I’m sorry, that is a disaster for the reformation movement in Islam. “Sorry, wifey, you’re gonna wear that burka and like it, because even the First Lady of the United States says it is not oppressive.”

Michael, I think that’s a stretch of imagination. Although it probably does provide for propaganda fodder for the left; the ones who like to show photos of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam and President Bush with Saudi royals (forget that all U.S. Presidents have shaken hands with Saudis).

It is dishonest to claim that Laura Bush is essentially saying, “there is no subjugation of women in Islam”.

But we have no moral high ground to say anything about any culture anywhere in the world, because we legitimize Islamic oppression. Period. That is what First Lady Laura Bush did.

She did not “legitimize” Islamic oppression. She exercised diplomacy.

I don’t mean this in an insulting manner, but you are exercising the same puritanical moral arrogance and sanctimony that Jimmy Carter practiced during his Presidency, when he alienated and pressured other governments- strong allies, to live up to our standards of human rights practice. He did this to the Shah of Iran; and for that, he enabled an even worse regime to replace a “bad” dictator.

The ones who want to overthrow the Saudi royal family are the Sunni Islam wahhabi who want a rejection of modernity and western influence. If they gained power by overthrowing the House of Saud monarchy, you can kiss goodbye even an “alliance of convenience”, as well as any reformation of ever standing a chance to take place in Saudi Arabia, as fundamentalist Sunni Islam institutes absolute Sharia, leading to even more oppression.

Amy - Women who are beaten by their husbands say that they just fell down the stairs or ran into the door when asked abou their bruises too. Of course the women told the First Lady they didn’t feel subjugated or oppressed.

And who said anything about treating the women in Saudi Arabia with condescension?

I think, in a manner, your first paragraph does exactly what your second paragraph asks.

I know Muslims in this country who value the religious freedom our country affords them. And they are deeply pro-American. They mix western wear with covering their heads. It’s by choice. Their choice. No one is “forcing” them to do this. And it is utmost arrogance for us to tell them they need to “stop it”, because they are legitimizing symbols of oppression against women.

I think many conservatives have been so-filled with anti-PC anti-Islam “propaganda” and rhetoric, we stand to alienate many good Muslims, by thinking we know Islam better than they know and practice Islam.

I simply ask that my First Lady does not legitimize oppression by wearing the symbol of such oppression. That is OUR culture.

I don’t think Amy, Mike, nor myself need to be preached to about the hijab, burkha, abaya, khimār, and oppression of women in the Middle East. We know all this. The problem here, is that religion and culture are deeply intertwined. What is considered by us as a “symbol of oppression”, is also part and parcel to culture. And it is only oppressive when it is forced, and not worn out of choice.

What you see as Laura Bush “endorsing” and “legitimizing” the oppression of women in Saudi Arabia, others might see as simply a show of respect for foreign customs when on foreign soil. I have mixed feelings on this, btw. But I just want you to try and look outside of this “box” of yours.

What would you have of her? Openly speak out against the wearing of the hijab? America has a reputation for arrogance, you know.

It’s impossible to erase or ignore all the good work in the First Lady’s historic trip by focusing solely and exclusively on ONE photograph.

Here’s the First Lady meeting the Pope:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/images/20060209-2_p012006sc-0449-3-515h.jpg

Are we to shun her as a Papist because she wore that black veil? Does this mean she endorses the Catholic Church treating women on an unequal plane with men?

I don’t think so. And I would hope you do not also.

I don’t usually recommend watching Greta Van Susteren on Fox News, but Greta is featuring exclusive video and interviews with Mrs. Bush from the trip. Tuesday Greta will cover the Saudi portion of the trip.

“And she’s done more for women in Islamic countries than any other Western leader.”

What?

All any Islamic man has to do is show his woman the picture of First Lady Laura Bush in the abaya with the following words:

“These women do not see covering as some sort of subjugation of women, this group of women that I was with. That’s their culture. That’s their tradition. That’s a religious choice of theirs.”

If this is the culture, tradition and religious choice of Islam, then that means that a Muslim man who forces his wife to wear the burka and beats or stones her for not abiding by that demand should be allowed here in America.

This is what First Lady Laura Bush just legitimized, in my eyes. Pictures mean things. Words mean things. She should know full well that Saudi Arabian women do not have the choice to wear these things. It is a requirement.

Again, go back and look at the links for the complete sets of photos from each country visited.

Mrs. Bush made an extraordinary effort to reach out to women in politics in these countries.

Surely, if the status of women in these countries is a concern of yours you should be pleased that Mrs. Bush did so much to elevate the issues.

Unfortunately, she doesn’t have a magic wand that can make centuries of oppression disappear overnight.

But she’s making the effort. And she’s done more for women in Islamic countries than any other Western leader.

And who said anything about treating the women in Saudi Arabia with condescension? I simply ask that my First Lady does not legitimize oppression by wearing the symbol of such oppression. That is OUR culture.

Or actually, if this is true, apparently we even get rid of our culture of celebrating the equality of women in America when the Saudis come to America:

Remember when GWB agreed to remove all women from the control tower and the tarmac in Waco when the Saudis flew in. Normally we don’t do that in Texas.

Interesting. Apparently we have respect for their misogynistic culture, but we have no respect for the women of our own culture when the misogynists come to America. That’s brilliant.

I’m sorry, Amy and Mike. I respectfully, but adamantly disagree with you both on this.

The first lady didn’t say there was no oppression in their country. She said the women say this as giving her, the First Lady, as a gift. I invite you to listen to the First Lady in her own defense.

However, we have to decide if we stand for human rights or not. If we say that Islam, as practiced by Saudia Arabia, which grants women NO rights, as outlined by Caroline Glick in the article, and punishes them with public stoning if they so much as leave the house without wearing their Islamic garb, is legitimate, then I really don’t know what we stand for anymore.

And how many Muslims do you know? My husband is an OIF vet and we still keep in touch with friends he made in Iraq. I’m NOT defending Islam, but you’re wrong about all Muslim women. Like in Iraq, Saudi women have the choice to wear a headress, a burka or none at all.

I’m not sure what the alternative would be. The First Lady could have gone head uncovered, as she did most of her visit, but THIS FACT only points to prove what she was saying; that Muslim women have more choice than you give htem credit for. Otherwise, Laura would have been run out of town. Instead, she was welcomed. This is NOT the Taliban. Showing solidarity with women in the situation they are in helps them to overcome whatever obstacles they may face.

The First Lady did NOT “support oppressive Islamic dress”! She supported women’s rights and early prevention of cancer. Is Bill Clinton a pagan because he visited Africa preaching AIDS prevention and dressed in tribal clothes, or Bush Sr. and Clinton in their traditional dress when visiting tsunami savaged Indonesia? I think not. They were showing solidarity on a human level.

Michael: The reason I ran this photo spread is because it shows just the opposite.

You could not have a clearer contrast than to sit Mrs. Bush next to these covered women or Arab leaders.

Again, I don’t know what you want her to do? Rip the shroud off these women?

I get myself into hot water with fellow conservatives, some of whom think that All Islam is evil and that we really are in a war with the 1/4 of the world’s population.

I simply refuse to see it that way and I hope you do too.

I don’t see how that helps us in reforming Islam. Not at all.