Caroline Lucas, a member of the Green Party faction in the European Parliament, is a longtime activist in anti-nuclear, animal-rights and environmentalist causes, and not someone likely to describe herself as an anti-feminist. Yet in June 2004, she joined British MPs Fiona Mactaggart of Labor and Sarah Teather of the Liberal Democrats for a press conference in the House of Commons organized by the Assembly for the Protection of Hijab. The Assembly, better known as Pro-Hijab, is a pan-European organization formed "to campaign nationally and internationally for the protection of every Muslim woman's right to wear the Hijab in accordance with her beliefs and for the protection of every woman's right to dress as modestly and as comfortably as she pleases."How about the protection of a Muslim woman's right not to wear one? How about protection of even more basic rights than that? In countries where a man's word is worth twice that of a woman's. Or where she can't leave the country, or even the house without her husband's or a man's permission. Or where she can't drive a car.
Or where she can be beaten on the slightest pretext or become the victim of an honor killing by the male members of her family after being raped because she is now unclean.
Or if she resists and kills in self-defense or in defense of a younger girl she can be charged with murder and face execution.
Even in America, where unfortunately Wahhabi Islam is widespread, imams counsel beating women "lightly", and we have seen at least one honor killing. And the most prominent Muslim organization in America, CAIR, is at the very least an apologist for terrorists, and there is evidence of terrorist ties. Groups like the Muslim Student Association present sweet little seminars in Kansas about how liberating the hijab is, while in San Francisco and Montreal they mob Jews.
For feminists and the left, political expediency always, always trumps principle. Victimology always triumphs over the rule of law. Because you see, they view Muslims as an ethnic minority and as such they can not be questioned. Actually the multicultural approach is not non-judgemental and egalitarian in this case---Muslims have superior moral authority as supposed victims of the West. Hirsi Ali:
As to the charges that she is an "Enlightenment fundamentalist," she points out, rightly, that people who live in democratic societies are not supposed to settle their disagreements by killing one another.And apparently it's Islamophobic to ask this: "Where do you stand on the statement that a wife should obey her husband and that he can hit her if she fails to do so?", as German immigration is doing now. The morality of the feminists and the left is very blinkered. I guess this is an issue of privacy, now extended from the fetus to the wife. The effect of this is to empower bullies of women, bullies of fellow Muslims who have more gentle beliefs, and bullies of non-believers in Islam. Some have murder in mind for us, starting as always with the Jews. And eventually the extremists will probably murder the left, unless they are stopped. One of them already murdered Theo van Gogh.
And yet contemporary democracies, she says, accommodate the incitement of such behavior: "The multiculturalism theology, like all theologies, is cruel, is wrongheaded, and is unarguable because it is an utter dogmatism. . . . Minorities are exempted from the obligations of the rest of society, so they don't improve. . . . With this theory you limit them, you freeze their culture, you keep them in place."
So feminists, liberals and Democrats, when you decry the war on terror we are fighting for your liberty as "not in our name", think about that hijab with your name on it. Or worse.
UPDATE: Ordinary Americans gathered on the mall to take on the anti-war left in numbers that shocked the media (they still downplayed the numbers of patriots and showed unrepresentative pix). Michelle Malkin here. Rick Moran:
History ended yesterday. Or at least one version of it. Or perhaps it didn’t end as much as it was overthrown, trampled by the feet of 30,000 ordinary Americans who gathered on the mall and along the broad avenues in Washington to confront those who have, either wittingly or witlessly, given aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States for more than 40 years.And this from another blogger who was there. Pix and video of the good guys outnumbering the bad guys:
In my opinion, this Gathering of Eagles rally has done more for the healing of the wounds these veterans have been burdened with for forty years than any wall or memorial could ever. It was if they’d finally been given the opportunity to face their oppressors. There were no sorrowful stares, no sympathetic words. It was all smiles and laughter.
All of those years of anger that had been bottled up was directed against their common enemy - moral and intellectual laziness. The world had to listen to them, the citizens who had sacrificed and paid the price and came home to the disapproval of the citizens who had never spent an uncomfortable moment in their lives.
One veteran told me, “We’re here because those guys who are fighting in Iraq deserve better than what we got when we came home. No one stood up for us, but by God, we’re standing up for them. And if we don’t, who will?”