WLUML-Women Living Under Muslim Laws is an "international solidarity network that provides information, support and a collective space for women whose lives are shaped, conditioned or governed by laws and customs said to derive from Islam."

WLUML's website states that it has linked individual women and organisations in more than 70 countries; not only women living in countries where Islam is the state religion, but also women in secular states where political groups are demanding religious laws.

The organisation says its name challenges the myth of one, homogenous ‘Muslim world’. They says "this deliberately created myth fails to reflect that: a) laws said to be Muslim vary from one context to another and, b) the laws that determine Muslim women's lives are from diverse sources: religious, customary, colonial and secular.

In this article on their website, WLUML addresses the myth of the "clash of civilizations." They maintain that the real clash is between "fascists and antifascists."

In an appeal to the World Social Forum in Brazil, they write, "There is no such thing as the 'clash of civilizations', as both the Bushes and the Bin Ladens would like us to believe. The clash in the world today is between fascists and antifascists. And that definitely cuts across national, ethnic and religious boundaries."

They appeal to the anti-globalization movement gathered in Porto Alegre, and more specifically to the women's movement, "to give international visibility and recognition to progressive democratic forces and to the women's movement within it, that oppose the fundamentalist theocratic project. We urge them all to stop supporting fundamentalists as though it were a legitimate response to situations of oppression."

Read and reflect.

Tarek Fatah
-----------
21/01/2005

There is no such thing as the 'clash of civilizations':
the clash in the world today is between fascists and anti-fascists.

Several years ago, Alternatives held a very interesting and widely attended conference: "Against Fundamentalism". It was organised in large part by the women's committee and featured a participant from Women Under Muslim Laws, and other speakers on Hindu, Christian and Jewish fundamentalism ... and on the TINA "fundamentalism of the market." You can probably find documentation through the Alternatives site (also linked to on the rabble front page or at www.alternatives.ca ).

Here is my problem: While it is good and proper to oppose Muslim fundamentlaism, what about the rest of us?

quote:

---

Originally posted by WingNut:
Why don't we remove the "muslim" from the equation and oppose all religious fundamentalism?

---

Here here wingnut. I would edit your post though to remove the word religious and leave it at either just fundamentalism. Because although religious fundamentalism is bad so is political fundamentalism.

The reason that particular group is speaking out against Muslim fundamentalism is simply because it is a Muslim group, and because there is no basis for support of, say, Christian, Hindu or Jewish fundamentalism among people attending the WSF.

quote:

---

The reason that particular group is speaking out against Muslim fundamentalism is simply because it is a Muslim group

---

I know.

But I would suggest that all of us must join with them to speak out against all fundamentalism. As much as I agree that Islamic fundamentalism offers its own brand of human cruelty, they are not that far removed from Christian fundamentalists who will oppose freedom of choice in the morning, condemn young people to AIDS by denying condoms in the afternoon, and still have time to protest in favour of an execution in the evening.

"We have already witnessed prominent Left intellectuals and activists publicly share the view that they could not care less if fundamentalist theocratic regimes come to power in Palestine or Iraq, provided that the USA and Israel get booted out."

I remain impressed at the degree to which the apologists for US aggression can ignore the simple fact that not a single Arab mid-east nation aligned with the United States or over which the United States wields considerable influence, is democratic. Not one.

More, in every nation in the mid-east, from Egypt to Iran where democracy was finding root, it was stepped on either by dictators wearing boots labeled Made in USA or by the USA itself.

Imagine you are an Arab in a room where you are being suffocated. There are three doors. One is marked "Democracy" the second is marked "Arab Nationalism" and the third is marked "Islamic Nationalism".

Now imagine you try the first door only to find an American or Brit on the other side pushing you back in. And then you try the second door to find another American or Brit again pushing you back in. Do you try the third door?

This is the option we have given Arabs who desire the same lives with the same freedoms that we enjoy. We have systematically stripped them of all options but fundamentalist Islam as an escape from the box of tyranny in which we have entrapped them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mahsbah:
Any intellectual advocating an immediate pullout from Iraq is effectively saying that.

---

quote:

---

Hailey:
I'm curious whether or not this is a movement that, ultimately, seeks to create an offshoot of islam so that they can worship and practice their faith as they see fit or whether or not they want to vary the essential core of the faith for millions of people who are muslim and are worshipping in accordance with their conscience?

---

I would have great reservations to call it a "movement". It appears to be a cyber group (friends and acquaintances who happen to live in different countries).