In the ad it says that men wear hijab too. Funny, I never saw photos of Muslim men covering their faces.

Very clever ... someone should check up on where the money will be going.

Next its the Full Burqas for Solidarity.

Creeping sharia.

American women wearing the rag of shame for a lousey $5, thats selling out pretty cheap. What next the joy of stoneing and clitirectomies. You put that scarf on and your a Dhemmi and all that stands for, you've become slave minded.

I posted the following over at the link. It remains to be see whether it will ever see the light of day over there. So for the record, its here for anyone to see as it should be in a truly free society.

"I really fail to see how wearing the headscarf has anything to do with battered women. Its clear that the battered women are really secondary to this event. While promoting Islam is the primary reason. The discussion afterwards is not about battered women, but about the experience of wearing hijab. That is just one more proof. I say that this is not right in the least. You are using battered women for an ulterior motive. I would seriously re-think your approach. You look bad doing this.
Sure, there will be some ultra-liberal women who will be willing to participate. The others who will participate will do so out of guilt perhaps. Then during discussion, you will suggest to them ways of adjusting to the hijab. Then you will get to use the positive comments of these women for your real purpose. I reailze that you believe that wearing the hijab is what all women really want if they would just try it, and if they try it then they will prefer it, but that will never address the real issues behind it. Hijab teaches women and men that it is good to hide and to hoard. It teaches that a person's identity, value and dignity comes from what they wear. That a women can't be really respected for who she really is unless she wears a special costume. That she can't be free unless she hides herself away from men. That men cannot really respect women and treat them as equals without help. All of this says something wrong about the strength of men and women. It is a crutch that makes both men and women weaker and more dependent on something outside of themselves rather than on their inner strength.

And please, don't characterize wearing a scarf with creativity and personal expression. The variety of ways to wear hijab pales in comparison to other clothing styles. It is more uniform than any other style. What is more, how is it better to cover up your God-given individuality and identity in favor of some cloth. Our hair is part of that God-given, built in individuality. Our hair is part of the work of art that God has made of us. You don't hoard away a work of ark like some gold or silver in a vault. Art is meant to be shared. Hair has more functions than the sexual and is rightly classified by non-Muslims as proper to expose for this reason. When Muslim women cover their hair, their faces start to look less differentiated. They look more alike. But Western women are as different in appearance as they could be because we show our beautiful God-given hair and thus show our full individuality.

I am sure that you will not publish this comment. But just in case you want to surprise me by actually allowing free speech and full dialogue, I will be checking back here to see if you will allow this comment to see the light of day.

I hope that your event does not go well. I hope that you will in the future support and raise money for battered women without also benefiting yourselves. That is the right way to give. That is the right way to be truly charitable."

Here's the comment I posted, at the moment awaiting moderation:

Cute. Misogynist Islamists team up with a battered women’s shelter to promote the false notion that women are not second-class members of Muslim societies, where genital mutliations, forced marriages, wife beatings and honor killings are common.

In Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive or be in mixed company without a chaperone, and women convicted of having an affair are executed by beheading — which is probably a more humane execution than in Iran, where the condemned woman is buried up to the chest in a pit and then stoned to death.

Smooth move by the Islamists (MSA was founded by the Muslim Brotherhood) to advance their cause of creeping sharia by aligning with a progressive cause and getting non-Muslim women to identify with their would-be masters and oppressors by wearing a hijab.

in response to nappy headead ho

"In Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive or be in mixed company without a chaperone, and women convicted of having an affair are executed by beheading — which is probably a more humane execution than in Iran, where the condemned woman is buried up to the chest in a pit and then stoned to death."

this is a clear example of mixing up things.

1) women driving is not a religious issue its a cultural issue that will be changed with time, if and only if the saudi people say the want to change it.

2) execution of women having an affair is only to married women, and if she was married and practiced adultery then there must be 4 ( trusted) wittiness on her practicing adultery to execute her,
which is impossible 98% of the time.
and if 1 of the witnesses is thought to be lying then the excution of the women practicing adultry will be droped directly(in case his evidances has contradictions) and he will be lashed 80 times.

its more complex than what picky minds can bear.
as the saying goes; the man is enemy of what he doesnt now.

this is to make it clear on this topic.

Arabian,

Wrong and wrong.

The fact that women do not drive in SA is justified by religion as protecting the honor of the family and preventing adultery. It is most certainly not a cultural preference. Those who put the law into place and who continue to support it extract the principles for doing so from Islam. Just because there is no specifically worded law in the Koran saying that women can't drive does not mean that that the Islamic ideas of women's honor and the separation of women from men in order to protect their honor comes directly from Islamic theology. Whether that separation is acheived by hijab or by a screen in a mosque or by other measures, the principle is the same and it is the principle of separation that leads inevitably to inequality. Time after time in human history, it has been proven that separate but equal can not be acheived. No religion has been able to perfect it, regardless of any claims that they can. Just because one sincerely wants separate but equal to succeed does not make it any less impossible.

As for that silly law about the four witnesses as if this somehow exonerates the religion from the atrocity of killing women (and sometimes men) for adultery. 1) it doesnt make it better if it is rare. If even one person is so executed it is an evil of the highest order that makes the religion that allows for it guilty of evil. 2)The requirement can be easily met all kinds of ways, not the least of which would be to simply lie in wait to catch the suspected adulteress as she meets with her lover. If she is suspected she can be followed and caught in thr act. This is why these crimes are prosecuted. They are also overwhelmingly prosecuted against women who become pregnant (this is irrefutable evidence) and it is known that the husband could not have fathered the child. These women are caught in the act because they cannot conceal their pregnancy. 3) Finally, even if the requirement were not easy to acheive, it would be ridiculous and what is more it would be immoral. In other words, if the law is written in order to punish something that society considers bad but then it is written so that prosecution of the law is impossible, then the law contradicts itself by allowing for immorality to go unpunished as long as it is not obvious. That is hypocritical. It would be better to just eliminate the punishment rather than to execute the poor and pitiful few unlucky enough to get caught.

Now go chew on this for awhile before you come back trying to justify and minimize the true responsibility for inequality committed against women.

"Arabian,

Wrong and wrong.

The fact that women do not drive in SA is justified by religion as protecting the honor of the family and preventing adultery. It is most certainly not a cultural preference. Those who put the law into place and who continue to support it extract the principles for doing so from Islam. Just because there is no specifically worded law in the Koran saying that women can't drive does not mean that that the Islamic ideas of women's honor and the separation of women from men in order to protect their honor comes directly from Islamic theology. Whether that separation is acheived by hijab or by a screen in a mosque or by other measures, the principle is the same and it is the principle of separation that leads inevitably to inequality. Time after time in human history, it has been proven that separate but equal can not be acheived. No religion has been able to perfect it, regardless of any claims that they can. Just because one sincerely wants separate but equal to succeed does not make it any less impossible."

ok your right in some points. it relates to the saudi way of thinking. which is strict in women cases.

so from this point since it is not mentioned in the quran or sunna about women driving, so scholers, who are part of the strict saudi culture, which again makes them strict islamic scholers. abide by the fiqh rule (fiqh is the building block of sharie studies) the rule: keeping the harms away is better than bringing the benifits, if the benefits and harms are equell. so they consider car driving more harmefull than its benefits

while in other less strict countries scholers allow it. actually most schlers .
so again it is part of the culture as I said.

nowhere is it mentioned in the quran or sunna that women are not allowed to drive.

"As for that silly law about the four witnesses as if this somehow exonerates the religion from the atrocity of killing women (and sometimes men) for adultery. 1) it doesnt make it better if it is rare. If even one person is so executed it is an evil of the highest order that makes the religion that allows for it guilty of evil. 2)The requirement can be easily met all kinds of ways, not the least of which would be to simply lie in wait to catch the suspected adulteress as she meets with her lover. If she is suspected she can be followed and caught in thr act. This is why these crimes are prosecuted. They are also overwhelmingly prosecuted against women who become pregnant (this is irrefutable evidence) and it is known that the husband could not have fathered the child. These women are caught in the act because they cannot conceal their pregnancy. 3) Finally, even if the requirement were not easy to acheive, it would be ridiculous and what is more it would be immoral. In other words, if the law is written in order to punish something that society considers bad but then it is written so that prosecution of the law is impossible, then the law contradicts itself by allowing for immorality to go unpunished as long as it is not obvious. That is hypocritical. It would be better to just eliminate the punishment rather than to execute the poor and pitiful few unlucky enough to get caught.

Now go chew on this for awhile before you come back trying to justify and minimize the true responsibility for inequality committed against women."

the law is there not to punish and run after each women. its there to make order in the community.
the law doesnt contradicts itself when its there but executing is rare . its there to make public exposure of sin acts less( a prime reason not the only reason)

there is a part of fiqh ( as I presume you have a good background) that is intentions of laws, which far exceed the punishments itsself.
the punishment will be here or in the after life, but order is one of the intentions to make things work in the right manner in the society.

It's incredible that there are women in this country who gripe and moan about "inequality" yet they will certainly put on a headscarf to show "solidarity".

It's grotesque.

There is no way I will ever acquiesce to being a second class citizen and the hijab is nearly the biggest symbol of being a second class citizen that there is - second only to the burka.

It makes my stomach turn to even think that free American women will do this and pat themselves on the back for being so "inclusive".

Question for Arabian:

This goes to the subject of "keeping order in society" - is this really more important than human and civil rights, including rights for women?

Doesn't "keeping order in society," carried to this extreme, actually keep the society from progressing? Aren't creativity and innovation factors, to some degree, of disorder?

Can't societies tolerate some disorder, in fact, isn't it vital that societies tolerate disorder so that people as individuals can grow and thrive and in turn, enrich their societies?

I have a lot of trouble accepting the idea that "keeping order" must come at the cost of such repression - and it is repression. Women after all are not property - we own our own bodies and our own hearts and minds.

I realize this is a cultural and religious issue and hope I'm not treading on sensibilities. But I feel pretty strongly also that people, including women, must at some point be trusted to govern themselves. Should laws be broken, laws that protect the weak, that protect lives, property, etc, then there is recourse obviously - but governance of one's own body, including one's sexuality - that is an important human rights issue I think, and one that has consequences for all of us.

Save battered women!

......

from the men who would batter them for not wearing the Hijab.

You guys think you're secular, but you don't even know what it means to be secular. If you don't want to wear a hijab, don't. No one's being forced. Put a sock in it. Religious and cultural diversity are some of the things that make America most beautiful.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4jQi0Gjy3M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXzUuKdfnRE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OnBfPIohvU&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRXm5ttFC_s