Please answer under the section. You may have to establish a google account in order for it to work, or switch the listing to anonymous and then sign your name.
1) I think that Saudi Arabia's rules for women aren't quite foolish, but the fact that the women don't have a choice in whether they have to follow them or not is. I think that women should be allowed to defend their practices, as it is their own personal choice to wear or do whatever they want within the parameters of the law.
2) I believe that the practices of one country should not matter to other countries, as long as no innocent is hurt and no one asks for help. Whole civilizations have been wiped out that did not deserve to be because people have come in and forced their own ideas onto others.
1. I agree with Marielle on this point. Saudi women can wear whatever sort of concealing garb they want. Similarly, they should be able to choose what they wear, rather than having their style severely cramped by laws, especially religious laws, which don't necessarily apply to all individuals. I agree with Kristof on some of his arguments concerning the foolishness of the strict rules for women, for example, a country which segregates its women into different facilities for religious and social reasons seems backwards and unjust. Women shouldn't have to go to a different swimming pool so as to not tempt men. Saudi men should learn to control their inordinate supplies of lust. Also, though I much prefer the female activist groups in Saudi Arabia which protest the restrictions by driving cars and shedding their cloaks and whatever other shenanigans, I can understand the decisions of Saudi women who wish to remain shrouded, though their arguments defending this choice are stupid. For example, Western women choose to participate in pornography or advertisements as a personal decision. Though of course they don't choose to be harassed, one would hope the harasser would be blamed for such a crime, rather than the harassee.
2. The federal government of one country should not meddle in the affairs of another country unless that country is suffering under inescapable crises such as genocides (like the Holocaust or the genocide in Darfur) or epidemics (like AIDS). However, cultural traditions such as polygamy or repression of women should be changed by individuals rather than governments. People like Kristof may try to change the views on the veil in Saudi Arabia, but it is up to Saudi men and women, and their own government, whether to change such a deeply held tradition.
1. I believe that the regulations imposed by the Saudis aren't foolish, but as Marielle said, it is foolish that the women have no power to change these regulations. The Saudi women who defend such practices say that under their traditional clothing they are still free to wear what they want, and they accept that this practice has been a staple of their culture for a very long time.
2. It is unfair for a country to intervene in the standards of other countries. It is acceptable for them to recommend changes in current standards of morality, but ultimately it remains the choice of the host country.
1. I agree with Marielle, that these strict rules aren't "foolish" but perhaps instead of being rules of the law, they should simply be rules of the religion to be followed when one chooses. It does not seem fair to force someone to wear certain clothes or do or not do certain things simply because of what gender he or she is. Also, it seems unreasonable for men and women to have to be segregated when partaking in certain social activities (swimming, playing sports, going to restaurants, etc). To answer the second part of the question: I think it is fine for women to defend these practices. I do not really feel I have a right to say they cannot defend what they believe. I may have an opposing opinion, but I cannot just keep these people from defending their practices and beliefs simply because I do not agree.
2. Despite the fact that countries may have starkly different standards pf morality, it does not seem to be the place of one country to involve itself in the affairs of another country except when innocent people of the country are being harmed or injured. In cases such as the dress of these Saudi Arabian women, it it not another country's job or obligation to come in and change the other country's system. If the people of the country want to change the way things are, they can. Just because countries have different opinions and customs does not mean one country can attempt to, in their opinion, "fix" the other country.
1. I disagree with Kristof's statement that these rules are "foolish." Although I see no point to these rules myself, I would not be so insulting as to call it foolish. If one's religion is so conservative, then so be it. I see nothing wrong with Saudi Arabian women defending what they believe in. I do, however, agree with Kristof's statement in paragraph 14 that these rules should not be government enforced so that those who are not religious may be treated equally. 2. If the citizens are happy with the way the country is run - truly happy and not just forced to say so - then it is none of our business, even if we believe they are brainwashed. If, like in Iran recently, people are not happy, then it is our duty to help them out. The people must come to this conclusion on their own because if we "help" them when they do not want to be helped, then is it really helping?
1. I also agree with Marielle, the laws aren't foolish; however, the rules shouldn't be the laws of the country. Rather they should just be religious laws that women can choose to follow but are not forced to by law. On another note I believe that it is fine for women to defend this practice. To say otherwise would be to say that women do not have the freedom to believe in a practice and defend it. In other words by saying that women cannot defend these restricting practices we are in fact attempting to restrict them.
2. I believe that each country should be able to decide for itself what it's standards should be. In most cases a country's laws reflect the opinion of a majority of the country's citizens. Because of this I believe that foreign countries can suggest a course of action; however they should abstain from interfering
1. I will agree and say that these strict rules for women are "foolish." However, I believe that the reason I agree is simply because of the culture in which I was raised, and the Saudi Arabian women defend such practices because of the culture in which they were raised. The Saudi Arabian women find our culture unjust as we see their culture unjust. Someone in America would be quick to judge and find flaws in their culture, but I find it unfair to judge the justice in the culture of these Saudi Arabian women from an outside perspective (cultural relativism?). However, even though it may seem contradictory, coming from a Western culture's perspective, I find their laws to be persecuting.
2. Repeating from my earlier answer, I reaffirm my belief that is unfair to judge another culture from an outside perspective. Because of this idea, cultural traditions should not be questioned by other governments, except for, like Keyan said, cases such as torture and genocide. However, because of the state of nature, humans will consistently continue to want to oppress their culture upon other nations.
1. I think it is rude to call someone else's culture "foolish" no matter how much it differs from ours. The fact that they have such strict rules is their own business. I personally would not be comfortable with their practices, but perhaps that is only because I was raised in a different environment. I think it is wrong for the women and men involved to be forced to adhere to these rules, as there is undoubtely a faction that does not agree with the customs being discussed. However, the Saudi Arabians will not change their laws until they are ready to do so. If Saudi Arabian women feel that they have more freedom in this mode of dress and conduct, who are we to tell them they don't know what they're talking about? We have freedom of religion and expression in our country, so it seems silly to criticize others for not conforming to our preconceptions of what these freedoms are.
2. One should not judge another country's standard of morality without bearing in mind what judgments they may be passing on oneself. One definitly should not intervene in any way, as, if one does not understand the culture, one cannot do anything other than harm. One does not need to condone practices that are against one's own moral standards, but one needs to accept that other morals are just as valid and should not be toyed with needlessly.
1) This is yet another example of religion being used as a vehicle with which to oppress a group based on a distinguishing characteristic, as in this case gender. The argument of "it's just their culture" never works. Was it just "part of the southern culture" for Pre-Civil War people to have slaves? If you argue that "culture" justifies oppression, then you are part of problem. Do I believe that people have the right to choose what they wear? Of course. However, these women have very few choices. If one of them decides to go against the grain and take off their conservative clothing, they are considered "strange" and "inappropriate." Once there is a shift in thinking, and men and women are considered equal and women can dress however they want in front of men without being considered strange, then I would have less of a problem with women dressing conservatively. However, in the end, this is a choice based on religion, which I have a problem with, and ultimately, when women dress conservatively like this, all they do is reinforce their subservience. 2) The second question is quite tricky. In one sense, countries with oppressive and harmful practices should change. However, no foreign government has a right to try to enforce their subjective view on other nations. I mostly agree with Keyan on this point, some situations do require immediate action, and all the . The only point I disagree on (and it is quite possible that I am misinterpreting his argument) is that the fact that it is a deeply held tradition means that more pause should be given before abolishing it. It is up to the people to fight to abolish unjust practices; however, this can be impossible when fighting against an oppressive government. I know I haven't really answered the question; I am quite torn on this issue.
1. Obviously, to American women, these rules would seem "foolish," but difference of cultures always has to be taken into account. To me, they are foolish, but to a typical Saudi Arabian woman, they probably aren't. I respect the rights of these women to defend the way they dress and live, because it is part of their culture, although I agree with Kristof in his opinion that these women should at least have the choice. When (if ever) these laws are changed, then we'll see just how many Saudi Arabian women really want to dress extremely conservatively, be allowed only in certain buildings, and otherwise be blatantly discriminated against.
2. On this point, I agree with Keyan. One country cannot go and force its standards/opinions on another, unless it is a matter of life and death. The world wouldn't really be able to function otherwise. The Saudi Arabian women being discriminated against will (hopefully) eventually see or be educated about the way that these laws governing their lives are unjust.
1. I personally do not believe these beliefs are foolish. One would think that in today's time, where equality and open- mindedness prevail, practices such as covering ones face or not being allowed to drive would not be deemed as "foolish". People might not necessarily believe the same things as Saudi Arabian women, but just because it is different does not make it bad.
2. I agree with Arun- one country should not be allowed to have a say in the standards of another country. While it is OK to not share the same standards, it is not acceptable to act differently to a country that has different values that you have.
1. I think Julia makes a good point; differences in culture alter perceptions of what is and is not "foolish". Personally, I believe that these practices are foolish because I was raised in a country where separate but equal is not equal. Additionally, I believe that these Saudi Arabian women do want equal rights, but don't live in a society or have the means to attain them. However, like Julia pointed out, to these Saudi Arabian women, this "repression" is not only practical, but a normal part of their lifestyle. I think that the Saudi Arabian women who defend such practices are fearful of what modernization and a step toward equality will bring. I don't think these women foolish, rather afraid to liberate themselves in a hostile society.
2. It is difficult to distinguish the point where it is appropriate for one country to intervene and contest with another country's standards and culture. However, when situations such as genocide, oppression, and other violent scenarios are prevalent, intervention of another country should not only be expected, but is a necessity.
1. Saudi Arabia is basing policy off of religious law, and therefore is violating the concept of separation of church and state. Although you can't say that it is "foolish" since, in fact, the policy is very pragmatic and effective in preventing opposition to the government, it is wrong and should not be tolerated. While there may be many Saudi women who believe they are fair laws, they do not speak for all women in the country, thus, their personal opinions are not effective as evidence defending the policies based on the Koran. Saudi Arabia should rescind the strict rules to allow the women who believe they are unjust to have their freedom, and those who believe they are just laws should just continue their previous lifestyles and mind their own business.
2. In the context of the general population, the people may think whatever they want. However, in the diplomatic level, between government bodies, they should not condone or condemn the actions of other states, as morals are defined by either religion or the general population, and the purpose of the government is not to impose the will of its people or its people's ideology on other nations. The one exception to this, however, is if another country's standard of morality causes the violation of established, recognized, and irrefutable international laws such as the Geneva Conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, or even treaties and agreements between countries. When these are broken, the country who did not violate anything in this context may take whatever action necessary to rectify the situation.
1. I do not believe Saudi Arabia's strict rules for women to be "foolish"; however, I do feel that women should have a choice in the matter. These rules are not "foolish" because they have been a way of religion and lifestyle to an abundant amount of people for many years. Nevertheless, times are changing and women should have the right to equality if they so choose. I think it is great to see Saudi Arabian women fighting to defend their religious practices, yet they also must realize that some women in their country may want these freedoms and both groups should keep an open opinion.
2. I do not feel one country has the right to go into another country and change their standards, laws, and rules. On the other hand, I believe it is a country's responsibility to recommend changes and give advice to another country even if it is not taken.
1: similar to julia's point, i think that although we may consider the rules "foolish", the Saudi Arabian women disagree. likewise, they may regard our society as "foolish" also, but from our perspective, we don't necessarily think so. these "rules" are a part of their culture. 2: countries have the right to share their different beliefs, but i dont think that they should be able to intervene or to force their beliefs upon the country. however, unless the problem is universally/morally unacceptable, countries should have the right to get involved, such as the rwandan genocide
1) I think it is a bit foolish that they have these strict rules that they force upon their women. This violates what many regard as a basic human right. On the other hand, it would be patronizing for us to attempt to help these women because it appears, based on their reactions to that they either want to slowly liberate themselves or are really content with the way things are. Perhaps the Saudi Arabian women who defend these practices do so because they don't want to go from one patriarchal influence to another; perhaps they don't want Western standards thrust upon them. I think that this is their own battle thus far and that it should be left to them unless they give indication that they want or really need help.
2) To intervene in the policies of other countries has done more harm than help in past instances. It too often leads to military action as this seems to often be the only way that countries can effectively exercise force over other countries. Military action has only hindered such situations in the past. It is best to just stick to commenting on such policies from afar and hope that someday the country may reevaluate their practices.
1. The continued enforcement of religious dress code in Saudi Arabia is absolutely foolish, but as with all disagreement with religious laws, it is also foolish to combat the laws from an outsider perspective, especially if one is dealing with a religion as large and as powerful as Islam. Saudi Arabian women who defend these policies are merely a product of their environment, as we are a product of ours; however, the strict enforcement of these codes makes one question the honesty in the defense of the Saudi woman. The only way to truly find out who supports the social codes and who doesn't would be to lift them, and observe the sections of the society that uphold the tradition, as well as to what degree. Kristof describes this way of life as a "choice," and the validity of his observation could either hold to be very true or very wrong if one were to conduct such a giant, manipulative social experiment on a global scale, which of course will never happen due to the feared intertwining of secular government intervention in a religious society.
On another note, I fail to see how when a government intervenes on the purpose of equalizing or subduing religious groups in public as demonstrated in the Hiyab short film ISN'T a breach into religious territory by the government. True separation of church and state would involve a more complete disconnect with the line drawn at the right to choose and practice religion.
2. As stated many times in previous comments, forcing, or even suggesting the instatement of any contrasting moral standard in a society will likely be taken as offense and lead to conflict. Countries should simply support and embrace different ideas while continuing to diplomatically debate what I think should be focused on specifically as "societal repression." "Morality" is too vague and too religiously involved a word to be an actual focus of any government or large body of people, for it would be passing judgement on the morals of large groups of people, as religions already do so commonly, while the concept of repression would be based off of the perspective of the repressed individual or certain demographic, not the stereotyped "morals" of a large society.
1) I don't agree with these rules because they single out one gender and take away its rights and freedom; however, I believe that the women have chosen to view these rules in a positive way, whether they are really happy with these rules or they just want to make the best of a situation they think they can't get out of. Either way, their view on these rules shows how they thought of the rules in a different way allowing them to approach it with their own logic and detismine that the rules aren't so bad.
2)I don't think countries should interfere with others on matters such as gender-based and religious rights. We could end up hurting Saudi Arabia instead of helping it. Especially if the women have this view of these rules, any form of military action would be completely unnecessary. In the past, rulers such as Charlemagne have attempted to "help" other countries by forcing Christianity on them. While he thought he was doing the right thing, he ended up killing many people over religious beliefs
Please answer under the section. You may have to establish a google account in order for it to work, or switch the listing to anonymous and then sign your name.
ReplyDelete1) I think that Saudi Arabia's rules for women aren't quite foolish, but the fact that the women don't have a choice in whether they have to follow them or not is. I think that women should be allowed to defend their practices, as it is their own personal choice to wear or do whatever they want within the parameters of the law.
ReplyDelete2) I believe that the practices of one country should not matter to other countries, as long as no innocent is hurt and no one asks for help. Whole civilizations have been wiped out that did not deserve to be because people have come in and forced their own ideas onto others.
1. I agree with Marielle on this point. Saudi women can wear whatever sort of concealing garb they want. Similarly, they should be able to choose what they wear, rather than having their style severely cramped by laws, especially religious laws, which don't necessarily apply to all individuals. I agree with Kristof on some of his arguments concerning the foolishness of the strict rules for women, for example, a country which segregates its women into different facilities for religious and social reasons seems backwards and unjust. Women shouldn't have to go to a different swimming pool so as to not tempt men. Saudi men should learn to control their inordinate supplies of lust. Also, though I much prefer the female activist groups in Saudi Arabia which protest the restrictions by driving cars and shedding their cloaks and whatever other shenanigans, I can understand the decisions of Saudi women who wish to remain shrouded, though their arguments defending this choice are stupid. For example, Western women choose to participate in pornography or advertisements as a personal decision. Though of course they don't choose to be harassed, one would hope the harasser would be blamed for such a crime, rather than the harassee.
ReplyDelete2. The federal government of one country should not meddle in the affairs of another country unless that country is suffering under inescapable crises such as genocides (like the Holocaust or the genocide in Darfur) or epidemics (like AIDS). However, cultural traditions such as polygamy or repression of women should be changed by individuals rather than governments. People like Kristof may try to change the views on the veil in Saudi Arabia, but it is up to Saudi men and women, and their own government, whether to change such a deeply held tradition.
1. I believe that the regulations imposed by the Saudis aren't foolish, but as Marielle said, it is foolish that the women have no power to change these regulations. The Saudi women who defend such practices say that under their traditional clothing they are still free to wear what they want, and they accept that this practice has been a staple of their culture for a very long time.
ReplyDelete2. It is unfair for a country to intervene in the standards of other countries. It is acceptable for them to recommend changes in current standards of morality, but ultimately it remains the choice of the host country.
1. I agree with Marielle, that these strict rules aren't "foolish" but perhaps instead of being rules of the law, they should simply be rules of the religion to be followed when one chooses. It does not seem fair to force someone to wear certain clothes or do or not do certain things simply because of what gender he or she is. Also, it seems unreasonable for men and women to have to be segregated when partaking in certain social activities (swimming, playing sports, going to restaurants, etc). To answer the second part of the question: I think it is fine for women to defend these practices. I do not really feel I have a right to say they cannot defend what they believe. I may have an opposing opinion, but I cannot just keep these people from defending their practices and beliefs simply because I do not agree.
ReplyDelete2. Despite the fact that countries may have starkly different standards pf morality, it does not seem to be the place of one country to involve itself in the affairs of another country except when innocent people of the country are being harmed or injured. In cases such as the dress of these Saudi Arabian women, it it not another country's job or obligation to come in and change the other country's system. If the people of the country want to change the way things are, they can. Just because countries have different opinions and customs does not mean one country can attempt to, in their opinion, "fix" the other country.
1. I disagree with Kristof's statement that these rules are "foolish." Although I see no point to these rules myself, I would not be so insulting as to call it foolish. If one's religion is so conservative, then so be it. I see nothing wrong with Saudi Arabian women defending what they believe in. I do, however, agree with Kristof's statement in paragraph 14 that these rules should not be government enforced so that those who are not religious may be treated equally.
ReplyDelete2. If the citizens are happy with the way the country is run - truly happy and not just forced to say so - then it is none of our business, even if we believe they are brainwashed. If, like in Iran recently, people are not happy, then it is our duty to help them out. The people must come to this conclusion on their own because if we "help" them when they do not want to be helped, then is it really helping?
1. I also agree with Marielle, the laws aren't foolish; however, the rules shouldn't be the laws of the country. Rather they should just be religious laws that women can choose to follow but are not forced to by law. On another note I believe that it is fine for women to defend this practice. To say otherwise would be to say that women do not have the freedom to believe in a practice and defend it. In other words by saying that women cannot defend these restricting practices we are in fact attempting to restrict them.
ReplyDelete2. I believe that each country should be able to decide for itself what it's standards should be. In most cases a country's laws reflect the opinion of a majority of the country's citizens. Because of this I believe that foreign countries can suggest a course of action; however they should abstain from interfering
1. I will agree and say that these strict rules for women are "foolish." However, I believe that the reason I agree is simply because of the culture in which I was raised, and the Saudi Arabian women defend such practices because of the culture in which they were raised. The Saudi Arabian women find our culture unjust as we see their culture unjust. Someone in America would be quick to judge and find flaws in their culture, but I find it unfair to judge the justice in the culture of these Saudi Arabian women from an outside perspective (cultural relativism?). However, even though it may seem contradictory, coming from a Western culture's perspective, I find their laws to be persecuting.
ReplyDelete2. Repeating from my earlier answer, I reaffirm my belief that is unfair to judge another culture from an outside perspective. Because of this idea, cultural traditions should not be questioned by other governments, except for, like Keyan said, cases such as torture and genocide. However, because of the state of nature, humans will consistently continue to want to oppress their culture upon other nations.
-Sarah Normoyle
1. I think it is rude to call someone else's culture "foolish" no matter how much it differs from ours. The fact that they have such strict rules is their own business. I personally would not be comfortable with their practices, but perhaps that is only because I was raised in a different environment. I think it is wrong for the women and men involved to be forced to adhere to these rules, as there is undoubtely a faction that does not agree with the customs being discussed. However, the Saudi Arabians will not change their laws until they are ready to do so. If Saudi Arabian women feel that they have more freedom in this mode of dress and conduct, who are we to tell them they don't know what they're talking about? We have freedom of religion and expression in our country, so it seems silly to criticize others for not conforming to our preconceptions of what these freedoms are.
ReplyDelete2. One should not judge another country's standard of morality without bearing in mind what judgments they may be passing on oneself. One definitly should not intervene in any way, as, if one does not understand the culture, one cannot do anything other than harm. One does not need to condone practices that are against one's own moral standards, but one needs to accept that other morals are just as valid and should not be toyed with needlessly.
--Sarah Brenneman
1) This is yet another example of religion being used as a vehicle with which to oppress a group based on a distinguishing characteristic, as in this case gender. The argument of "it's just their culture" never works. Was it just "part of the southern culture" for Pre-Civil War people to have slaves? If you argue that "culture" justifies oppression, then you are part of problem. Do I believe that people have the right to choose what they wear? Of course. However, these women have very few choices. If one of them decides to go against the grain and take off their conservative clothing, they are considered "strange" and "inappropriate." Once there is a shift in thinking, and men and women are considered equal and women can dress however they want in front of men without being considered strange, then I would have less of a problem with women dressing conservatively. However, in the end, this is a choice based on religion, which I have a problem with, and ultimately, when women dress conservatively like this, all they do is reinforce their subservience.
ReplyDelete2) The second question is quite tricky. In one sense, countries with oppressive and harmful practices should change. However, no foreign government has a right to try to enforce their subjective view on other nations. I mostly agree with Keyan on this point, some situations do require immediate action, and all the . The only point I disagree on (and it is quite possible that I am misinterpreting his argument) is that the fact that it is a deeply held tradition means that more pause should be given before abolishing it. It is up to the people to fight to abolish unjust practices; however, this can be impossible when fighting against an oppressive government. I know I haven't really answered the question; I am quite torn on this issue.
1. Obviously, to American women, these rules would seem "foolish," but difference of cultures always has to be taken into account. To me, they are foolish, but to a typical Saudi Arabian woman, they probably aren't. I respect the rights of these women to defend the way they dress and live, because it is part of their culture, although I agree with Kristof in his opinion that these women should at least have the choice. When (if ever) these laws are changed, then we'll see just how many Saudi Arabian women really want to dress extremely conservatively, be allowed only in certain buildings, and otherwise be blatantly discriminated against.
ReplyDelete2. On this point, I agree with Keyan. One country cannot go and force its standards/opinions on another, unless it is a matter of life and death. The world wouldn't really be able to function otherwise. The Saudi Arabian women being discriminated against will (hopefully) eventually see or be educated about the way that these laws governing their lives are unjust.
1. I personally do not believe these beliefs are foolish. One would think that in today's time, where equality and open- mindedness prevail, practices such as covering ones face or not being allowed to drive would not be deemed as "foolish". People might not necessarily believe the same things as Saudi Arabian women, but just because it is different does not make it bad.
ReplyDelete2. I agree with Arun- one country should not be allowed to have a say in the standards of another country. While it is OK to not share the same standards, it is not acceptable to act differently to a country that has different values that you have.
-Aaron
1. I think Julia makes a good point; differences in culture alter perceptions of what is and is not "foolish". Personally, I believe that these practices are foolish because I was raised in a country where separate but equal is not equal. Additionally, I believe that these Saudi Arabian women do want equal rights, but don't live in a society or have the means to attain them. However, like Julia pointed out, to these Saudi Arabian women, this "repression" is not only practical, but a normal part of their lifestyle. I think that the Saudi Arabian women who defend such practices are fearful of what modernization and a step toward equality will bring. I don't think these women foolish, rather afraid to liberate themselves in a hostile society.
ReplyDelete2. It is difficult to distinguish the point where it is appropriate for one country to intervene and contest with another country's standards and culture. However, when situations such as genocide, oppression, and other violent scenarios are prevalent, intervention of another country should not only be expected, but is a necessity.
1. Saudi Arabia is basing policy off of religious law, and therefore is violating the concept of separation of church and state. Although you can't say that it is "foolish" since, in fact, the policy is very pragmatic and effective in preventing opposition to the government, it is wrong and should not be tolerated. While there may be many Saudi women who believe they are fair laws, they do not speak for all women in the country, thus, their personal opinions are not effective as evidence defending the policies based on the Koran. Saudi Arabia should rescind the strict rules to allow the women who believe they are unjust to have their freedom, and those who believe they are just laws should just continue their previous lifestyles and mind their own business.
ReplyDelete2. In the context of the general population, the people may think whatever they want. However, in the diplomatic level, between government bodies, they should not condone or condemn the actions of other states, as morals are defined by either religion or the general population, and the purpose of the government is not to impose the will of its people or its people's ideology on other nations. The one exception to this, however, is if another country's standard of morality causes the violation of established, recognized, and irrefutable international laws such as the Geneva Conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, or even treaties and agreements between countries. When these are broken, the country who did not violate anything in this context may take whatever action necessary to rectify the situation.
1. I do not believe Saudi Arabia's strict rules for women to be "foolish"; however, I do feel that women should have a choice in the matter. These rules are not "foolish" because they have been a way of religion and lifestyle to an abundant amount of people for many years. Nevertheless, times are changing and women should have the right to equality if they so choose. I think it is great to see Saudi Arabian women fighting to defend their religious practices, yet they also must realize that some women in their country may want these freedoms and both groups should keep an open opinion.
ReplyDelete2. I do not feel one country has the right to go into another country and change their standards, laws, and rules. On the other hand, I believe it is a country's responsibility to recommend changes and give advice to another country even if it is not taken.
1: similar to julia's point, i think that although we may consider the rules "foolish", the Saudi Arabian women disagree. likewise, they may regard our society as "foolish" also, but from our perspective, we don't necessarily think so. these "rules" are a part of their culture.
ReplyDelete2: countries have the right to share their different beliefs, but i dont think that they should be able to intervene or to force their beliefs upon the country. however, unless the problem is universally/morally unacceptable, countries should have the right to get involved, such as the rwandan genocide
1) I think it is a bit foolish that they have these strict rules that they force upon their women. This violates what many regard as a basic human right. On the other hand, it would be patronizing for us to attempt to help these women because it appears, based on their reactions to that they either want to slowly liberate themselves or are really content with the way things are. Perhaps the Saudi Arabian women who defend these practices do so because they don't want to go from one patriarchal influence to another; perhaps they don't want Western standards thrust upon them. I think that this is their own battle thus far and that it should be left to them unless they give indication that they want or really need help.
ReplyDelete2) To intervene in the policies of other countries has done more harm than help in past instances. It too often leads to military action as this seems to often be the only way that countries can effectively exercise force over other countries. Military action has only hindered such situations in the past. It is best to just stick to commenting on such policies from afar and hope that someday the country may reevaluate their practices.
This is Mitch.
ReplyDelete1. The continued enforcement of religious dress code in Saudi Arabia is absolutely foolish, but as with all disagreement with religious laws, it is also foolish to combat the laws from an outsider perspective, especially if one is dealing with a religion as large and as powerful as Islam. Saudi Arabian women who defend these policies are merely a product of their environment, as we are a product of ours; however, the strict enforcement of these codes makes one question the honesty in the defense of the Saudi woman. The only way to truly find out who supports the social codes and who doesn't would be to lift them, and observe the sections of the society that uphold the tradition, as well as to what degree. Kristof describes this way of life as a "choice," and the validity of his observation could either hold to be very true or very wrong if one were to conduct such a giant, manipulative social experiment on a global scale, which of course will never happen due to the feared intertwining of secular government intervention in a religious society.
On another note, I fail to see how when a government intervenes on the purpose of equalizing or subduing religious groups in public as demonstrated in the Hiyab short film ISN'T a breach into religious territory by the government. True separation of church and state would involve a more complete disconnect with the line drawn at the right to choose and practice religion.
2. As stated many times in previous comments, forcing, or even suggesting the instatement of any contrasting moral standard in a society will likely be taken as offense and lead to conflict. Countries should simply support and embrace different ideas while continuing to diplomatically debate what I think should be focused on specifically as "societal repression." "Morality" is too vague and too religiously involved a word to be an actual focus of any government or large body of people, for it would be passing judgement on the morals of large groups of people, as religions already do so commonly, while the concept of repression would be based off of the perspective of the repressed individual or certain demographic, not the stereotyped "morals" of a large society.
1) I don't agree with these rules because they single out one gender and take away its rights and freedom; however, I believe that the women have chosen to view these rules in a positive way, whether they are really happy with these rules or they just want to make the best of a situation they think they can't get out of. Either way, their view on these rules shows how they thought of the rules in a different way allowing them to approach it with their own logic and detismine that the rules aren't so bad.
ReplyDelete2)I don't think countries should interfere with others on matters such as gender-based and religious rights. We could end up hurting Saudi Arabia instead of helping it. Especially if the women have this view of these rules, any form of military action would be completely unnecessary. In the past, rulers such as Charlemagne have attempted to "help" other countries by forcing Christianity on them. While he thought he was doing the right thing, he ended up killing many people over religious beliefs