Intolerance: can we save our future generations?

[Solomon2]

Intolerance: can we save our future generations?
If we do not agree with this policy of supporting or giving in to bigotry, then it's time that we take a firm stand as a people and force the government to not to give in
Huma Ijaz Zaman

SEPTEMBER 17, 2018

Intellectuals, judiciary, political parties, rulers and leaders have been giving space to extremists and bigots since as early as 1970s. It began with the popularly elected Zulfikar Ali Bhutto giving in to the unreasonable demands of Islamic parties followed by the Zia era which unleashed extremist Islam on Pakistan for a decade. Zia’s Islam was used to justify Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war and a generation was raised rooting for an extremist approach supporting a single sect of Islam. In the 90s this syndrome was toned down but after the September 11, 2001, incident; another uprising of the Taliban took place in Pakistan. From 2007 onwards came Qadri’s version of Islam and governance, holding an entire city hostage for days to the new movement of Tehreek-e-Labbaik, who in the last three years have gained power by blackmailing the sitting government to give to their bigoted demands.

The PTI government has also given in to them, during their first thirty days. Considering that religious-right parties only garnered 7 million votes, in comparison to all other parties who received over 40 million votes; it is clear that the majority of the Pakistani population does not want these religious parties in power. Then how come PTI, the majority vote-takers are failing to stand up to these bigots, or do anything about the deep rooted causes of terrorism in Pakistan?

Given the electorate verdict against extremism, it was questionable that the Prime Minister in his maiden speech didn’t even mention terrorism nor delineate his government’s policy on tackling the extremist issue. How many more civilians will die at their hands? How many more politicians will be shot? And how many more a soldiers will lose their lives fighting these bigots?

All these religious movements are about power whether it’s Khadim Hussain Rizvi, Lal Masjid or ‘good’ and ‘bad’ Taliban. It is power control through religion based terror used by some to impose their rule or others to retain their power and those who do not give in are finished. The Atif Mian episode is the tip of the iceberg. Sadly in his container speeches popular leader Imran Khan mentioned this very person to be a saviour for Pakistan and within 48 hours of his appointment gave in to extremists demands. The Prime Minister whom we had high hopes from, has given us a clear message that “extremists rule and Pakistanis lose”. Captain! This was a jolt to those who believed in you. It has disillusioned Pakistanis and overseas, letting the world know how blatantly discriminatory we are.

The Prime Minister whom we had high hopes from, has given us a clear message that “extremists rule and Pakistanis lose”. Captain! This was a jolt to those who believed in you. It has disillusioned Pakistanis at home and overseas, let the world know how blatantly bigoted we are​

Had ZAB not given into these intolerant parties in the 1970s, maybe we would have had a different Pakistan today. Had enough protested Zia’s Islamisation; it would have saved us from terrorism today. And had the PTI not taken grotesque steps to remove the pictures of Christmas cakes from text books in KP, perhaps we wouldn’t be facing the crisis of removing Atif Mian today. In the end, ZAB went to the gallows, wishing he had taken a firm stance against the unreasonable demands of religious zealots. Of course the 80s did worse to Pakistan and the damage still resonates in our generations. Past actions have always haunted leaders and governments but we still have not learnt our lesson.

In all institutions bigotry has seeped in, forcible observance of religion is the norm and non Muslims are not welcomed to key positions. 90 percent of Pakistan is Muslim and our religion is still under threat? This justification for Islamist movements that Muslims and Islam in Pakistan is under threat simply does not make sense to any reasonable person, especially when it comes from popular public leadership.

There are more Muslims living outside Pakistan as compared to those living in Pakistan. Many Muslims, including Pakistanis, are given jobs, key public offices in their governments and equal citizenship in UK, Canada, USA, Australia and European countries. In UK leaders of opposition, secretary state, ministers and the mayor of London are not only Muslims but of Pakistani origin. There is representation of Pakistani origin parliamentarians in Canada and in America, many other such examples can be found. Just imagine if they were removed from offices on basis of their religion how would the world react? How will Pakistan react?

By public showing of extreme actions of intolerance, Pakistan has infact left a question mark for equal opportunity for Muslims abroad. How will we react if a western country did this to Muslims? Why are we criticising Trump if we are exactly doing what he does? The history of giving into these forces who in the name of Islam have leashed a reign of terror on forcing politicians and leaders to give in to their extremely unreasonable demands robbing, this nation and its generations from peace for the last four decades and the nightmare is not stopping! Tomorrow these same forces will turn on sects within Islam — as some already do — then what?

When donations are asked for hospitals, schools, orphanages, flood funds dams should we discriminate there too? Maybe non-Muslim donations should not be accepted. Our leaders keep shoving us down this dark abyss of intolerance and bigotry, which will most likely be our undoing.

Today Pakistanis need to think very hard on what kind of Pakistan they want to live in and leave for their future generations. If we do not agree with this policy of supporting or giving in to bigotry, by any government, then it’s time that we take firm stand as people and force the government to “not to give in”. Government should be forced to listen to its electorate and seek the opposition’s support to unite against elements like TLP, otherwise soon politicians will be held hostagesn too by these extremists. Who would save us then? only we can save ourselves. The people of Pakistan have had enough of four decades of religious terror being forced on multiple generations. It is time to say “No” loud and clear and stand united and force the government to bow to the people’s will. Only this can save our future generations.

Lawyer writes on social & government issues and policy. Tweets @humzee1

Published in Daily Times, September 17th 2018.

 

[El Sidd]

Intolerance: can we save our future generations?
If we do not agree with this policy of supporting or giving in to bigotry, then it's time that we take a firm stand as a people and force the government to not to give in
Huma Ijaz Zaman

SEPTEMBER 17, 2018

Intellectuals, judiciary, political parties, rulers and leaders have been giving space to extremists and bigots since as early as 1970s. It began with the popularly elected Zulfikar Ali Bhutto giving in to the unreasonable demands of Islamic parties followed by the Zia era which unleashed extremist Islam on Pakistan for a decade. Zia’s Islam was used to justify Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war and a generation was raised rooting for an extremist approach supporting a single sect of Islam. In the 90s this syndrome was toned down but after the September 11, 2001, incident; another uprising of the Taliban took place in Pakistan. From 2007 onwards came Qadri’s version of Islam and governance, holding an entire city hostage for days to the new movement of Tehreek-e-Labbaik, who in the last three years have gained power by blackmailing the sitting government to give to their bigoted demands.

The PTI government has also given in to them, during their first thirty days. Considering that religious-right parties only garnered 7 million votes, in comparison to all other parties who received over 40 million votes; it is clear that the majority of the Pakistani population does not want these religious parties in power. Then how come PTI, the majority vote-takers are failing to stand up to these bigots, or do anything about the deep rooted causes of terrorism in Pakistan?

Given the electorate verdict against extremism, it was questionable that the Prime Minister in his maiden speech didn’t even mention terrorism nor delineate his government’s policy on tackling the extremist issue. How many more civilians will die at their hands? How many more politicians will be shot? And how many more a soldiers will lose their lives fighting these bigots?

All these religious movements are about power whether it’s Khadim Hussain Rizvi, Lal Masjid or ‘good’ and ‘bad’ Taliban. It is power control through religion based terror used by some to impose their rule or others to retain their power and those who do not give in are finished. The Atif Mian episode is the tip of the iceberg. Sadly in his container speeches popular leader Imran Khan mentioned this very person to be a saviour for Pakistan and within 48 hours of his appointment gave in to extremists demands. The Prime Minister whom we had high hopes from, has given us a clear message that “extremists rule and Pakistanis lose”. Captain! This was a jolt to those who believed in you. It has disillusioned Pakistanis and overseas, letting the world know how blatantly discriminatory we are.

The Prime Minister whom we had high hopes from, has given us a clear message that “extremists rule and Pakistanis lose”. Captain! This was a jolt to those who believed in you. It has disillusioned Pakistanis at home and overseas, let the world know how blatantly bigoted we are​

Had ZAB not given into these intolerant parties in the 1970s, maybe we would have had a different Pakistan today. Had enough protested Zia’s Islamisation; it would have saved us from terrorism today. And had the PTI not taken grotesque steps to remove the pictures of Christmas cakes from text books in KP, perhaps we wouldn’t be facing the crisis of removing Atif Mian today. In the end, ZAB went to the gallows, wishing he had taken a firm stance against the unreasonable demands of religious zealots. Of course the 80s did worse to Pakistan and the damage still resonates in our generations. Past actions have always haunted leaders and governments but we still have not learnt our lesson.

In all institutions bigotry has seeped in, forcible observance of religion is the norm and non Muslims are not welcomed to key positions. 90 percent of Pakistan is Muslim and our religion is still under threat? This justification for Islamist movements that Muslims and Islam in Pakistan is under threat simply does not make sense to any reasonable person, especially when it comes from popular public leadership.

There are more Muslims living outside Pakistan as compared to those living in Pakistan. Many Muslims, including Pakistanis, are given jobs, key public offices in their governments and equal citizenship in UK, Canada, USA, Australia and European countries. In UK leaders of opposition, secretary state, ministers and the mayor of London are not only Muslims but of Pakistani origin. There is representation of Pakistani origin parliamentarians in Canada and in America, many other such examples can be found. Just imagine if they were removed from offices on basis of their religion how would the world react? How will Pakistan react?

By public showing of extreme actions of intolerance, Pakistan has infact left a question mark for equal opportunity for Muslims abroad. How will we react if a western country did this to Muslims? Why are we criticising Trump if we are exactly doing what he does? The history of giving into these forces who in the name of Islam have leashed a reign of terror on forcing politicians and leaders to give in to their extremely unreasonable demands robbing, this nation and its generations from peace for the last four decades and the nightmare is not stopping! Tomorrow these same forces will turn on sects within Islam — as some already do — then what?

When donations are asked for hospitals, schools, orphanages, flood funds dams should we discriminate there too? Maybe non-Muslim donations should not be accepted. Our leaders keep shoving us down this dark abyss of intolerance and bigotry, which will most likely be our undoing.

Today Pakistanis need to think very hard on what kind of Pakistan they want to live in and leave for their future generations. If we do not agree with this policy of supporting or giving in to bigotry, by any government, then it’s time that we take firm stand as people and force the government to “not to give in”. Government should be forced to listen to its electorate and seek the opposition’s support to unite against elements like TLP, otherwise soon politicians will be held hostagesn too by these extremists. Who would save us then? only we can save ourselves. The people of Pakistan have had enough of four decades of religious terror being forced on multiple generations. It is time to say “No” loud and clear and stand united and force the government to bow to the people’s will. Only this can save our future generations.

Lawyer writes on social & government issues and policy. Tweets @humzee1

Published in Daily Times, September 17th 2018.

Look man No point in wasting Time.

You can put the Moon in one palm and the Sun in the other. Pakistanis will Not accept a false Prophet.

 

[Solomon2]

You can put the Moon in one palm and the Sun in the other. Pakistanis will Not accept a false Prophet.

Who is asking them to, exactly?

 

[El Sidd]

Who is asking them to, exactly?

Foreign funded legislature changes

 

[Reichsmarschall]

Intolerance: can we save our future generations?
If we do not agree with this policy of supporting or giving in to bigotry, then it's time that we take a firm stand as a people and force the government to not to give in
Huma Ijaz Zaman

SEPTEMBER 17, 2018

Intellectuals, judiciary, political parties, rulers and leaders have been giving space to extremists and bigots since as early as 1970s. It began with the popularly elected Zulfikar Ali Bhutto giving in to the unreasonable demands of Islamic parties followed by the Zia era which unleashed extremist Islam on Pakistan for a decade. Zia’s Islam was used to justify Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war and a generation was raised rooting for an extremist approach supporting a single sect of Islam. In the 90s this syndrome was toned down but after the September 11, 2001, incident; another uprising of the Taliban took place in Pakistan. From 2007 onwards came Qadri’s version of Islam and governance, holding an entire city hostage for days to the new movement of Tehreek-e-Labbaik, who in the last three years have gained power by blackmailing the sitting government to give to their bigoted demands.

The PTI government has also given in to them, during their first thirty days. Considering that religious-right parties only garnered 7 million votes, in comparison to all other parties who received over 40 million votes; it is clear that the majority of the Pakistani population does not want these religious parties in power. Then how come PTI, the majority vote-takers are failing to stand up to these bigots, or do anything about the deep rooted causes of terrorism in Pakistan?

Given the electorate verdict against extremism, it was questionable that the Prime Minister in his maiden speech didn’t even mention terrorism nor delineate his government’s policy on tackling the extremist issue. How many more civilians will die at their hands? How many more politicians will be shot? And how many more a soldiers will lose their lives fighting these bigots?

All these religious movements are about power whether it’s Khadim Hussain Rizvi, Lal Masjid or ‘good’ and ‘bad’ Taliban. It is power control through religion based terror used by some to impose their rule or others to retain their power and those who do not give in are finished. The Atif Mian episode is the tip of the iceberg. Sadly in his container speeches popular leader Imran Khan mentioned this very person to be a saviour for Pakistan and within 48 hours of his appointment gave in to extremists demands. The Prime Minister whom we had high hopes from, has given us a clear message that “extremists rule and Pakistanis lose”. Captain! This was a jolt to those who believed in you. It has disillusioned Pakistanis and overseas, letting the world know how blatantly discriminatory we are.

The Prime Minister whom we had high hopes from, has given us a clear message that “extremists rule and Pakistanis lose”. Captain! This was a jolt to those who believed in you. It has disillusioned Pakistanis at home and overseas, let the world know how blatantly bigoted we are​

Had ZAB not given into these intolerant parties in the 1970s, maybe we would have had a different Pakistan today. Had enough protested Zia’s Islamisation; it would have saved us from terrorism today. And had the PTI not taken grotesque steps to remove the pictures of Christmas cakes from text books in KP, perhaps we wouldn’t be facing the crisis of removing Atif Mian today. In the end, ZAB went to the gallows, wishing he had taken a firm stance against the unreasonable demands of religious zealots. Of course the 80s did worse to Pakistan and the damage still resonates in our generations. Past actions have always haunted leaders and governments but we still have not learnt our lesson.

In all institutions bigotry has seeped in, forcible observance of religion is the norm and non Muslims are not welcomed to key positions. 90 percent of Pakistan is Muslim and our religion is still under threat? This justification for Islamist movements that Muslims and Islam in Pakistan is under threat simply does not make sense to any reasonable person, especially when it comes from popular public leadership.

There are more Muslims living outside Pakistan as compared to those living in Pakistan. Many Muslims, including Pakistanis, are given jobs, key public offices in their governments and equal citizenship in UK, Canada, USA, Australia and European countries. In UK leaders of opposition, secretary state, ministers and the mayor of London are not only Muslims but of Pakistani origin. There is representation of Pakistani origin parliamentarians in Canada and in America, many other such examples can be found. Just imagine if they were removed from offices on basis of their religion how would the world react? How will Pakistan react?

By public showing of extreme actions of intolerance, Pakistan has infact left a question mark for equal opportunity for Muslims abroad. How will we react if a western country did this to Muslims? Why are we criticising Trump if we are exactly doing what he does? The history of giving into these forces who in the name of Islam have leashed a reign of terror on forcing politicians and leaders to give in to their extremely unreasonable demands robbing, this nation and its generations from peace for the last four decades and the nightmare is not stopping! Tomorrow these same forces will turn on sects within Islam — as some already do — then what?

When donations are asked for hospitals, schools, orphanages, flood funds dams should we discriminate there too? Maybe non-Muslim donations should not be accepted. Our leaders keep shoving us down this dark abyss of intolerance and bigotry, which will most likely be our undoing.

Today Pakistanis need to think very hard on what kind of Pakistan they want to live in and leave for their future generations. If we do not agree with this policy of supporting or giving in to bigotry, by any government, then it’s time that we take firm stand as people and force the government to “not to give in”. Government should be forced to listen to its electorate and seek the opposition’s support to unite against elements like TLP, otherwise soon politicians will be held hostagesn too by these extremists. Who would save us then? only we can save ourselves. The people of Pakistan have had enough of four decades of religious terror being forced on multiple generations. It is time to say “No” loud and clear and stand united and force the government to bow to the people’s will. Only this can save our future generations.

Lawyer writes on social & government issues and policy. Tweets @humzee1

Published in Daily Times, September 17th 2018.

we should follow foot step of Amrika (the epitome of human rights and Freedom) and put a blanket ban on all non muslims

 

[Dash]

Intolerance was fought between people of opposing side in every generation. It’s the threshold that separates mindsets.

Having said that intolerance has different meaning for different idiologies. To be practical it was always between my truth vs your truth.

Liberals will curse bhakts and Vica versa.

But we can’t ait together and don’t have the courage to see who wins.

So the saga will continue.

 

[Solomon2]

Foreign funded legislature changes

Are you sure these are to blame for the "false Prophet" Pakistanis won't accept? Consider:

...the practice of coercing women into forced marriages is in violation of not only Islamic laws but also Pakistani laws. Yet most Pakistani Muslims continue to engage in what is clearly a cultural practice deeply embedded in our society -
​

Seems clear what prophet Pakistanis are rejecting here, doesn't it?

 

[El Sidd]

Are you sure these are to blame for the "false Prophet" Pakistanis won't accept? Consider:

...the practice of coercing women into forced marriages is in violation of not only Islamic laws but also Pakistani laws. Yet most Pakistani Muslims continue to engage in what is clearly a cultural practice deeply embedded in our society -
​

Seems clear what prophet Pakistanis are rejecting here, doesn't it?

Every marriage is forced theologically.

 

[Reichsmarschall]

Are you sure these are to blame for the "false Prophet" Pakistanis won't accept? Consider:

...the practice of coercing women into forced marriages is in violation of not only Islamic laws but also Pakistani laws. Yet most Pakistani Muslims continue to engage in what is clearly a cultural practice deeply embedded in our society -
​

Seems clear what prophet Pakistanis are rejecting here, doesn't it?

what are you trying to prove here ?

In Just One Year, More Than 1,600 Women Were Murdered by Men in the U.S.
September 25, 2017 by Kali Holloway | 1 Comment
+1
Tweet
Share
Share
Toxic masculinity dictates that men dominate and control women in ways that often involve violence. This virulent form of social control constructs manhood and masculinity as inextricably tied to shows of strength and aggression. Psychologist and author Terry Real, perhaps the most informed voice on men’s issues and trauma, has said a gun is the most extreme version of toxic masculinity. The troubling reality of that statement is borne out by a new study finding that more than “1,600 women were murdered by men in 2015 and the most common weapon used was a gun.”

via Everytown

The report, titled “When Men Murder Women,” is compiled annually by the Violence Policy Center. Researchers analyzed data from 2015, the most recent year for which numbers are available. Study authors note that they examined “only those instances involving one female homicide victim and one male offender…the exact scenario—the lone male attacker and the vulnerable woman—that is often used to promote gun ownership among women.” What they found was that a gun in the home, generally bought to protect residents from intruders, was far more likely to be lethally used against a woman by an intimate partner, such as a boyfriend or husband. Report authors cite U.S. Department of Justice findings that show women are not only far likelier than men to be the victims of domestic abuse involving a weapon, they are attacked in their own homes more than any other location.

Disturbing findings detailed by study authors also include, per the report:

• For homicides in which the victim to offender relationship could be identified, 93 percent of female victims (1,450 out of 1,551) were murdered by a male they knew.
• Fourteen times as many females were murdered by a male they knew (1,450 victims) than were killed by male strangers (101 victims).
• For victims who knew their offenders, 64 percent (928) of female homicide victims were wives or intimate acquaintances of their killers.
• There were 266 women shot and killed by either their husband or intimate acquaintance during the course of an argument.
• Nationwide, for homicides in which the weapon could be determined (1,522), more female homicides were committed with firearms (55 percent) than with any other weapon. Knives and other cutting instruments accounted for 20 percent of all female murders, bodily force 11 percent, and murder by blunt object six percent. Of the homicides committed with firearms, 69 percent were committed with handguns.
• In 84 percent of all incidents where the circumstances could be determined, homicides were not related to the commission of any other felony, such as rape or robbery.

While murder is the most horrific outcome when domestic violence and guns intersect, weapons are also used as a means of intimidation in non-fatal cases of gun violence. Report authors point to a paper from the Harvard School of Public Health that determined “hostile gun displays against family members may be more common than gun use in self-defense, and that hostile gun displays are often acts of domestic violence directed against women.”

According to a 2016 report from the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the number of women buying guns has been growing faster than any other group in recent years. Between 2004 and 2011, the number of women gun owners reportedly skyrocketed by 77 percent. The NRA has helped drive those numbers, focusing its efforts over the last decade on women, whom the organization regards as an untapped market. The ludicrous ends the gun group has gone to include releasing a video this year hailing gun ownership by women as an act of feminist resistance, and putting on a “Concealed Carry Fashion Show” just this past August. Wrapped up in this messaging is the disproven idea that the only thing that can kill a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, and if a man isn’t around, an armed woman can do the job. But the Violence Policy Center study—which follows dozens upon dozens of surveys with similar findings—has proven yet again that gun ownership leads only to more gun violence, of which women are disproportionately the victims.

Researchers also noted that black women are more than twice as likely to be murdered by men as their white peers. Numerous anecdotal reports suggest that while gun sales overall have gone down since Donald Trump entered office, gun sales to black women have increased. All available evidence suggests those guns are more likely to be used against those women than to save them.

The report ranked U.S. states by their levels of the rate of women murdered by men, with the top 10 states as follows. (Each ratio represents the state’s homicide rate, females murdered by males.)

1. Alaska: 2.86 per 100,000
2. Nevada: 2.29 per 100,000
3. Louisiana: 2.22 per 100,000
4. Tennessee: 2.10 per 100,000
5. South Carolina: 1.83 per 100,000
6. Arkansas: 1.78 per 100,000
7. Kansas: 1.65 per 100,000
8. Kentucky: 1.60 per 100,000
9. Texas: 1.54 per 100,000
10. New Mexico & Missouri: 1.52 per 100,000

“Women killed by men are most often killed by someone they know and more than half were killed by an intimate partner,” Violence Policy Center legislative director Kristen Rand said in a statement. “Much more must be done to identify and implement strategies to prevent these tragedies. More resources are needed at the federal, state and local levels to help keep women safe.”

The study is available online in its entirety.

This article was made possible by the readers and supporters of AlterNet.

Kali Holloway is a senior writer and the associate editor of media and culture at AlterNet.


More than 200,000 children married in US over the last 15 years
Girls as young as 10 were among the minors who wedded under legal loopholes

• Chris Baynes
• Saturday 8 July 2017 09:47
• 167 comments

Click to follow
The Independent US
9408shares

Passers-by are stunned by a social experiment stunt held in New York to highlight child marriage ( YouTube )
More than 200,000 children were married in the US over the past 15 years, new figures have revealed.

Three 10-year-old girls and an 11-year-old boy were among the youngest to wed, under legal loopholes which allow minors to marry in certain circumstances.

The minimum age for marriage across most of the US is 18, but every state has exemptions – such as parental consent or pregnancy – which allow younger children to tie the knot.

In May, the high-profile Republican governor for New Jersey declined to sign into law a measure that would have made his state the first to ban child marriage without exception. Chris Christie claimed it would conflict with religious customs.

• READ MORE

New York raises age of consent for marriage from 14 to 18
At least 207,468 minors married in the US between 2000 and 2015, according to data compiled by Unchained At Last, a group campaigning to abolish child marriage, and investigative documentary series Frontline.

The true figure is likely to be much higher because 10 states provided no or incomplete statistics.

Fraidy Reiss, the founder of Unchained at Last, said she was "literally shaking" when she first obtained data for New Jersey, where her group is based.

Nearly 3,500 children married in the state between 1995 and 2012.

“That number was so much higher than I had thought it would be,” she told Frontline. “Then, the fact that the children were as young as 13 and the fact that it was mostly girls married to adult men.”

Social experiment reveals people's reactions to seeing a child bride
Eight-seven per cent of the minors who married across the country between 2000 and 2015 were girls, with the majority either 16 or 17.

The youngest wedded were three 10-year-old girls in Tennessee who married men aged 24, 25 and 31 in 2001. The youngest groom was an 11-year-old who married a 27-year-old woman in the same state in 2006.

Children as young as 12 were granted marriage licences in Alaska, Louisiana and South Carolina, while 11 other states allowed 13-year-olds to wed.

More than 1,000 children aged 14 or under were granted marriage licences.

Most states set the age of sexual consent between 16 and 18 and a person can be charged with statutory rape for having sex with a minor. Yet many children were granted marriage licences, approved by judges, before they could legally consent to sex.

Only 14 per cent of the children who wedded were married to other minors. Most married a partner aged 18 to 29, with 60 per cent aged between 18 or 20.

Republican refuses to repeal child marriage law

• This is why New Jersey is protecting child marriage

• Female Islamic clerics declare rare fatwa against child marriage

But in rare cases children were permitted to wed someone decades older.

A 14-year-old girl married a 74-year-old man in Alabama, while a 17-year-old wed a 65-year-old groom in Idaho.

Child brides usually come from poor backgrounds, said Jeanne Smoot, an attorney with the Tahirih Justice Centre.

she added: "Almost all the evidence indicates that girls in cities don’t get married young, that girls from middle class or wealthy families, don’t get married young. This is a rural phenomenon and it is a phenomenon of poverty."

The bill vetoed by Mr Christie in May had already been approved by both houses of the legislature and would have made New Jersey the first state to outlaw child marriage.

He said it should have an exception so a judge can approve marriages for 16- and 17-year-olds, and the measure could still become law if the legislators resubmit the bill with his recommended changes.

Last month New York banned children aged under 17 from marrying. Previously minors as young as 14 were allowed to wed under state law providing they obtained parental and court permission.


Post Nation
Nearly a third of U.S. women have experienced domestic violence



By Elahe Izadi
September 8, 2014
The abuse portrayed in the video that led to Ray Rice’s contract terminationshows Rice striking his then-fiancee, Janay Palmer, hitting her against an elevator wall, and dragging her out. The violent act has been widely condemned. It’s also all too common: More than 31 percent of women in the United States have been physically abused by an intimate partner at some point in their lives, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

That troubling statistic comes from the agency’s National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, released just last week. Researchers conducted more than 12,000 phone interviews in 2011, and also found that 19.3 percent of women (almost one in five) had been raped.

Intimate partner violence covers “physical, sexual or psychological harm” by a current or former partner, according to the CDC. In addition to experiencing physical abuse by a partner, an estimated 22.3 percent of women (and 14 percent of men) have experienced severe physical violence at the hands of an intimate partner.

Among the most common types of severe violence women experienced by intimate partners: being slammed against something and being hit with a fist or hard object.


Percentage of women who have experienced domestic violence, by type | Create Infographics
The survey also captured forms of non-physical abuse, with nearly half of women in the United States having experienced at least one act of psychological aggression by an intimate partner at some point in their lives. Psychological and emotional violence covers acts such as threats and coercion.

A 2003 CDC study funded by Congress found far-reaching impacts of such violence against women and zeroed in on the costs of such violence on everything from medical bills to lost time at work. Using survey data from 1995 — the same year 1,252 women were killed by an intimate partner — the CDC estimated physical abuse against a woman by an intimate partner results in 1.8 million injuries each year, with more than 500,000 of such injuries requiring medical care.

More than a quarter of such female abuse victims speak to a mental health professional. The survey also estimated 17.5 percent of women physically abused by their partners lost time from paid work.

Of course, all of these studies are the result of women actually telling researchers that they were abused. While the response rate for the 2011 survey wasn’t all that high (about 33 percent), CDC researchers conclude that the results likely underestimate how common such violence is in the United States.

“Victims who are involved in violent relationships or who have recently experienced severe forms of violence might be less likely to participate in surveys or might not be willing to disclose their experiences because of unresolved emotional trauma or concern for their safety,” researchers note.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Our future generations are safe, you need to stop wasting your time worrying about us, focus on your own country. I hope your kids are safe from gun violence, opioids epidemic, prostitution, bullying, road rage, or police shootings.

Intolerance: can we save our future generations?
If we do not agree with this policy of supporting or giving in to bigotry, then it's time that we take a firm stand as a people and force the government to not to give in
Huma Ijaz Zaman

SEPTEMBER 17, 2018

Intellectuals, judiciary, political parties, rulers and leaders have been giving space to extremists and bigots since as early as 1970s. It began with the popularly elected Zulfikar Ali Bhutto giving in to the unreasonable demands of Islamic parties followed by the Zia era which unleashed extremist Islam on Pakistan for a decade. Zia’s Islam was used to justify Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war and a generation was raised rooting for an extremist approach supporting a single sect of Islam. In the 90s this syndrome was toned down but after the September 11, 2001, incident; another uprising of the Taliban took place in Pakistan. From 2007 onwards came Qadri’s version of Islam and governance, holding an entire city hostage for days to the new movement of Tehreek-e-Labbaik, who in the last three years have gained power by blackmailing the sitting government to give to their bigoted demands.

The PTI government has also given in to them, during their first thirty days. Considering that religious-right parties only garnered 7 million votes, in comparison to all other parties who received over 40 million votes; it is clear that the majority of the Pakistani population does not want these religious parties in power. Then how come PTI, the majority vote-takers are failing to stand up to these bigots, or do anything about the deep rooted causes of terrorism in Pakistan?

Given the electorate verdict against extremism, it was questionable that the Prime Minister in his maiden speech didn’t even mention terrorism nor delineate his government’s policy on tackling the extremist issue. How many more civilians will die at their hands? How many more politicians will be shot? And how many more a soldiers will lose their lives fighting these bigots?

All these religious movements are about power whether it’s Khadim Hussain Rizvi, Lal Masjid or ‘good’ and ‘bad’ Taliban. It is power control through religion based terror used by some to impose their rule or others to retain their power and those who do not give in are finished. The Atif Mian episode is the tip of the iceberg. Sadly in his container speeches popular leader Imran Khan mentioned this very person to be a saviour for Pakistan and within 48 hours of his appointment gave in to extremists demands. The Prime Minister whom we had high hopes from, has given us a clear message that “extremists rule and Pakistanis lose”. Captain! This was a jolt to those who believed in you. It has disillusioned Pakistanis and overseas, letting the world know how blatantly discriminatory we are.

The Prime Minister whom we had high hopes from, has given us a clear message that “extremists rule and Pakistanis lose”. Captain! This was a jolt to those who believed in you. It has disillusioned Pakistanis at home and overseas, let the world know how blatantly bigoted we are​

Had ZAB not given into these intolerant parties in the 1970s, maybe we would have had a different Pakistan today. Had enough protested Zia’s Islamisation; it would have saved us from terrorism today. And had the PTI not taken grotesque steps to remove the pictures of Christmas cakes from text books in KP, perhaps we wouldn’t be facing the crisis of removing Atif Mian today. In the end, ZAB went to the gallows, wishing he had taken a firm stance against the unreasonable demands of religious zealots. Of course the 80s did worse to Pakistan and the damage still resonates in our generations. Past actions have always haunted leaders and governments but we still have not learnt our lesson.

In all institutions bigotry has seeped in, forcible observance of religion is the norm and non Muslims are not welcomed to key positions. 90 percent of Pakistan is Muslim and our religion is still under threat? This justification for Islamist movements that Muslims and Islam in Pakistan is under threat simply does not make sense to any reasonable person, especially when it comes from popular public leadership.

There are more Muslims living outside Pakistan as compared to those living in Pakistan. Many Muslims, including Pakistanis, are given jobs, key public offices in their governments and equal citizenship in UK, Canada, USA, Australia and European countries. In UK leaders of opposition, secretary state, ministers and the mayor of London are not only Muslims but of Pakistani origin. There is representation of Pakistani origin parliamentarians in Canada and in America, many other such examples can be found. Just imagine if they were removed from offices on basis of their religion how would the world react? How will Pakistan react?

By public showing of extreme actions of intolerance, Pakistan has infact left a question mark for equal opportunity for Muslims abroad. How will we react if a western country did this to Muslims? Why are we criticising Trump if we are exactly doing what he does? The history of giving into these forces who in the name of Islam have leashed a reign of terror on forcing politicians and leaders to give in to their extremely unreasonable demands robbing, this nation and its generations from peace for the last four decades and the nightmare is not stopping! Tomorrow these same forces will turn on sects within Islam — as some already do — then what?

When donations are asked for hospitals, schools, orphanages, flood funds dams should we discriminate there too? Maybe non-Muslim donations should not be accepted. Our leaders keep shoving us down this dark abyss of intolerance and bigotry, which will most likely be our undoing.

Today Pakistanis need to think very hard on what kind of Pakistan they want to live in and leave for their future generations. If we do not agree with this policy of supporting or giving in to bigotry, by any government, then it’s time that we take firm stand as people and force the government to “not to give in”. Government should be forced to listen to its electorate and seek the opposition’s support to unite against elements like TLP, otherwise soon politicians will be held hostagesn too by these extremists. Who would save us then? only we can save ourselves. The people of Pakistan have had enough of four decades of religious terror being forced on multiple generations. It is time to say “No” loud and clear and stand united and force the government to bow to the people’s will. Only this can save our future generations.

Lawyer writes on social & government issues and policy. Tweets @humzee1

Published in Daily Times, September 17th 2018.

 

[Solomon2]

what are you trying to prove here ?

Why am I the one posting Pakistani articles related to citizens' security and well-being rather than Pakistanis like yourself?

 

[VCheng]

Why am I the one posting Pakistani articles related to citizens' security and well-being rather than Pakistanis like yourself?

If da horse don't wanna drink watcha gonna do?

One must learnt to respect the will of the Pakistani people as a collective, whatever it may be.

 

[Reichsmarschall]

Why am I the one posting Pakistani articles related to citizens' security and well-being rather than Pakistanis like yourself?

as i asked before what concerns do you have viz a viz Pak being an Indian American?

 

[SHAH07]

I don't know why people associate intolerance with religious people.. Are liberals tolerant? .. Don't they try to impose their agenda /thinking on others ?

 

[Thorough Pro]

@Solomon2 this is perfect for you, you have the same intellect as our neighbours to the east
enjoy your "YUM SEEEE" lesson

Intolerance: can we save our future generations?
If we do not agree with this policy of supporting or giving in to bigotry, then it's time that we take a firm stand as a people and force the government to not to give in
Huma Ijaz Zaman

SEPTEMBER 17, 2018

Intellectuals, judiciary, political parties, rulers and leaders have been giving space to extremists and bigots since as early as 1970s. It began with the popularly elected Zulfikar Ali Bhutto giving in to the unreasonable demands of Islamic parties followed by the Zia era which unleashed extremist Islam on Pakistan for a decade. Zia’s Islam was used to justify Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war and a generation was raised rooting for an extremist approach supporting a single sect of Islam. In the 90s this syndrome was toned down but after the September 11, 2001, incident; another uprising of the Taliban took place in Pakistan. From 2007 onwards came Qadri’s version of Islam and governance, holding an entire city hostage for days to the new movement of Tehreek-e-Labbaik, who in the last three years have gained power by blackmailing the sitting government to give to their bigoted demands.

The PTI government has also given in to them, during their first thirty days. Considering that religious-right parties only garnered 7 million votes, in comparison to all other parties who received over 40 million votes; it is clear that the majority of the Pakistani population does not want these religious parties in power. Then how come PTI, the majority vote-takers are failing to stand up to these bigots, or do anything about the deep rooted causes of terrorism in Pakistan?

Given the electorate verdict against extremism, it was questionable that the Prime Minister in his maiden speech didn’t even mention terrorism nor delineate his government’s policy on tackling the extremist issue. How many more civilians will die at their hands? How many more politicians will be shot? And how many more a soldiers will lose their lives fighting these bigots?

All these religious movements are about power whether it’s Khadim Hussain Rizvi, Lal Masjid or ‘good’ and ‘bad’ Taliban. It is power control through religion based terror used by some to impose their rule or others to retain their power and those who do not give in are finished. The Atif Mian episode is the tip of the iceberg. Sadly in his container speeches popular leader Imran Khan mentioned this very person to be a saviour for Pakistan and within 48 hours of his appointment gave in to extremists demands. The Prime Minister whom we had high hopes from, has given us a clear message that “extremists rule and Pakistanis lose”. Captain! This was a jolt to those who believed in you. It has disillusioned Pakistanis and overseas, letting the world know how blatantly discriminatory we are.

The Prime Minister whom we had high hopes from, has given us a clear message that “extremists rule and Pakistanis lose”. Captain! This was a jolt to those who believed in you. It has disillusioned Pakistanis at home and overseas, let the world know how blatantly bigoted we are​

Had ZAB not given into these intolerant parties in the 1970s, maybe we would have had a different Pakistan today. Had enough protested Zia’s Islamisation; it would have saved us from terrorism today. And had the PTI not taken grotesque steps to remove the pictures of Christmas cakes from text books in KP, perhaps we wouldn’t be facing the crisis of removing Atif Mian today. In the end, ZAB went to the gallows, wishing he had taken a firm stance against the unreasonable demands of religious zealots. Of course the 80s did worse to Pakistan and the damage still resonates in our generations. Past actions have always haunted leaders and governments but we still have not learnt our lesson.

In all institutions bigotry has seeped in, forcible observance of religion is the norm and non Muslims are not welcomed to key positions. 90 percent of Pakistan is Muslim and our religion is still under threat? This justification for Islamist movements that Muslims and Islam in Pakistan is under threat simply does not make sense to any reasonable person, especially when it comes from popular public leadership.

There are more Muslims living outside Pakistan as compared to those living in Pakistan. Many Muslims, including Pakistanis, are given jobs, key public offices in their governments and equal citizenship in UK, Canada, USA, Australia and European countries. In UK leaders of opposition, secretary state, ministers and the mayor of London are not only Muslims but of Pakistani origin. There is representation of Pakistani origin parliamentarians in Canada and in America, many other such examples can be found. Just imagine if they were removed from offices on basis of their religion how would the world react? How will Pakistan react?

By public showing of extreme actions of intolerance, Pakistan has infact left a question mark for equal opportunity for Muslims abroad. How will we react if a western country did this to Muslims? Why are we criticising Trump if we are exactly doing what he does? The history of giving into these forces who in the name of Islam have leashed a reign of terror on forcing politicians and leaders to give in to their extremely unreasonable demands robbing, this nation and its generations from peace for the last four decades and the nightmare is not stopping! Tomorrow these same forces will turn on sects within Islam — as some already do — then what?

When donations are asked for hospitals, schools, orphanages, flood funds dams should we discriminate there too? Maybe non-Muslim donations should not be accepted. Our leaders keep shoving us down this dark abyss of intolerance and bigotry, which will most likely be our undoing.

Today Pakistanis need to think very hard on what kind of Pakistan they want to live in and leave for their future generations. If we do not agree with this policy of supporting or giving in to bigotry, by any government, then it’s time that we take firm stand as people and force the government to “not to give in”. Government should be forced to listen to its electorate and seek the opposition’s support to unite against elements like TLP, otherwise soon politicians will be held hostagesn too by these extremists. Who would save us then? only we can save ourselves. The people of Pakistan have had enough of four decades of religious terror being forced on multiple generations. It is time to say “No” loud and clear and stand united and force the government to bow to the people’s will. Only this can save our future generations.

Lawyer writes on social & government issues and policy. Tweets @humzee1

Published in Daily Times, September 17th 2018.