 |
| |
|
|
aneeshm
|
 |
Indore , Madhya Pradesh
Jul 2001
time: 10:50
|
|
First , a bit of the background .
After Indian independence , the nation's founding fathers decided , in view of the multitude of cultures present in India ( and also due to political pressure from different community leaders ), to split the law into two sections , criminal and civil law , and to make criminal law common to all communities , while civil law varies depending upon the community . One community's leaders in particular were very vocal about wanting an independent civil code - I think you've guessed by now that that was the Islamic community and their leaders . They , however , had not the guts to ask to keep criminal laws separate ( the Sharia is very , very strict , and imposes very harsh penalties on the smallest transgressions ) .
One of the objectives was that , at an unspecified time in the future , the civil code would be unified and the entire country would be governed by one law . Due to political apathy and resistance from Islamic community leaders , this has not yet happened .
Now for the examples I give that will shock you and give you an idea of what imposing Islamic law on Muslims actually means . Note that this is a criticism of both , Islamic law as well as the current system .
The first case I come to was that of Shah Bano . This is a woman who was divorced by her husband just by her husband's utterance of the word "Talaq" ( which means divorce ) thrice . This form of divorce is held legal in India if you're a Muslim , because marriage and divorce are under civil law . This poor woman went to the court to get alimony . The case went till the Supreme Court , and the Supreme Court ruled that she get alimony .
The government in power , scared of displeasing the Islamic community leaders by appearing to encroach on Islamic personal law , caved and nullified the court decision . Shah Bano lost the case - after more than seven years of fighting it through the legal system . And she has children to support - the husband is not taking any responsibility for them , though by law he is expected to do so .
The second case is currently a matter of national debate , and deals with another woman who is suffering due to the double standards inherent in the partial adoption of any legal code . It is the case of Imrana .
Imrana is a woman who was raped by her father-in-law . She went to court , and her father-in-law will be convicted of rape and sentenced accordingly ( following Indian criminal law , common to all communities ) .
A Muslim law board , however , has issued a fatwa saying that now that she has been raped , she cannot go back to her husband , as according to Islamic law , if a woman has sexual relations with anyone from their husband's family , she is "haram" ( forbidden ) to her husband and , she must , in this case , renounce her husband , marry her father-in-law , and accept her husband as her son .
According to Islamic law , a rapist is to be stoned to death . So this means that the father-in-law is punished according to Indian common criminal law , but the poor women is forced to follow Islamic law .
In my opinion , it is best if the government gives all communities an ultimatum - by this date , you have to decide whether you want to make law uniform , or you want criminal law , too , to be split up . After being confronted with the Sharia and its harshness , I'm sure that the Islamic community will accept common law .
This is a rant to prove three points - that all cultures are not inherently equal , that Islamic law is f***ed up and has no place in a democratic society that values human rights , and that the current Indian civil legal system sucks .
Opinions ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Aneeshm - that's what you get when you take a system of law codified over a millenia ago, and then try to apply it to a modern society. Their are Muslims who are trying to bring a more modern aspect to their religion, but they are going to have a long, hard, vicious fight.
Look at the problems with fundamentalist Christians in the USA and the vitriol they spew towards Gays. Look at our friend BK here and his viewpoint about any hormonal form of birth control, and the fact that he would ban them as abortificants, if he could. There are millions of Christians who would do this, and impose this on non-Christians or Christians who disagree with them, i.e. the often villified "liberal" Christians.
I don't the history of Hindu's and the problems of reconciling systems of laws codified millenia ago with the modern world. Right now, in the modern world, it appears pretty conclusively that Islam is having the hardest problem with this - at least with the three largest world religions. Plus Islam as written is quite intolerant of other religions, with the best Christians and Jews can hope for is to be second class citizens, and if you are a Hindu - you are a pagan, and may be forcibly converted by the sword. It will be interesting to watch Islam try to work through some of it's intrinsic intoleracne, i.e. what the Koran states.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zevico
|
|
Melbourne
Apr 2002
time: 15:20
|
|
When you get down to it you'll find that all religious law of any religion is plain ridiculous. Jewish and Christian law are not so far 'behind' Islamic law in this respect. I can't speak about other religions with any knowledge, but I'll cynically add they are probably no better either.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tattila the Hun
Phuh, I'm starting to wish Krutchev had not backed down during the Cuban Missile Crisis... No more worries. |
Despite all the fear evoked by the Cuban missle crisis it appears that the Soviet threat at that time was largely an illusion, The SU had only 12 intact ICBM missles and they were not certain of their functionality. They had bombs which could be carried by bombers, but at the time they had not yet developed the technology of in-flight refueling, so they had no bombers capable of reaching the US from Russia. The US OTOH could have dropped hundreds of bombs on the SU. The result would not have been the end of the world, but a major defeat for the SU and severe devastation of the SU and Europe.
India, as head of the "non-aligned nations" would have scarcely been affected.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
VetLegion
|
|
Even if same law applies in theory, in practice it could very well mean little. See the example of the caste system.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
VetLegion
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by aneeshm
Like the printing press was vital to the Christian renaissance , the Internet is going to be one of the driving forces behind the Islamic modernisation . |
While I am also of the opinion that Islamic countries will be forced by world events to resolve their issues, I think you have the wrong media there.
Not the internet.
TV in every house. Hundreds of channels, all of them propagating western values. It raises expectations around the world as we speak, and it makes us more alike. TV can't be stopped (for better or worse).
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-07-2005 17:26
|