Buy appliances which are Energy Star compliant
Saudi Court PUNISHES RAPE VICTIM
In Saudi Arabia, a court recently heard an appeal in a rape case. The appeal was sought by the victim due to the light sentencing her convicted rapists received at the original trial. The new court granted the appeal and did, in fact, increase the sentence for the convicted rapists — but the judges also doubled a previous sentence against the rape victim. The court ordered that she be flogged 200 times and serve six months in prison. The Saudi court’s ruling was based on the rape victim’s alleged “failure to have a male guardian escort her” to the mall, where she was ultimately kidnapped and gang raped by seven men.
If in fact, it is illegal for women to travel unescorted throughout Saudi Arabia, are the courts flogging all the offenders, or just those who are improperly escorted to their own crimes? And why do some cultures continually punish women because of a lack of control and morality among their men?
At a minimum, might it not have occurred to a more sensitized, just and moral group of judges that the victim had suffered enough at the hands of her rapists? Though of course, no one deserves to be raped. In particular, this woman does not deserve to be vilified by her own legal community.
It seems to me that the last thing any modern court would want to do is put a chilling effect on the prosecution of crimes. In this case, the original sentence against the rape victim was already disgusting and outrageous. The Saudi court has now doubled the sentence against her — and it has been reported that the court did so because she went to the media and presumably because she “second guessed” the court. The court in fact also revoked her attorney’s license and ordered that he stop representing her. Obviously, there are members of the legal community in Saudi Arabia who are willing to protect women. These are the people who should be determining justice in modern court cases.
Although I’m not a fan of Hillary Clinton’s, I respect her recent condemnation of the Saudi court’s outrageous ruling on the appeal. This ruling is barbaric and intolerable. Despite that, the White House has refused to condemn the sentencing despite Senator Clinton’s call on it to do so. The White House explained that this is an internal matter and the Saudi courts have a right to preside over their own cases and reach verdicts in accordance with their laws — this from the Administration which coined the phrase activist judges. It seems the White House respects borders, the legal process and “internal matters” when it suits Mr. Bush’s interests. After all, there was a time in the not so distant past when Iraq’s struggles under Sadam Hussein were also considered an “internal matter.” Oh, how times have changed.
If we acknowledged we were human beings first, we might all agree that no government should be allowed to brutalize individuals under any circumstances. This is morally wrong. Waterboarding is wrong; flogging is certainly wrong. It shocks the senses to realize that any government still brutalizes people in these ways.
It’s a disgrace. I’m never surprised that America is criticized for its hypocrisy — in particular when our government refuses to recognize both its current immorality and those exhibited by other cultures. It really is a shock to the senses to realize that in Saudi Arabia a woman will be flogged 200 times because, in the minds of a few men, she was not properly escorted to her own rape.