeply liberal. We know these are values that the Democratic senators at our hearing share. Will they find their voices and join us in opposing Islamist extremism and its war on women?

This is the only off-key note in their article. The goals and values of Ayaan and Asra are not the goals and values of Harris and most of her fellow Democrats.

As for the voices of Harris and her colleagues, what you hear, or in this case didn’t hear, is what you get.

Will anyone rescue European women?

June 20, 2017

Will anyone rescue European women? Israel National News, Marc Arsak, June 20, 2017

(The holy Multiculturalist Scriptures supersede all others, except the even holier Islamic scriptures. — DM)

This circus of self-flagellation, self-repudiation, self-hatred and fanatical self-criticism has been pursued professionally as a career for Europe’s caste of globalist politicians. Meanwhile, the sources of our exponential crime rates and territorial disintegration, on the other hand, continue to be systematically exonerated of all suspicions and elevated to unattainable levels of absolute perfection and utter sainthood.

***********************************

Barely a week into Emmanuel Macron’s presidency, a petition was launched to bring the daily lives of many native European women to his attention. It was nothing more than a fruitless wishful attempt.

The facts are that the female residents of a Parisian neighborhood, have had enough of “being spat at, daily insults in different languages, forced robbery, the presence of pickpockets, drunkards and the smell of urine,” as the petition states. Many do not dare leave their houses alone, not to mention wearing a skirt or tight pants, lest they are attacked or insulted. They are not welcome in local bars and restaurants where they are greeted by the lewdness of gangs of drunk and unemployed young men who are either French citizens of foreign heritage or recent illegal migrants.

There is no shortage of this type of neighborhoods in Europe, long abandoned to the rule of gangs, drug dealers, and illegal migrants. Even so, any concern or criticism expressed by native Europeans is regarded as blasphemous towards multiculturalism. Which explains why as soon as some of these women expressed their displeasure at being dispossessed from their way of life, they were accused of prejudice and ‘racism.’

Smears and accusations of racism and bigotry are today’s price for telling the truth and describing the reality in Europe. Also, the fear of being called ‘racist’ further dissuades the authorities to take any concrete actions, even if they were ever going to. Besides, most people even fail or prefer not to recognize that these problems do exist and keep getting worse. Politicians from across the board believe that the thugs reigning in European territories are flawless and irreproachable in essence. Therefore, the situation could be ultimately and solely explained by the alleged evils of the European people and their past.

According to their delusional narrative, racist, bigoted, unwelcoming and parsimonious Europeans who colonized the otherwise cultivated, flourishing and prosperous Third World nations have to pay for some committed and mostly uncommitted ancestral sins eternally. Hence, it is, for instance, the fault of the French people, if they are turning into an unprotected ethnic minority in their own homeland. Consequently, had Europeans had not committed these cardinal ancestral sins, had they been less racist and more welcoming today, these masses of unemployed men would not only assimilate and abandon rape, crime, and terror, but they would also make Europe as advanced, civilized, cultivated and modern as the countries they fled.

This circus of self-flagellation, self-repudiation, self-hatred and fanatical self-criticism has been pursued professionally as a career for Europe’s caste of globalist politicians. Meanwhile, the sources of our exponential crime rates and territorial disintegration, on the other hand, continue to be systematically exonerated of all suspicions and elevated to unattainable levels of absolute perfection and utter sainthood.

Feminists are also doing their fair share in the ongoing circus. Following the controversy, Caroline De Haas, a leading feminist figure, proposed to solve the problem by expanding the sidewalks in the neighborhood in question. And no, in case you were wondering, she is not a comedian. The expansion of sidewalks, according to her, will address the issue and make women feel safe again. Her method, at best, might prove to be as efficient as France’s new counterterrorism measure. In case you have not heard of it, “you won’t have my hatred” has become this fancy buzz phrase that many French people are determined to fight terrorism with. Anything more efficient than candles, solidarity hashtags and “you won’t have my hatred,” would be – you guessed it – racist. Thank God, not many people thought of combating Nazism with this you-won’t-have-my-hatred type of servile idiocy.

With no solution on the horizon, it seems that Parisian women will simply have to learn to live with insults, robbery, sexual harassment and all the other wonders of multiculturalism just as their peers in Cologne did. The mere denunciation of this reality is deemed ‘racist’ by the thought police, just as any other thought, word or action advocating the rights of native Europeans to self-preservation is considered to be so. Failing to address the real racism that many people from White South Africans to Christians in Arab countries suffer from, those who use the word to slander Europeans resisting cultural and ethnic substitution have rendered it devoid of any meaning.

Sadly, however, the myth of racist Europeans does not seem to stop the ever-growing flow of criminals, rapists, and terrorists from coming into the continent. Will Europeans soon be told that their very existence, even as an unprotected ethnic minority in their homelands, is racist? Does anyone care enough to rescue the European women, at least?

Australia: Taxpayer-funded study urges “sensitivity” to Muslim migrants who beat their wives

June 18, 2017

Australia: Taxpayer-funded study urges “sensitivity” to Muslim migrants who beat their wives, Jihad Watch, June 18, 2017

This problem may not be solved now, but it will have to be faced eventually, not just in Australia but in all non-Muslim countries: are Muslims allowed to break the law of the land in order to follow their religion, or is the law of the land paramount? Will wife-beating be legal or illegal, or legal if you’re Muslim but not if you’re not Muslims?

Such questions will determine whether or not free societies will survive.

“Australians should show ‘sensitivity’ to migrants whose cultures ‘don’t value women’s and child’s rights’ claims new domestic violence study,” by Tom Flanagan, Daily Mail Australia, June 16, 2017 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

A taxpayer funded study has made the audacious claim that Australians need to show ‘cultural sensitivity’ towards migrant men who physically abuse their wife and children.

The study conducted over a three year period was funded by the Australian Research Council and points out that some human rights affect migrants’ integration and ‘successful settlement in Australia’, specifically those in relation to women and children.

The study refers to some refugees claiming that these rights ‘contravene the cultural values, norms and mores’ of their ethnic groups, according to The Daily Telegraph.

Yet the study has faced strong resistance in the shape of federal Minister for Women Michaelia Cash who has stated Australia is categorically against family violence.

‘Violence against women is unacceptable in any circumstances,’ Ms Cash told The Saturday Telegraph.

The study has however called for ‘cultural sensitivity and understanding of the impact on male refugees’ who suffer a sense of separation and an overwhelming feeling of disappointment when their views are repulsed by society.

The report did point out refugees’ appreciation for the factors of Australian life such as healthcare and education that were not available to them in their home nations, yet a ‘major point of contention’ was the differing views on women’s and children’s rights.

What was most upsetting for many refugees was the strong stance Australians had when it came to domestic violence.

It will be this Australian ethos that will repel the study’s findings with many in union with Prevention of Domestic Violence Minister Pru Goward who insists wife beaters must ‘change their ways.’

A recent example of the nation’s position on the matter was its reaction towards Sydney primary school teacher Reem Allouche telling the women’s arm of hardline political group Hizb ut-Tahrir that men are permitted to hit women with sticks….

ISIS Burns 19 Yazidi Girls to Death in Cages for Refusing Sex Slavery

June 13, 2017

ISIS Burns 19 Yazidi Girls to Death in Cages for Refusing Sex Slavery, Front Page Magazine,  Joseph Klein, June 13, 2017

(But as any fool knows, The Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam. — DM)

Don’t count on an American feminist march.

ISIS is Sharia-compliant in the most literal sense. Its fighters are following the example of Muhammad himself, the warrior prophet of Islam who captured slaves in battle and had sex with them. As the prophet was entitled to take advantage of such fruits of battle according to the Koran, so ISIS believes its fighters are entitled as well. Thus, these savages thought nothing of burning 19 Yazidi girls to death in iron cages after the girls had the temerity to resist having sex with their captors. This atrocity was said by local activists to have taken place recently in the Iraqi city of Mosul, which has currently become a battlefield between ISIS fighters and anti-ISIS coalition forces. An eyewitness reported that the burnings took place in front of hundreds of people.

“O Prophet!” the Koran (33:50) instructs Muhammad, in the “words” of Allah, “Verily, We have made lawful to you your wives, to whom you have paid their Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage), and those whom your right hand possesses – whom Allah has given to you.” The latter bounty from Allah refers to the females taken captive in battle and enslaved.

In an article entitled “ISIS Enshrines a Theology of Rape,” the New York Times reported on the religious sources ISIS fighters have used to justify their rapes of their female slaves. They believe that having sex with their infidel slaves, including with young girls, actually brings them closer to Allah. Indeed, they would pray before and after they raped their victims.

Islamist apologists and so-called “scholars” have sought to refute any interpretation of the Koran that could possibly lend support today for slavery and sexual exploitation of female captives. However, Prophet Muhammad’s own actions and words, which are called “Sunnah” and are part of Sharia law along with the Koran itself, belie such revisionist readings.

Cole Bunzel, a scholar of Islamic theology at Princeton University, is cited in the New York Times article for offering his counterpoint to the revisionists. He appears to believe that ISIS is simply scraping away all the layers of modernist interpretations to return to Islam in its purest original form: “There is a great deal of scripture that sanctions slavery. You can argue that it is no longer relevant and has fallen into abeyance. ISIS would argue that these institutions need to be revived, because that is what the Prophet and his companions did.”

While not manifesting itself yet in the United States in overt support of sexual enslavement of women, Sharia law is creeping into the United States.  Islamic prayers are being held in some public schools, in clear violation of the First Amendment’s establishment clause that has been used to bar Judeo-Christian prayers in the public schools. And in a shocking preview of what may lie ahead for the influence of Sharia law in U.S. courts, a trial court judge in New Jersey refused to issue a restraining order against a Muslim husband who allegedly raped his wife. The trial judge accepted the plaintiff’s claim that the defendant had engaged in sexual relations with the plaintiff against her expressed wishes. However, the judge concluded that the husband lacked criminal intent in this case because “he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.” Fortunately, wiser heads prevailed in the case on appeal and the plaintiff was ultimately granted a restraining order, while the defendant husband was convicted of rape. However, the fact that a judge in the United States could for one moment even consider, let alone rule, that a defendant should be exempted from the operation of a statute intended to protect women against sexual abuse because of his Muslim beliefs is disturbing, to say the least. The tendency of some judges, including some Supreme Court justices, to look at foreign law for guidance in rendering their decisions adds to the concern.

Too many self-proclaimed feminists in the United States have failed to express outrage at the oppression of women that is sanctioned under Sharia law. Instead, they have embraced an ardent defender of Sharia law, Linda Sarsour, who was chosen to serve as a national co-chair of the Women’s March on Washington last January protesting President Trump. She tweeted several years ago that “shariah law is reasonable and once u read into the details it makes a lot of sense. People just know the basics.” As someone wisely asked rhetorically, in reminding Sarsour of her Sharia tweet the day after the Women’s March on Washington, “basics like mutilating people…beating wives… killing apostates…killing rape victims…did i miss anything?”

The Yazidi sex slaves have learned the grisly details of Sharia law in operation the hard way. They have suffered the most barbaric forms of sexual violence at the hands of their masters, who have credibly argued that they are simply following in the footsteps of Prophet Mohammad and complying with Sharia law in its purest, most literal form.