Glenn Greenwald went on for paragraph after paragraph on Salon http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/12/22/klein/index.html about why he still deserves to live even though he's considering voting for a pro-life Republican, namely Dr. Ron Paul, for president.
It is stunning to me how many people would rather have an abortion than have world peace. It seems pretty selfish to me. But I guess that's what having an abortion is all about. Men who don't want to take responsibility for their offspring. It has absolutely nothing to do with women's rights if you ask me, and I have always been female. It has to do with the assumption that women must earn a living or else they are a drain on society.
Glenn Greenwald wrote:
"There's no question that abortion -- whatever one's views on it are -- is a vital, even central issue of individual rights... But abortion isn't the only important issue... of Paul's candidacy."
There are actually a lot of questions about what are the most vital issues concerning the individual rights of women, and how abortion fits into that picture. If you ask me, abortion is a distraction from the three fundamental rights of sexually active women.
Marriage - the promise of a man to provide for his potential offspring and fulfill the needs of his woman.
Dowry - a gift given from the man to the woman to legitimize his interest in her.
Maintenance - all expenses paid (food, clothing, shelter, medical care) for life.
In the ideal world, every woman should and would demand this from any man seeking to enjoy her. Abortion "on demand and without apology" destroys this ancient security net for women.
"If people who support a candidate with the wrong position on abortion (or gay rights) can be accused of being indifferent to the rights of women or gay people, then -- by the same exact "reasoning" -- those who end up supporting candidates who affirm America's right to act as an imperial power or who want to continue many of Bush's executive power abuses [as Hillary Clinton certainly does and as even Barack Obama and (to a lesser extent) John Edwards do] should be accused of being indifferent to constitutional liberties, the rule of law, and the lives of millions of innocent Muslims," continues Greenwald.
I do not presume to know what the "right" position is on abortion. Neither does Ron Paul. He doesn't let his personal feelings get in the way of the Constitution. He says leave it up to the state. There is no way New York Jews are ever going to criminalize abortion. So it's a non-issue.
3 comments:
HI Karin,
I am a longtime subscribe to WVNS who has taken a lot of heat for defending some of your posts in less sympathetic venues. And while I think this post has considerable merit, I also think you have got it dead wrong about dowries, and I hope you will do a bit of research on this subject. Dowries in the West were never given by a man to his spouse, but on the contrary, were given by the father of the bride to the husband. The reason for this is quite obvious from the rest of your post: since the man was socially obligated to provide for the entire family himself, a considerable economic burden, the dowry was a kind of jump start on getting together a viable family estate. It was a quid pro quo. The husband accepted lifetime economic responsibility for the bride, and the bride's father endowed him with assets to help make it possible. It is really that simple, and alas, pretty necessary, except for those born into great wealth (who nonetheless tended to acquire the largest dowries). I hope you will research this and amend your blog accordingly.
Peace and best wishes,
Ken Freela
Hi Ken
In Western society, a man usually gives the gal a diamond ring to justify his intentions. I recommend you buy anything but a diamond due to Zionist control over the diamond industry. Cash will do. Just be clear about your intentions to marry her.
The marriage is usually formalized by the man giving the woman a gold ring to symbolize the bond and protect her from witchcraft. In truth the gift does not have to be a ring and cash will do fine legally in terms of the religous aspect of the marriage gift.
I defend women's rights in Islam. I am aware that Christian and Hindu women actually have to get their fathers to PAY for someone to marry them but at least in theory that is not true in Islamic Law.
The right of dowry is the ultimate of woman's right, for who can measure the love of a man? By Islamic law he could "pay" her with 100 poems. As long as she accepts his gift it is a legal marriage. No gift, no marriage. The Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) said a man has to give the woman whatever she wants for a dowry, "even if were a mountain of gold."
Practically speaking a virgin Muslim bride would cost you minimum a few tens of thousands of dollars.
She would probably insist you put your house in her name and buy her a car, carpets for every floor and curtains for every window in the house, and a new wardrobe; for the privilege of seeing her naked.
A divorcee Muslim lady might have her own house already but you are not going to get away with enjoying her privacy without paying her a dowry. The Prophet said, "Save yourself from hellfire, even if by half a date."
Asserting Women's Rights
Ibn Al-Jauzi narrated the virtues and merits of Umar bin Al-Khattab (Allah bless him) in the following words: Umar forbade the people from paying excessive dowries and addressed them saying: "Don't fix the dowries for women over forty ounces. If ever that is exceeded I shall deposit the excess amount in the public treasury". As he descended from the pulpit, a flat-nosed lady stood up from among the women audience, and said: "It is not within your right". Umar asked: "Why should this not be of my right?" she replied: "Because Allah has proclaimed: 'even if you had given one of them (wives) a whole treasure for dowry take not the least bit back. Would you take it by false claim and a manifest sin'". (Al Nisa, 20). When he heard this, Umar said: "The woman is right and the man (Umar) is wrong. It seems that all people have deeper insight and wisdom than Umar". Then he returned to the pulpit and declared: "O people, I had restricted the giving of more than four hundred dirhams in dowry. Whosoever of you wishes to give in dowry as much as he likes and finds satisfaction in so doing may do so". quoted in: "On the Position and Role of Women in Islam and Islamic Society"
God I love Islam.
Post a Comment