 | ||||
Menu
April 18, 2008
NEWS
The most admired Independent Kurdish Newspaper from the heart of Kurdistan.
For Kurdish Women’s Issues
SOMA Digest, Iraqi Kurdistan's one and only English-language news digest
Hevallo actively supports the Kurdish Freedom Struggle.
An Independent Online Kurdish-English Newspaper
Separating state and love
Kurdishaspect.com - Prepared by Art-in-Mind
You probably saw the wives of a missing Joe on television. If Joe was there, he might have argued he married all of those ladies because they felt they were weak and needed his support. Any Joe or Moe who first institutionalized polygamy might have used this argument to justify being married to multiple women at the same time.
The construct of men having many spouses without women having the same rights is discriminatory in nature. Like all of those who justify any discrimination, polygamists might expect us to believe in their views in order to understand them. Even without believing in their belief, the interviewed wives could be understood from a human rights perspective.
Instead of answering the questions about the whereabouts of the missing Joe, the wives were asking the state to give their children back to them. In their mindset the legality of polygamy was irrelevant, since they were following a different law. One might have sympathy for them as they miss their children, yet sympathy for their dysfunctional legal system might be difficult.
In a functional legal system the citizens have the capacity to make informed decision, abide laws, and do so without violating anyone’s rights. A believer that forcers one’s own laws on others, marries children who have no capacity to make informed decisions, and does not respect the rights of others, is not a law-abiding citizen. Such believer might be violating humane aspects of laws and human relations.
Before incorporating marriage into their customary laws, humans might have had a more humane attitude toward their love and relation. Upon being attracted to each other they might have communicated, mated, reproduced, and stayed together to protect their offspring. They might also have freely left each other alone, if any of them had asked the other to leave. Both genders might have been free to have none, one, or multiple humane relationships regardless if they were intimate with each other or not.
When marriage became an institution, it created strange laws, made commitment an obligation enforced by financial incentives, and so love and human relation became less relevant. Now even gays and lesbians want to follow a dysfunctional institution and get married instead of having a humane union. They argue marriage gives them a better financial incentive. Some institution might have helped humans to evolve and some to devolve. Marriage might have done the latter especially to those who are resistant to change, misuse institutions, and support a polygamous or a dysfunctional marriage.
The state should not be responsible to make laws for those adults who choose to be in one or multiple romantic relationships with the opposite or the same gender. The states is only there to make sure everyone, regardless of ethnicity, gender, faith, age, color, and orientation, has the same human rights and the same opportunity to pursue happiness without taking the happiness of anyone else away. As the love between human and a possible higher being is separated from the state, so should be the love between human and another human being.
ART-in-Mind
An individualistic attempt to enlighten about a social cause
With Affection, Reason, and Tolerance in Mind!
P.O. Box 50822, Irvine, CA 92619, USA
www.art-in-mind.net
_________________________
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
RECOMMENDED SITES
| ||||
| ||||
Sponsors
