Comments on: Friday Links — December 4, 2009

By: beka

beka — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:57:10 +0000

An ASEAN human rights meeting of Muslim activists encouraged ijtihad in combating repressive interpretations of syariah being implemented, pointing out that women are more adversely affected by such a phenomenon. [Source]

By: Rochelle

Rochelle — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 21:23:01 +0000

oh man i’m not sure how I missed that michelle malkan pop up. I retract my comment.

By: Zahra (with a Z)

Zahra (with a Z) — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 21:13:08 +0000

Re the American Prospect piece, I for one am tired of articles that argue that because SOME Muslims believe X, we should make a law based on it that will affect the entire community. The article calls for banning the niqab entirely in the US! Yes, I’d love to see more widespread public acknowledge of the very different attitudes toward niqab and other forms of covering, but I just don’t think it’s right for non-Muslims to arbitrate between different interpretations of the faith and decide which one is the “correct” one. (The authors may well be Muslim themselves, but the forum is not, and they’re calling for a national law to be made by non-Muslims.)

Also, the comments on that article are stomach-turningly racist.

By: Sobia

Sobia — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 06:45:37 +0000

I agree with both Rochelle and Fatemeh. As Rochelle said, I think it *is* important to present the “other” viewpoint as this in one rarely seen in mainstream media (minus the fear mongering of course). However, when I also saw the Michelle Malkin pop up it made me seriously wonder about the intentions of the publication itself – obviously a right-wing one. Nonetheless, I still think the overall message of the article is a necessary one to have in the conversation, just not in a right-wing forum.

By: Fatemeh

Fatemeh — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:51:02 +0000

Whoops–it’s up now. Thanks for catching that!

By: Fatemeh

Fatemeh — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:38:02 +0000

Mostly the stuff you already mentioned. Plus, the fact that an ad with Michelle Malkin pops up before you read the article doesn’t give me a lot of confidence in their viewpoint.

By: Rochelle

Rochelle — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:58:45 +0000

Why the eyeroll on the American Spectator article Fatemeh? There were certainly things about the piece that I did not like (e.g. calling CAIR “radical”, which is absurd). But there were also a lot of nuances that the article deserves credit for, like differentiating between different forms of hijab (instead of lumping it all into the “veil”), calling our attention to the diversity in Muslim women’s dress and cultures, and using religious arguments when discussing the niqab. I think its important for non-Muslims (and Muslims too) to realize that niqab is not a religious obligation but a personal choice, and that when men coerce Muslim women into wearing the niqab, they are speaking from a perspective of patriarchy and not religious authority.

By: ALC

ALC — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 08:33:45 +0000

Missing the link for “Female Iraqi refugees bear the heaviest burdens.”