> "sunny" <am...@...> wrote: > "Women Will Not Drive Cars in Saudi > Arabia!" Refleksi : Apa pendapat > Anda jika di NKRI bertindak seperti > di Arab Saudia wanita dilarang > mengemudi kendaraan?
Melarang wanita menyetir mobil di Arab Saudia itu merupakan satu contoh pelanggaran HAM di negara Syariah Islam !!! Jadi enggak bakalan bisa terjadi di Indonesia karena Indonesia adalah negara Pancasila yang menolak Syariah Islam. Sejak pertama kali negara ini terbentukpun, segelintir keturunan Arab di Indonesia sudah berusaha memaksakan negara ini berbentuk negara Syariah Islam namun melalui referendum, voting atau berbagai cara2 teror ternyata Syariah Islam itu tetap ditolak. Syariah Islam melarang wanita keluar rumah, melarang wanita bekerja, melarang wanita berolah raga, melarang wanita berjalan bersama teman2 laki2 dan perempuan meskipun bukan berpacaran, melarang wanita berenang dikolam renang umum, memaksa wanita menutupi seluruh muka, kepala hingga ujung kakinya agar tidak terlihat laki2 yang bukan muhrimnya. Terlalu banyak larangan2 bagi wanita dalam Syariah Islam yang tidak masuk akal lainnya yang kesemuanya melanggar HAM. Bahkan wanita dilarang memberikan suaranya dalam pemilu. Dalam pengadilan sekalipun, kesaksian wanita cuma dinilai setengah dari kesaksian laki2. Apalagi dalam soal warisan, wanita itu dianggap tidak perlu warisan, dan ada kalanya dikasihani boleh disanguin sepersekian dari bagian sisa setelah warisan laki2 dibagikan. Bahkan wanita boleh diceraikan suaminya tanpa dinafkahi. Cukup tidak memberi nafkah selama 6 bulan maka seorang isteri sudah syah diceraikan. Celakanya, isteri yang sudah diceraikan juga sekalipun masih wajib memberi kepuasan sex bagi bekas suaminya karena meskipun sudah diceraikan tetap saja dilarang berhubungan sex dengan laki2 lainnya. Itulah sebabnya, kalo seorang wanita diceraikan ada tingkatannya yang dinamakannya sebagai talak ke1, talak ke2 dan talak ke3. Barulah setelah keluar talak ke3 maka wanita itu boleh menikahi laki2 lainnya. Pokoknya, Syariah Islam itu adalah sisa2 kebiadaban masa lalu yang masih dipertahankan segelintir muslimin karena mereka tidak tahu bahwa peradaban dunia sekarang menolak kebiadaban masa lalu umat manusia ini. Mereka tetap mempertahankan dan ngotot dengan jihad Islam teror2-nya karena percaya bahwa Syariah Islam ini harus dipertahankan sebagai kewajiban umat kepada Allahnya. Jelas kita enggak mungkin mundur kembali kepada peradaban biadab masa lalu itu. Ny. Muslim binti Muskitawati. > > http://www.aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=2&id=21106 > > Women Will Not Drive Cars in Saudi Arabia! > > 28/05/2010 > By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed > > > Repeated appeals to the official authorities in Saudi Arabia to put an end to > the ban on women being allowed to drive have been to no avail. Women will not > be sitting in the driver's seat anytime soon, despite a huge number of text > messages and emails calling for this by those who advocate women being > permitted to drive. > > All campaigns to remedy this situation have failed, and in my opinion this is > as a result of a mistake being made by attempting to take a shortcut with > regards to convincing the government to change its position on this issue. I > personally believe that it is impossible to convince any government, > regardless of one's influence, of something without there first being > widespread public acceptance of the idea. Those who oppose this idea base > their opposition on the official rejection of this, as well as on religious > and social aspects as well. It may be difficult for others, by which I mean > those outside of Saudi Arabia, to believe that a large proportion of Saudi > Arabian men and women are against the idea of women driving cars, especially > as this is something normal and ordinary to them, and women also ride > donkeys, horses, and camels. Those outside of Saudi Arabia believe that this > ban exists in opposition to the will of the public, but we do not know if > this is true, in light of the lack of polling information to reveal public > opinion on this issue. > > Lately efforts have been focused on convincing the government to put an end > to the ban, and to keep pace with the rest of the world. However this is not > a smart bet, as it is the policy of all governments in the world to avoid > taking unnecessary risks and refrain from swimming against the stream. Those > who cite the example of Rosa Parks, the African-American civil rights > activist who refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white passenger in > defiance of racially discriminative laws at the time, fail to understand that > change does not take place after just one incident. The woman in question was > arrested, and buses remain segregated for a long time afterwards. However > what was important was rallying public opinion against this [discriminative > law]. > > Is the problem in Saudi Arabia more complex than the race problem in the US? > Perhaps the mistake lies in the 40-year delay in issuing the decision > recognizing a woman's right to drive as back then this was neither an issue > nor a demand however it gradually became a custom then a law. > > Despite this, today there are more than a few clerics who acknowledge the > right of women to drive. There is also a growing proportion of society that > supports this idea; however there is a large percentage of Saudi Arabians who > are still concerned, scared, sceptical, and oppose change. The ban on women > driving has become something of a symbol for them, and the government is > attempting to take the middle path, as it does not want to impose change from > above. > > It would be much easier to impose this from above if there was sufficient > public support for this idea. However is there truly public support towards > ending the ban on women driving? Nobody knows. The general impression is no, > but we might be wrong. When we say "public support" we do not mean in the > democratic concept of a "slim majority" or "51 percent" but rather what we > require is an overwhelming majority. > > Why is it important to secure an overwhelming majority? Since when have > decisions been taken in accordance with opinion polls? An overwhelming > majority is beneficial in this case as it would allow the idea to become > reality with only a little official push. A slim majority on the other hand > would result in bitter social and political division. Feeling the pulse of > the general public is the easiest way to making this decision. Many things > that were socially and officially taboo have become acceptable as an everyday > reality as a result of popularity, including satellite television, whereas > today satellite dishes can be seen on rooftops everywhere. The same applies > to mobile phones with built-in cameras; they were originally banned however > this was reserved due to popular demand. > > I am certain that convincing public opinion in Saudi Arabia would be easier > than trying to push the government towards taking a decision granting women > the right to drive. The same reasons that justify the ban justify it being > lifted, as this ban has increased the number of scandals, disgraces, and > losses. >
