The “Right to Choose”, Islamist-style
May 31st, 2008 at 06:01pm Mark Noonan
Wonder what NARAL-Pro Choice America and NOW will have to say about this:
Egypt - Muslim extremist women are challenging al-Qaida’s refusal to include — or at least acknowledge — women in its ranks, in an emotional debate that gives rare insight into the gender conflicts lurking beneath one of the strictest strains of Islam.
In response to a female questioner, al-Qaida No. 2 leader Ayman Al-Zawahri said in April that the terrorist group does not have women. A woman’s role, he said on the Internet audio recording, is limited to caring for the homes and children of al-Qaida fighters.
His remarks have since prompted an outcry from fundamentalist women, who are fighting or pleading for the right to be terrorists. The statements have also created some confusion, because in fact suicide bombings by women seem to be on the rise, at least within the Iraq branch of al-Qaida.
And, also, I wonder if, now, the “pro-choice” people will come to understand that far more important than the act of choosing is what is chosen…
Entry Filed under: Life Issues, War on Terror
11 Comments
1. Rich | May 31st, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Off topic- This just in, Barak Obama has cut and run from his church.
2. Fish Fry | May 31st, 2008 at 8:01 pm
May 31st, 2008 at 06:01pm Mark Noonan
Why do you and the other cons here fixate on other countries as if any of you know a hell of beans what goes on in any of these places?
3. Fish Fry | May 31st, 2008 at 8:05 pm
“Wonder what NARAL-Pro Choice America and NOW will have to say..”
Mark, al-Qaida is a terrorist organization, it has no right to exist in a civilized world, therefore your question is stupid!
4. neocon | May 31st, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Fish,
That’s just standard issue Sharia Law. So the question is valid. To what lengths will human rights, and women organizations go to protect the women who live under such oppression?
5. FmrMarine | June 1st, 2008 at 11:35 am
brett m, posing as rich
>>>>Racist SCUMBAGS like Noonan and FMR Marine are going to find out that people of all political persuasions will not tolerate hate speech.<<<
Your seething hatred is right out of obamas pulpit and racist church.
We will probably see you on the evening news as a mass murderer some day.
BO is running as a “BLACK” candidate. He belongs to an “afrocentric” racist church.
He is a MULATTO…….so what?
So if anyone uses the correct terminology to describe the man they are racist?
You failed to mention i said he was a “community activist” or an empty suit.
I also pointed out Klintons many faults which YOU ignored. You chose to focus on BO being a mulatto, I can only conclude you want to make a huge faux outrage over NOTHING…..what a piece of work!
6. FmrMarine | June 1st, 2008 at 11:39 am
Mark;
It would be interesting to see islam reform from women within the cult.
I dont think it will happen soon though. Dont they behead them for speaking out?
7. Tractatus | June 1st, 2008 at 1:53 pm
A woman’s role, he said on the Internet audio recording, is limited to caring for the homes and children
So it’s suddenly a bad thing to you guys to be a religious conservative who believes that a woman’s role is to stay home to birth and raise children? Interesting.
8. Anon | June 1st, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Right to choose, American Insurance style.
Women must get sterilized after they have a Caesarean section or they will be denied health insurance or have premiums too high to be affordable. This is worse than abortion because it takes away the right of a woman to have a baby when she wants one.
After Caesareans, Some See Higher Insurance Cost
When the Golden Rule Insurance Company rejected her application for health coverage last year, Peggy Robertson was mystified.
“It made me feel very helpless,” she said.
“It made no sense,” said Ms. Robertson, 39, who lives in Centennial, Colo. “I’m in perfect health.”
She was turned down because she had given birth by Caesarean section. Having the operation once increases the odds that it will be performed again, and if she became pregnant and needed another Caesarean, Golden Rule did not want to pay for it. A letter from the company explained that if she had been sterilized after the Caesarean, or if she were over 40 and had given birth two or more years before applying, she might have qualified.
This is yet another reason for eliminating for-profit health care. Nothing like this has ever happened in Canada or Europe.
Why is al-Qaida No. 2 leader Ayman Al-Zawahri care more about women than our health care insurance industry?
9. Mark Noonan | June 1st, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Tract,
There is a song from the 80’s by Aretha Franklin and Annie Lenox - “Sister Are Doing it for Themselves”; all about how women are “coming out of the kitchen” and taking charge…lets think about that…
A woman can be a wife and mother and mistress of her household and create in her kitchen whatever she pleases…she can also decorate as she wants, instruct her children as she wishes and, in short, pretty much do anything she wants…along comes feminism to say, “you don’t want that! You want to leave your home, have Stouffers cook for you, a nanny instruct your children and instead of creating and doing what you want, you’ll be shackled to a desk and do precisely what someone else tells you to do”. One of the biggest frauds of modern times is that, somehow, outside the home is superior to inside the home…that an aggolomeration of wage earners at a corporation is superior to a family as far as self-fulfillment goes.
Meanwhile, your attempt at comparing conservatism with Islamism is foolish - Islamists don’t want women at home because they think that home is superior but because, just like feminists, they think that outside the home is superior to inside the home…and now they are hoist on their own feminist petard…women want the right to choose to be human bombs…and just what will NOW say about all this?
10. Mark Noonan | June 1st, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Anon,
Your comment is off topic - you get one freebie; the next will be deleted.
11. Tractatus | June 1st, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Weak attempt to dodge the point, Noonan. Religious conservatism demands female subservience. It commands that a woman’s place is in the home, and she should not aspire to anything different. It exists in Christianity, and it exists in Islam. You both want the same thing: Women at home and nowhere else. You’ll defend it in Christianity, but you’ll oppose it in Islam. Which is about the one millionth example of your rather flagrant hypocrisy that you’ve exposed here.
But you’ll pretend not to notice it. Or maybe you aren’t pretending. Which would be rather sad if true.
Also, you apparently learned about feminism from people who have no idea what it really is. What a shocker. Hint: It wasn’t saying, “You don’t want that,” in your example above, merely, “You don’t have to do that if you don’t want to. You can make your own decisions.” If you are unable to parse the difference there, then we must once again call either your intelligence or your vocabulary into question.
But we both know what you’re going to do. You’re going to stick with your ignorant little talking point. Much easier on you that way.
I love that you equate “creating in the kitchen” and decorating the home with “doing whatever she wants,” though. Sort of a “you can have it in any color as long as it’s black” scenario.