Chaddar and Chardewari ?

Women must certainly be respected for their 'right' of Chaddar and Chardiwari. However, what has surprised me in the recent days is the indignation upon the violation of Chaddar and Chardiwari by the very people who themselves refute the concept of Chaddar and Chardiwari.

In general, the seculars deny the need of Chaddar and Chardiwari for women. They say that since men and women are absolutely equal (in physique as well?), women should not be asked for any different set of social rules and regulations from men. If men do not do Hijab, niether should women, and likewise parables...

Then why were they upset when the police intruded upon Tahira Abdullah in the middle of the night during the Long March '09 round-ups and specifically call it a violation of Chaddar and Chardiwari? Why did they want special consideration in terms of her being a woman now? The police intruded upon many homes, why was the case of Tahira Abdullah highlighted with respect to the fact that she is a woman?

Then again, in the present case of the lashing of a seventeen-year-old girl in Swat. The secular were continuously exclaiming upon the fact that a 'woman' was publicly punished. Why cannot she be? If a man can be punished publicly, so can a woman. The secular want an equal treatment of man and woman, so why should she be given any special consideration in punishment with respect to her being a woman?

They also touched upon the fact that non-Mehrams were touching her. Why should the seculars mind that? Not long ago some secular analysts said that we should be cool about the fact that Zardari gave Sarah Palin a hug. Hence, the issue of touch should not be raised here either, because 'touch' is not an issue in the secular world, rather it is considered very backward to make it an issue.

To conclude, the debate should be upon the validity of lashing as a punishment in conviction of adultery and not of any other issue. For the seculars never agreed with the idea of Chaddar and Chardiwari for women and Islam no longer holds it valid for a woman who has chosen to violate it herself by committing adultery.

As far as the issue of lashing in conviction of adultery is concerned plus the issue of false accusations, please read The Holy Quran, Surah'e Noor [V. 2 and 4], and please read the whole of it, not just a verse and a half. Else, you may suffer from the same disease as those who have read and memorized just half a verse from Surah'e Baqarah and go around telling people,

"There is no compulsion is religion..."

while the complete verse says,

"There is no compulsion in religion; True guidance has been made clearly distinct from error. Therefore, whoever renounces 'Taghut' (forces of Shaitan) and believes in Allah has grasped the firm hand-hold that will never break. Allah, Whose hand-hold you have grasped, hears all and knows all." [The Holy Quran, 2:256]

Those who would like to believe that Allah SWT has sent down a code of life with the caption, 'There is no compulsion in religion (Full stop) ', is analogue to the scenario that a school prints out its prospectus and adds a line at its end, 'There is no compulsion in our rules and regulations, whosoever wishes to follow it, they may and whosoever wishes to defy it, they may, both ways it is okay with us...'.

Is that correct ?

Is it sensible ? Is it believable ?