I voted it's all about lies,an ather way just a lot fuss for nothing and show propaganda.Originally posted by shah reza@Apr 26th, 2004 - 11:36 am
WHAT HAPPENED TO RANIA’S EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN?
I don't think that you gave us much of a choice here. Your poll is very biased.
Yes i agree that QR doesn't have something to do with Haya's marriage,but she shows that she only talk talk and talk,if really she doesn't approving poligamy,the lesser thing to do is to don't take presence it that,at least she wasn't at Ali's engagement,she could to do the same in haya's engagement ,a way to show her disaprovement,but as i said what she says is a thing and what she acts is an other thing it's all about a show propaganda but the truth come out on now surfaceOriginally posted by madonna23@Apr 26th, 2004 - 4:07 pm
I don't think that you gave us much of a choice here. Your poll is very biased.
I agree. How about giving us the option "Rania has nothing to do with Haya's marriage."
Yes, well, "empowerment" one step at a time instead of no steps at all.Originally posted by Bubbette@Apr 26th, 2004 - 11:45 pm
The thing that is a little weird is that Rania is patron of a program that helps women work at home--because their husbands won't let them out of the house! Is that a good thing? It's in the Jordan Times.
The thing that is a little weird is that Rania is patron of a program that helps women work at home--because their husbands won't let them out of the house! Is that a good thing? It's in the Jordan Times.
in other words,that's meaning making things and life betterOriginally posted by alola@Apr 26th, 2004 - 11:39 pm
what's empowerment? Idin't find it in my dictionary
She is interested in what is called small projects, and people involved in these projects are not the women who can't work out because there husbands won't let them to do, but for poor families with small budgets to start a small project at home or with a group of people.
is that good or not? yes and no, for those poor people it can be useful, but on the long term Jordan economy can not be improved by the small projects, it requires a huge projects that can employ a large number of people.
It seems that there is no coordination between her and KA who is interested in large projects of computer industries and others which depends on the foreign investors so its contribution to jordan economy is minimal, they should both understand that the true development need large projects with patriot investments.
From what I have read Jordan still has a parliament (mainly men) and it appoints a judiciary (all men).Originally posted by papillon@May 8th, 2004 - 12:18 pm
What about honor killings? One thing I have never understood is how the JRF (KA, QR, QN, PA, and others) can speak out against honor killings, yet not put, if not a stop to them, at least the perpetrators behind bars for life. After all, it is an absolute monarchy. There is very little need for others to approve of anything the JRF wants to do. Can anyone shed light on that for me? It's puzzling.
They could start by making them illegal.Originally posted by papillon@May 7th, 2004 - 11:35 pm
Thanks, Wymanda. Yes, I know it's partly a cultural thing, which the JRF cannot necessarily control. But in terms of the legal codes that permit these crimes to go virtually unpunished, KA could overturn them by royal decree if he wants. It wouldn't stop the murders, but it would allow the murderers to be punished. It's a start, and it would send a very strong message to the people that the JRF really DOES abhor these practices and is willing to put its power behind its words. Life or death. . .it seems like one of the more worthy causes to stick one's neck out for.
Yes, but would they be punished?Originally posted by papillon@May 8th, 2004 - 12:35 pm
KA could overturn them by royal decree if he wants. It wouldn't stop the murders, but it would allow the murderers to be punished.
[/b][/quote]Originally posted by wymanda+May 8th, 2004 - 5:41 am--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (wymanda @ May 8th, 2004 - 5:41 am)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-papillon@May 8th, 2004 - 12:35 pm
KA could overturn them by royal decree if he wants. It wouldn't stop the murders, but it would allow the murderers to be punished.
As I said you have a judiciary made up soley of men.
It would be unlikely that they would hand down sentences to fit the crime. Most of them probably condone what these animals do.
The only alternative would be for KA to intervene and become lawmaker and Judge. This defeats the whole three arms of government scenario.
* Legislative
* Judicial
* Enforcement (Police)
Is KA to be all three rolled up into one man? I thought that was called a Dictator!
Sean, I see that you are understanding my point. In effect, KA is a dictator, as unpleasant as that word is to many of us. Jordan is not at all a democracy, so the three branches of government do not provide the checks and balances that we see in democratic nations.
But, Sean, your point about maintaining good relations with the tribal leaders is insightful to me. That could be the missing ingredient for me, perhaps explaining why no actions have been taken. Thanks.
I guess I still don't understand why KA can't change by royal decree the penal codes in Jordan to be consistent with the Constitution (which provides for gender equality), see what kinds of sentences are then handed down to the killers, and, if they remain far too lenient, issue another royal decree with mandatory sentencing guidelines. It seems to me a way of making mere words of support to the women of the country have actual backing from the very top.
My observation, exactly. All the words spoken against these crimes by the JRF ring hollow, once one realizes the power they have to change things.Originally posted by Sean.~@May 8th, 2004 - 2:55 pm
One would think it would be a relatively easy for an authoritarian leader to make the necessary changes. However, in this case, the political will is lacking.
Indeed, even in democracies, where governments are actually accountable to the electorate, the executive branch often has to take the 'bull by the horns' and pass (sometimes unpopular) legislation that protect the rights of the minority and/ or traditionally marginalized groups (look at the Indian constitution) from the tyranny of the majority regardless of the political fall-out.
A more likely reason might be because that the killings tend to be conducted in tribal areas outside the city,
and the RF is weary of alienating tribal leaders because that is the base of its support.
are you sure? I notice that the crimes happens more in the cities, as there are poor places there and hetrogeneous mix of people while rural areas are more homogeneous, conservative and abiding by relegion. I could not find any sources about the geograhical distribution of these crimes, do you have any?
*Some* tribal leaders protested. And I don't think all lawyers supported the article. For those who don't know, article 340 states that:remember that the tribal leaders participated in protesting law 340 of honor killing and they said that it is againest the Arab morals. while the lawyers are who supported the law.
Btw, is it just me or are there lots of laila's on this board (same name, different spelling)?