The real ‘War on Women’

(Washington Times) — Chechnya’s government is openly approving of families that kill female relatives who violate their sense of honor, as this Russian republic embraces a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam after decades of religious suppression under Soviet rule.

In the past five years, the bodies of dozens of young Chechen women have been found dumped in woods, abandoned in alleys and left along roads in the capital, Grozny, and neighboring villages.

Chechen President Ramzan Kadyrov publicly announced that the dead women had “loose morals” and were rightfully shot by male relatives. He went on to describe women as the property of their husbands, and said their main role is to bear children.

“If a woman runs around and if a man runs around with her, both of them should be killed,” said Mr. Kadyrov, who often has stated his goal of making Chechnya “more Islamic than the Islamists.”

Official merchandise from the Democrat Party

I find it incredibly telling how silent those who renounce the “Republican war on women” are when it comes to the atrocities committed against women all over the world who are subjected to Islamic justice.  The fact is that women in Muslim countries are barely one step above chattel, but not a word from people who claim to be championing women’s rights.

The left is bending over backwards trying to save women from Republicans who want to prevent millions of babies from being killed by their mothers shove them back into the kitchen barefoot and pregnant.

I used to refer to those who label themselves pro-choice as pro-abortion.  I used that term because it seemed those on the pro-choice side were more interested in promoting abortion than they were promoting the choice between abortion and carrying to term (See: But Where’s The Body?).  I have capitulated a bit and now refer them as  abortion advocates and defenders.  I think this is even still more fitting than pro-choice.

But abortion isn’t about choice or rights.  Not in a sense that isn’t trivial.  Abortion first and foremost is about sex.  Not family planning, bodily autonomy, privacy, or rights.  It is about securing the freedom to have as many (or as few) sexual encounters as desired without the worry of having children (See: Can’t Hardly Wait).

So to put things in perspective, attempting to limit access to an elective operation intended to take the life of an innocent human being constitutes a war on women.  But killing and maiming women because it is suspected that they have done something which has dishonored the family name, or throwing acid in their faces because they don’t cover them in public is not a war on women — or if it is, it’s not one worth protesting apparently.


  1. John…

    I find it incredibly telling how silent those who renounce the “Republican war on women” are when it comes to the atrocities committed against women all over the world who are subjected to Islamic justice. The fact is that women in Muslim countries are barely one step above chattel, but not a word from people who claim to be championing women’s rights.

    Amnesty International has come out against honor killings and violence against women, wherever it happens.

    So has Human Rights Watch.

    So have Unitarian Peacemakers

    So has Jim Wallis and his band of progressives at Sojourners.

    So have the Mennonites at Third Way Cafe.

    So have the Christian Peacemaker Teams

    So has OxFam

    I certainly agree with you and all these more progressive groups that more needs to be heard about and done to stop honor killings. But I don’t think you can blame the progressives who work hardest at peacemaking/justice issues. They remain on the forefront of this fight.

    We need to see more editorials like this one from the New York Times and more stories on the topic, like these at CNN.

    May it be so.

    • Sure you might find some hits around the web from sites that few people see. But lets not pretend that the oppression of women, the killing and maiming of them in Islamic countries garners anywhere near the attention by mainstream news outlets, or opinion broadcasts on networks like CNN or MSNBC that the “republican war on women” gets. Any time anyone suggests that abortion out to be limited we hear about this war for weeks from the liberal media. Give me a break.

      Do a search for how often the war on women as it relates to abortion is discussed to the atrocities committed by Muslims from those sites and see the ratio.

  2. Perfect example – when have you ever read in the MSM newspapers, or seen on TV, anything about the daily violence against women in Islam? I don’t recall ever having done so.

  3. I just provided links to multiple MSM stories and editorials on the topic, Glenn.

    • Actually dan

      only the nyt and cnn links are msm, I am a rabid internet media junkie and havent heard of some of the others you posted which shows that you dont know what the main stream media is. And if you look at the cnn link there are only a couple done each year, meaning it gets relatively no coverage compared to the war on women, which is my point, which still stands.

      You know, I be willing to wager you’re pro-choice. Are you?

    • Not to mention Glenn was referencing television and print media, which goes to show you either don’t pay attention, or you are trying to yet again change the narrative of the post.

  4. sigh, John, I was referring to the nyt and cnn links, not the non-profit/watchdog links. I know you think I’m an idiot, but I know the difference between media and non-profit orgs.

    As to my position on abortion, it’s complicated. I’m both pro-life and pro-choice. I’m opposed to so-called abortions of convenience AND I’m opposed to gov’t intervention in the private lives and medical choices of citizens.

    I think that families should make decisions about their medical needs and procedures, not “big gov’t,” but I’d really encourage individuals and doctors to make decisions truly based on medical need, not convenience.

    I’m also opposed to gov’t intervention in end of life decisions in general.

    For me, it’s a big gov’t issue – I’m concerned about big gov’t interfering with individual family medical choices. At the same time, I’m concerned that some people (I don’t know if it’s “many” or only a few, but “some”) take the decision to end a life in the womb too lightly.

    Whether or not the babe/fetus is a full-on “person” with all the rights that implies, I don’t know. I don’t really see it at one hour old. I definiitely come closer to thinking Yes, when we’re talking about an 8 month old fetus.

    Does that answer your question? As with many of my positions, it’s nuanced.

    • Yes dan

      I realize it’s nuanced. It needs to be so you can re-frame your positions to suit your needs. Anyone who is not anti-abortion, is pro-choice/pro-abortion. You are not pro-life. Family medical decisions is just a euphemism for abortion, you are pro-that.

      But in all honesty, I knew you were pro-choice, I just wanted to see it in print.

  5. re: “where most americans get their news…”

    58% News on TV
    44% any web or mobile news (internet on computer, cell phone, ipad, etc)
    34% print media
    31% radio


    I did make the assumption that Glenn was speaking of news media in general. If you were speaking only of print and TV, well, the nyt is print and CNN is TV, so I’m not sure of your point. You all sound like you’re disagreeing just to disagree, even when I post a comment in agreement with one of John’s points (ie, we ought to be doing more about the problems of violence against women).

    By the way, just out of curiosity, other than pointing out a need to see more done, what are you doing about violence against women? What do you think we ought to be doing?

    • Though more should be covered, my point was not about needing more. It was about the hypocrisy of the left who claims to care about women yet ignore all the atrocities done in Islam to women.

      To fix it you need to expel liberalism from the media. They pander and cater to Muslims to the detriment of our country and Christianity.

  6. One thing we can do is quit pandering to Islam! Start broadcasting exactly what Islam teaches about women and how they treat their women. Ostracize Islam all over the world.

  7. Ostracize ALL muslims? Even the non-oppressive, peaceful, reasonable ones? To what end?

    I’m in full agreement that we ought to cover oppression of women, children – oppression of anyone, anywhere it happens, I fully agree with you on that point.

    The good news is that we have groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch for whom that is their job, to keep us informed. So maybe making donations to groups like that is a good starting point.

  8. So the answer you two are offering is to “expel liberalism” (presumably, even liberals who report on violence against women?) from the media and to “ostracize all Muslims…”?

    I’m in favor of dealing with the offenders, not “all Muslims” or “all liberals in the media,” if that is what you all are suggesting.

    • Dan, instead of listening to media pap about Islam, try studying it for yourself. There is nothing peaceful about that religion, and it is more than just a religion anyway. While a large majority of Muslims could be categorized as “secular” Muslims, they aren’t the ones who are causing the problems. The Muslims who follow the faith of Islam are the problem area, and since they run Muslim countries, and are the ones propagating the abuse of women, you have to nail ALL of Islam. Those who don’t want to be ostracized should stand up and denounce the faith.

      Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are liberal organizations who are very selective of what they address. And Islam does not seem to be something they are very concerned about when it comes to abuse of women – and people in general.

  9. Glenn, while I’m certainly not an expert on Islam, I know some Muslims. Devout Muslims. Further, I have a close friend/dear church member who is a Christian pastor in a Muslim nation and I trust her views. She is very close friends with Muslims of all stripes and reports that, just as with Christians, there are more and less reasonable Muslims, more and less violent Muslims.

    And, similarly to Christians (oftentimes, anyway) the more conservative these Muslims are in their approach to their faith, the more irrational and prone to violence they are. Thankfully, those muslims are in the minority.

    It makes no more sense to “nail” all muslims because some are jerks than it does to “nail” all Christians because some are jerks.

    And while you may hold the opinion that AI and HRW are “liberal,” they’re actually doing something about violence against women. What are you doing, other than complaining?

    • So conservative Christians are irrational and prone to violence, huh. idiot.

    • Woman pastor? I already don’t trust her judgement. But I’m not surprised you do.

      So do you have anything to add to the discussion of liberal hypocrisy? Or are we just going to let you run the discussion.

  10. Dan, I have been studying Islam for the past decade and have actually read the Qur’an and many hadith commentaries. IF a Muslim is not doing what they can to conquer the world for Islam, if a Muslim is NOT violent towards Christians and Jews, etc, then they are not following their faith. On the other hand, if a Christian was trying to conquer the world, violent towards other faiths, etc, they would NOT be following their faith. Part of Muslim teaching is to lie to your enemy about your beliefs until you are in power. As John said, I wouldn’t trust a woman “pastor” to tell me about Islam.

    It isn’t about individuals – it’s about the teaching of the belief system. And it is apparent you know no more about Islam than you do about Scripture.

  11. My friend has been studying Islam for the past 15+ years and knows personally a great number of Muslims – regular folk and scholars. She can read the Qur’an in Arabic and is a Christian of impeccable credentials, full of the love and grace and wisdom of God.

    I trust actual Muslims and people who know them to speak more authoritatively than you, Glenn. Nothing personal, I just don’t trust your opinion (or maybe that is personal), as you seem to be coming at it with an agenda, rather than in seeking knowledge and wisdom.

    Tell me: Did you study Islam with the intent of knowing enough about it to debunk it, or to become more enlightened?

    • Seems to me that a lady “pastor” (liberal from the git-go in order to dispense with what Scripture says about women not being in leadership in the assembly) is an easy target for deception, and as I said, their doctrine tells them to lie to their enemy. If she has read the Qur’an, then she knows first-hand what the REAL teaching is, which means she is ignoring it due to the lies being told to her.

      I began studying Islam to understand what makes them tick, where the religion came from, etc. Just like I study all other religious beliefs. They are all lies from Satan, and the better we understand them, the better we can reach them with the truth of the Gospel.

      Yeah, I have an agenda – it is called proclaiming truth, and helping as many as possible escape hell-fire by giving them what the truth is so they can decide whether or not to follow Christ or another god.

    • Funny Dan how you’ll trust any Muslim who tells you about something of which you admit to being ignorant of, rather than reading their own holy writ. But yet you don’t trust other Christians to tell you your errors in Christianity.

  12. I trust my friend who has shown and proven herself to be not only a Christian, but a lady of great wisdom and no bigotry. Sometimes even “men” like you can learn from “women pastors…” Humility my friends, embrace it.

    And no, I don’t trust complete strangers on the internet who often do not behave in a Christian manner (embracing and celebrating gossip, slander, demonization, bearing false witness, gracelessness, etc) who tell me “I’m an expert on that there ISlam stuff, yep!” or “Trust me, I know what I’m talking about…” when their actions don’t line up with good Christian orthopraxy or orthodoxy.

  13. Glenn…

    They are all lies from Satan, and the better we understand them, the better we can reach them with the truth of the Gospel.

    So you gladly admit starting your “study” from a place of arrogance and bigotry?

    When you start any study from such a place, don’t be surprised if you wind up with arrogant and bigoted “wisdom,” that is not wisdom at all.

    • Dan, you are such a hypocrite. You claim it is not “humility” to point out that Scripture says women are not to be leaders in the assembly. Whether or not we can learn from them isn’t the point. The first thing THEY should learn is what the Lord has said their role is NOT. You continue to claim I “embrac[e] and celebrat[e] gossip, slander, demonization, bearing false witness, gracelessness, etc” yet everyone on the various sites you visit have proven than none of this is the case. You claim such victimization because you’ve been proven to be a false teacher and heretic. Then you imply that I claimed to be an “expert on that there Islam stuff” – which is a bald-faced lie (talk about false witness!). It is YOUR actions which do not line up with Christian orthopraxy or orthodoxy, as has been proven on site after site.

      Then you have the temerity to say it is “arrogance and bigotry” to know that all religious beliefs which aren’t Christian are lies of Satan!!!! So, by claiming that Christianity is the true faith and that all others are lies from Satan, I will only get “arrogant and bigoted ‘wisdom’”?!!? You have just demonstrated again that you are nothing but a rank heretic. It was Jesus who called satan the father of lies. It is Jesus who says only He is the truth. It is Jesus who said He is the only way to the Father. This means all other beliefs are lies from Satan. I guess Jesus must have been arrogant and bigoted.

      This is but another example of no one being able to have a rational conversation with you. I give up on this string.

      John, he’s yours. I’m finished. The man is a fool.

  14. Marshall Art says:

    None of us know anything about Dan’s lady pastor friend. But we do know Dan from the many years of dealing with him on the blogs. He demonstrates very little wisdom in his Biblical understandings and I don’t recall him ever offering too many examples of wisdom by those he favors, like the aforementioned friend. I know he thinks highly of his own pastor, but the sermons he’s reproduced at his blog belie any claim of wisdom there.

    I would imagine that Dan’s friend who is supposedly knowledgable about muslims might indeed know of many kindly muslim people, but as Glenn suggested, this in and of itself does not imply a good knowledge or understanding of islam. Too many people have spoken about what islam is that for “nice” muslims to do nothing to work toward some kind of purge of the nastier elements of the religion means that being “nice” just isn’t enough. Islam is a threat to free peoples everywhere and muslims aren’t the only faction of mankind that needs to change from within. That is to say, whereas Christians are right to hold each other accountable to the true teachings of Christianity, muslims need to change islam so as to remove those aspects of their faith that are blatantly inhumane, if not inhuman. Their brutal attitudes toward women would be a great start.

    Also, I would again point out here, as I did at Dan’s when he listed those links as he did up above, the point is not in who is doing what for women as much as the leftist crapola about what conservatives are supposedly doing TO women. The charge, that the right is waging this war on women, is not only a lie outright, but a cheap diversionary tactic to draw attention away from real issues of importance as we draw closer to November. All lefties know it is an incredible lie, but they willingly choose to run with it as if it is really happening. They are without shame.

  15. This is easily the most amused I’ve been in weeks.
    First, let me start by saying that I personally do not in any way support any of the following. Honor killings, FGM, sex slavery, refusal to allow women to vote or drive, forced marriage or any other option that might get thrown out. I strongly denounce all of them.

    Second, having read the three posts and comments occasioned by those posts, allow me to state the obvious. There are persons and groups on both sides of the American political spectrum who are working to halt these types of abuses of women. For anyone to suggest otherwise is just silly.

    Third, it seems that the point of the original post was NOT that the left is doing nothing about the abuses of women, but that certain factions have attempted to create some sort of moral equivalency between access to birth control or abortion or whether Anne Romney has ever “held a real job” and actual real abuses of women.
    It seems like maybe the reasonable approach would be to dial back the “war on women” rhetoric, or at least address some much bigger issues that easy and inexpensive access to contraceptives/abortion. It does seem to me that there is a tendency of those on the left to be hesitant in condemning these types of things when they are performed in a “religious” context. Call it a desire to not be “Islamophobic” or some such foolishness.
    Any it’s enjoyable to watch every one revert to type, the comment thread at Geoffrey’s is especially enlightening and uplifting.

    Anyway, I hope you all have a great time with this.

    • Craig

      Yeah, I’m not suggesting liberals don’t care about the problems of women in other countries. Only that the hyperbole used to defame conservatives who want to limit abortion is a bit extreme. I however think it is more than a little out of touch with reality to be calling limits on abortion a war on women while remaining silent on the horrors of the middle east.

  16. John,
    We’re pretty much on the same page, I’ve just enjoyed the fallout elsewhere from what seems like a pretty non controversial post on your part.

  17. TerranceH says:

    I don’t much care for the Islam vs. Christianity bickering, but I will say that, yet again, Dan has misrepresented someone’s position. Day in, day out the Left accuses Republicans of waging “war on women.” We hear it daily, several times a day. As for the real war on women, almost nothing.

    With respect to mainstream media sources, the best you were able to come up with is a Times article and a CNN story, run once yearly or maybe every six months at best. The Republican “war on women” narrative is a daily assault on the intelligence of the American people, coming from the mouth of Internet, television, and newspaper liberals and progressives.

    If the Left were truly concerned about women, the focus would not be on Republicans. That was John’s point – and it was a good one.

  18. So, one can’t have an opinion on domestic policy and express it regularly and with fervor unless one also posts opinions on all similarly-themed policies in all other nations?

    Does the fact that you, Terrance, have not spoken out against “honor killings” or done anything about it at all indicate that you support “honor killings…” or that you don’t truly care about women?

    It’s an irrational argument.

    • Of course that’s an irrational argument. And you know what? No one said that. Nice try. Typical from you and liberals, to change what your opposition said and try to make them sound ridiculous.

      Go back, re-read, and try again. If necessary find a playground and have a child read and explain. Sorry Dan, I refuse to tolerate your BS any longer.

  19. John, you will note the question marks? Those were questions (hence the question marks) seeking clarification.

    So, you all are NOT saying that if one holds an opinion on some topic (violence against women, or abortion, for instance), it is okay for those people to offer those opinions, even if they don’t offer opinions on other related topics? Good, we agree.

    But doesn’t that sort of undermine the argument of your post?

  20. Marshall Art says:

    To help, I’ll respond to the question:

    “So, one can’t have an opinion on domestic policy and express it regularly and with fervor unless one also posts opinions on all similarly-themed policies in all other

    One is perfectly entitle to express an opinion on a domestic policy and do so both regularly and with fervor. The problem is the hyperbolic rhetoric, such as “war on women”, that is purposely lying about the intentions of the opponent so as to demonize that opponent and force him to address a non-issue rather than the policy in question.

    Opposition to abortion is not about the women who won’t be able to abort for any reason. It is about the unborn being put to death and THEIR unalienable right to life. Thus, no war on women.

    Opposition to coverage for contraceptives is not about the women who must pay for their own out of pocket, but the added costs to insurance companies and their customers for what is very often NOT a medical issue. Thus, no war on women.

    There was the excuse that some contraceptives are sought for reasons other than birth control, yet the “contraceptive” in question is not the only solution to the medical issue for which it is sought, but can cause other medical issues harmful to women. Thus, not only not a war on women, but a defense of women.

    In the meantime, while this deceitful rhetoric is bandied about, there are women in the world, as well as in this country, that are suffering real abuses and thus the unfortunate use of the term is insulting to those who do suffer. Thus, the use of the expression is more war on women than anything being done by those on the right being accuse of waging a war on women.

  21. TerranceH says:

    So, one can’t have an opinion on domestic policy and express it regularly and with fervor unless one also posts opinions on all similarly-themed policies in all other nations?

    Somewhat of a quasi red herring, Dan. Policy disagreement is one thing; leveling ad hominem attacks at your opponent is quite another. Interesting that you aren’t able to see the difference, Dan, given your constant “woe is me/I’m the victim” routine.

    Does the fact that you, Terrance, have not spoken out against “honor killings” or done anything about it at all indicate that you support “honor killings…” or that you don’t truly care about women?

    I actually have spoken out against Muslim treatment of women, Dan. But even if I haven’t, I’m not running around claiming to be a champion of women. I’m a champion of all human beings.

    It’s an irrational argument.

    I wasn’t really making an argument, Dan. I was merely pointing out your rather poor rhetorical style. You mislead and misrepresent your opponents argument. But that’s the only way liberals can win an argument, I think, so I understand why you do it. Nobody likes to lose all the time.


  1. […] surprise me.  The political left is just as willfully blind to the way Islam and Muslims treat women.  Women who are suspected of shaming their family’s name are beaten, maimed, or killed with […]

Any Thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: