On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:54 AM, va <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/3/08, Divya Sampath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > There are many grounds for my objections to the > > multiple personal laws in India; apart from strong > > personal convictions about the separation of religion > > from state, they are discriminatory, particularly > > against women. > > Women are usually ignored by state/lawmakers and unless pressured are > treated as the weakest link/pawn in the larger scheme of things. Its > easier to pay lip service (to gender equality) put chains/controls > around them in the name of culture (or > religion/society/country/what-have-you..) than get the law implemented > instead of the paper tiger it currently is.
Which would make sense since most lawmakers are not women! There was this poem that I once read that said something along the lines of using the pickaxe instead of the key. Lawmakers are something like that, they create laws that appeal to both judicious uses of the law, and otherwise. I guess this is just the failure of laws and the written word, but I wish lawyers and judges didn't have to fight against outcomes that went against the word of the law versus the intent. Don't they understand? The intent always wins... Sigh, I wish it was that simple... Cheeni
