Afghanistan legalises rape

I can’t see this being a vote winner but then I’m not an Afghan. I would have thought that at least half the nations voters would be mildly pissed off by this change to the law.

Article 132 requires women to obey their husband’s sexual demands and stipulates that a man can expect to have sex with his wife at least “once every four nights” when travelling, unless they are ill.

I wonder if illness will now be on the rise in Afghan bedrooms. This law is pathatic in so many ways. It is appalling in what it tries to mandate. Policing such a decree would be madness. Are husbands meant to enact citizens arrests for non compliant wives? Or is the point simply to let raped wives know that the justice system has no interest in their plight.

12 thoughts on “Afghanistan legalises rape

  1. As of 2004 women in Afghanistan have the right to vote. About 40% of registered voters in Afghanistan are women. This law has been passed by a democratically elected government. The above post really demonstrates the need to have informed voters. I(and I may be wrong here) would think at least 40% of the electorate would have voted against this abhorrent reigeme if they had have known what was going to happen.
    The potential for something similar to happen in western democracies, assuming they are the best examples, is truly frightening, especially in countries with compulsary voting. OK I know we don’t have compulsary voting, we have compulsary attendance at polling booths, however it just gives unscrupulous, popularity mongers that much more opportunity to gain support from the great unwashed. Now whether by being populist or using fear and intimidation as their modus operandi really makes little difference, the result is the same.

  2. Whether they vote against it or not will depend on whether they are allowed to leave the house.

    As a member of “the great unwashed” you refer to, you supercilious bastard, I’m inclined to think they need a secular state rather than a theocracy or at least what is on the way to become one. Islam will always opt for these kind of laws as the only thing most of its adherents have as a status symbol is a compliant little woman submissively walking a couple of paces behind.

    Feminism is the biggest threat Islam has.

  3. “…as the only thing most of its adherents have as a status symbol is a compliant little woman submissively walking a couple of paces behind.”

    There was a joke doing the rounds a while back, about a liberal female journalist who was elated to notice women now walking in front of their husbands. Asking what had brought about such a positive change in a relatively short period of time, she was told, “land mines!”

  4. The voter turnout in the last election in Afghanistan was something less than 50%, of a total of 6200 polling stations only 16 did not operate, mostly due to local fighting. Given these numbers, a more moderate government could not have been that hard to get across the line, if a large enough portion of the population could be bothered to turn out. It just makes me nervous that in a country with such serious problems, ones that really make ours look like a storm in a teacup, you would think everyone who was eligible and able would want to have their say about how their country was run and they don’t.

  5. I do agree getting rid of religion out of politics and government, all of them, not just Islam, can only be a good thing. In fact getting rid of religion totally…hmmm…but that is an arguement for another time and place.

  6. Actually, this will probably reduce the marriage rate. Women simply won’t want to marry. Furthermore, it will encourage pre marital relationships (against the goals of radical Islam I suppose) – unless further draconian laws are introduced and women in general lose more rights.

  7. “Actually, this will probably reduce the marriage rate. Women simply won’t want to marry.”

    Assuming they get a say in the matter…

  8. How do you guys know that there aren’t Afghanastan women that support the proposed laws?
    They may believe it makes them a good wife and good Muslim to follow the Koran.

  9. Cameron Larkin, for a world without religion, look in the history books for ‘Hitler’, ‘Stalin’, ‘Mao’, and count the millions dead at the hands of atheists. And look at Pol Pot for recent attempts along the same lines. We don’t need to imagine a world without religion, because it’s been tried, and the results are NOT pretty.

  10. Tim – in practice I think that if the state demonstrates a bias against the basic human rights of women then women have a much higher incentive to seek out a husband. Serfs will elect to serve Lords when the state treats serfs as inconsequential.

  11. Nicholas,
    When it come to religion I am quite happy for anybody to have their own fantasies, but everyone should have the right to, for example, have an abortion, choose their own sexuality, choose to end their life, drink alcohol, choose their own clothes, etc. without interference from somebody quoting a 2000 year old poorly written novel at them.

  12. Cameron, the delusional fantasy “God does not exist” would be acceptable if kept within the confines of a person’s mind, but people try to live out these fantasies in real life! They try to base societies on them, and we can judge whether they are close to reality by the results. And when I look at the results, I am not impressed. (I am also not impressed by some religious societies, either, just to show I can be dispassionate)

Comments are closed.