CII curtail
women’s right
CII allowed
men to beat women
Few days back, Islamic
constitutional body, Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) has proposed its own women
protection bill, recommending ‘a light beating’ for the wife if she defies the
husband. This recommendations spark outrage though the CII chairman soften the
tone stating ‘violence’ is not permissible in Islam. As he believes that light
beating does not mean violence.
Earlier CII rejected Punjab’s controversial
Protection of Women against Violence Act (PPWA) terming it un-Islamic and
drafted its own bill and will now forward to the Punjab Assembly. However the
parliament is not bound to consider its recommendations. The 20-members CII
proposed that a husband should be allowed to ‘lightly’ beat his wife if she
defies his commands and refuse to dress up as per his desires; turns down
demand of intercourse without any religious excuse or does not take bath after
intercourse or menstrual periods. The bill also suggested that beating is also
permissible if a woman does not observe Hijab; interacts with strangers; speaks
loud enough that she can easily be heard by strangers; and provides monetary
support to people without taking consent of her spouse.
In a bill of 163-pages there are several
bans on women like ban on co-education after primary educations, ban on women
from taking part in military combat, ban on welcoming foreign delegations,
interacting with males and making recreational visits with ‘Na-Mehram’ (not
known), female nurses should not be allowed to take care of male patients and
women should be banned from working in advertisements etc….. The CII is a
powerful body because of its influence on political system in Pakistan. It
advises Pakistani legislature whether laws are in line with the teachings of
Islam.
I don’t know for how long blasphemy laws
allow me to speak about Islam or its teaching, but let me tell you; there is
difference between women, children and minorities rights and Islamic
permission. There are no equal rights for women and other minorities residing
in a nation in which the Quran and Sharia Law define culture and society and
its rule of law. Women rights given in Islam are the same as recommended by
CII. Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Iran are clear examples and so much so
Pakistan is another Sunni dominated Islamic country inspired by Saudi Arabia.
A Muslim apologist usually says that Islam
is religion of peace and provide the rights for women, children and for the
people of the Book like Christian and Jews. The Council must have given Islamic
references in support of these recommendations. And I am giving few quotes from
Quran about how Islam deal with other minorities, which one of my US friends
quoted.
In the
Quran, Christians are generally referred to as “people of the book” and then in
the various suras and ayahs (or chapters and verses) a number of references are
made. In 2:120, “Never will the Jews nor the Christians be pleased with you
till you follow their religion. Say: ‘Verily, Islamic Guidance is the only
Guidance. And if you were to follow their desires after what you have received
of Knowledge, then you would have against Allah neither any protector nor
helper.”
In 3:56: “As to those who disbelieve, I will punish them with a severe torment in this world and in the Hereafter, and they will have no helpers." In 3:85: “And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.” In 3:118: “O you who believe! Take not as your helpers or friends those outside your religion since they will not fail to do their best to corrupt you. They desire to harm you severely. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse. Indeed we have made plain to you the verses if you understand.”
3:178 states: “And let not the disbelievers think that our postponing of their punishment is good for them. We postpone the punishment only so that they may increase in sinfulness. And for them is a disgracing torment”. Hardly encouraging for the basis for a peaceful co-existence and a comfortable pluralism
In 3:56: “As to those who disbelieve, I will punish them with a severe torment in this world and in the Hereafter, and they will have no helpers." In 3:85: “And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.” In 3:118: “O you who believe! Take not as your helpers or friends those outside your religion since they will not fail to do their best to corrupt you. They desire to harm you severely. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse. Indeed we have made plain to you the verses if you understand.”
3:178 states: “And let not the disbelievers think that our postponing of their punishment is good for them. We postpone the punishment only so that they may increase in sinfulness. And for them is a disgracing torment”. Hardly encouraging for the basis for a peaceful co-existence and a comfortable pluralism
Muslim love of the Quran that tells them to
physically coerce non-Muslims through humiliation to convert or to kill them if
they insult Islam or its prophet Mohammad is a dooms day promise toward
Christians and other religious minorities in Pakistan.
CII recommendations could rightly be according
to Islam but legislature is not bound to obey it. Religions is one’s own
dealing with his creator but State deals with every individual’s matter and
have to protect every citizen. Today, anyone can construct mosque, synagogue or
temple in US or any Christian majority country and can worship according to his
faith but not in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Even if someone says
that constitution of Pakistan protect the rights of minorities but on ground
situation is totally different, Jews cannot even proclaim their faith in
Pakistan. And we are witness to the number of attacks on churches and temples and
on minorities in the country.
Decades back, Christian
majority countries have separated Church from the State matters. First amendment
to the United States Constitution includes a clause that calls for the
separation of church and state. Many people now espouse the belief that
American government was designed to include “an impenetrable wall” separating
church and state. Reason would have been same the domination of religious leadership
supervision over the state matters. One should learn a lesson from the history,
and may be tomorrow we will come up with the conclusion to do so, if we want to
survive.