Talk:LGBTQ rights in Iraq

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 6 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Adinkha101.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

POV

The afd discussion mentions WP:POV issues with this article. Can someone give me an example? It sounds reasonably neutral to me. Jasmol 02:29, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

• I personally see one point in this article, although it's more a case of WP:V than WP:NPOV. The "Opposition and Tolerance" section states: "Saddam's government often sent mixed signals about homosexuality in the 1990s. While it opposed efforts in the United Nations to address gay rights concerns on religious grounds, some reports have suggested that an active gay nightlife was tolerated by the government, including nightclubs and annual events with transgendered people, and that even homosexual prostitution was generally overlooked by the regime in the 1990's, at the most being something that incurred brief jail time and a small fine." These are quite important points, and they should be referenced, imo. Aecis ^praatpaal 01:41, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Cases

The one part of this other-wise well written article is the lack of cases, examples. Unless I missed something, in criminal code it mentions laws that "could have" been used against LGBT Iraqis, but no statements that they have been. I really think that, unless there are examples, or even a quote SAYING there have been usage of these laws against LBGT Iraqis, the argument presented by the article is entirely speculative. If there is an example somewhere in the article that I missed, the sentence I have mentioned should be changed from speculative to factual. Not a big problem, just makes it appear weak. JG of Borg 16:08, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Comment

I didn't believe this article had enough weight to support itsself and never would so that in brief is the reason I nominated it. I'd accept a "Gay rights in various countries" article before Gay rights in Iraq which only says "look at us" we are being discriminated against. Chooserr 23:59, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

This article is certainly on the lightweight side, but a number of "Something in Somewhere" articles are pretty lightweight as well [1] [2] [3]. Given that this article's little content was certainly specific to Iraq, I'm not sure that grouping would be appropriate. --Bletch 00:31, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

The reference to Ayatollah Sistani is extremely doubtful. Not only can I find no external source that is not a copy or quote of the original article which appeared on 365gay.com (and has since disappeared from that site as far as I can tell), I can find no evidence of such a fatwa on the English-language portion of www.sistani.org. Also, at least two Western commentors familiar with Sistani and earlier fatwas issued by him have strongly stated that the story does not pass the "smell test". (http://ginmar.livejournal.com/680814.html and http://www.indybay.org/news/2006/03/1808775.php)

Moved HIV/AIDS material into a separate article

I've moved content about HIV/AIDS out of this article into a separate article on HIV/AIDS in Iraq. Information regarding HIV and AIDS that does not directly pertain to its affect on Homosexuals simply does not belong in this article. --Bletch 03:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

It might be an issue to the extent that Iraqi society assumed -- by ignorance/prejudice -- that AIDS/HIV only infected "immoral" people (i.e. LGBT people, women who committed adultery, etc). I am not sure if much is known about the Iraqi governments policy on the issue (pre-regime change) other then the fact that the infected were generally relocated to medical prisons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.127.166.57 (talk) 21:36, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

honour killings

Article 111 of the Iraqi Penal Code - passed in 1969 - tolerated such killings if the defendant had 'honourable motives'. The law was amended in 2002 to allow 'honour' killings to be treated in the same way as murder. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/11/iraq.humanrights1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.12.171.218 (talk) 08:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

This may be true -- the English translation of the Iraqi penal code seems to differ a bit. However, in practice family members who killed a sibling or relative rarely faced serious (if any) sanctions from the government if the family argued that the punishment was justified for reasons of "immorality". Also reports seem to suggest that militias and even members of the police force have not been punished for attacking people for being "immoral". [TomJeffersonIII] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.127.166.57 (talk) 21:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://niqash.org/content.php?contentTypeID=74&id=2431&lang=0. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a license compatible with GFDL. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:54, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Should things from this article be included?

http://nymag.com/news/features/59695/index1.html Jabberwockgee (talk) 20:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Stupidity and ignorance

The person that wrote parts, or all, of this article is a raging, ignorant, moron. A complete pile of crud. Pan-Arabism and Ba'athism a branch of Sunni Islam???? Even the Syrian Ba'ath Party would've had some trouble pulling something like that off. Ba'ath originated in the philosophy of Michel Aflaq, a Syrian Christian, and it doesn't have any religious connotations. It is a secular ideology. Again, whoever wrote this, whatever their intentions, is a flaming pile of human shit.

"As far as socialism, the economic policies, and those more in general looked more like Stalinism [14]" - What in the world is this supposed to mean!? It doesn't even make sense as a sentence.

"Iraqi gays and bisexuals who lived in Iraq in the 1980s - 1990s have since reported that a Ba'athist crackdown on homosexuality and establishments known to function as gay bars took place in the 1990s. There is some speculation this was an attempt to appeal to his populace, however, a regime that on October 16, 2002 produced for itself a 100% turnout and a 100% vote in favour of another 7 years of Saddam Hussein as president, seems to have little need to suck up to its people [17]" - This confuses two concepts. First, the crackdown on homosexuality WAS probably to get grassroots support. The 100% vote was a political maneouvre to self-legitimize. Different concepts, albeit serving a similar purpose. Self-legitimization is useless without some level of popular support, even in a dictatorship. How braindead is the person that wrote this???

Whoever tried to torture the buttons on their keyboard by squirting out this crap, well, they've succeeded. The buttons are tortured and this is shit. All they're doing is weakening their own argument through fallacies.

Of course Iraq discriminated, and still discriminates, against homosexuals, but it equally discriminates, internally, against Shiites (by Sunnis), Sunnis (by Shiites), Kurds (by Arabs), Arabs (by Kurds) and so forth. But don't make a farce out of the politics of the area, fabricate facts and make correlations where there are none. Discrimination is there, true, it's very severe, true, but fabricating and exaggerating certain facts only destroys your own argument.

Sufitul (talk) 00:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

If you think the article is badly written, change it. Jabberwockgee (talk) 01:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Legal Position

I think that much of the content of this no doubt well intentioned Article is simply wrong when it refers to the legal position in Iraq.
It needs to be re-written from top to bottom. In the mean time I suggest that it revert to the version extant on 20 August 2009. I am posting this on the discussion page to explain why before I make any change. Homosexuality is not 'decriminalised'in Iraq. It was never criminalised. Not before Saddam. Not under Saddam. Not subsequently. Not now.
Shari'a (Islamic law) is not a fixed code of law. It is not the law of Iraq. To say that "vigilantes have applied Sharia law" may reflect what such people thought that they were doing but it may also give the wrong impression that there is such a law to be applied in Iraq. There is not.
No constitution of Iraq has ever stated that the death penalty was to be applied for homosexuality - not the constitution of 1925 or that of 2005 or the interim constitutions of the 1950s, 1960s or 1970. The 1970 constitution was in force at the time of the fall of Saddam in 2003. It had been amended a number of times - but never in that way. The footnoted Amnesty International report (12) cited in support of this assertion mentions neither homosexuality nor the constitution.
The Revolutionary Command Council Resolution 234 of 2001 introduced the death penalty for non consensual sexual offences of rape and anal rape. It did not criminalise homosexuality.
The Coalition Provisional Authority did not legalise homosexuality in 2003 - they didn't have to (whether they would have cared to do so or not), it wasn't illegal.
Paul Bremer reverted the 1969 Penal Code to the state that it had been in in 1985 (a number of amendments having already been made between 1969 and 1985) and then he made a number of amendments to it. It did not go right back to the original 1969 version.
In addition I think that the content is straying too far from the topic which ultimately causes the reader to lose focus. The basic information should be (a) homosexuality is legal in Iraq; (b) LGBT people are persecuted outside the law and their persecutors are rarely if ever punished by the law - the meanderings of the present content to encompass flags, Palestine and Kissinger are off topic.
Unfortunately much of the content is not well written. The style lacks clarity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.219.254.145 (talk) 13:07, 13 November 2009 (UTC) Page reverted to 20 August 2009 version with minor spelling and grammar corrections —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.219.254.145 (talk) 13:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC) Unfortunately as of December 2009, most of the highlighted previously corrected errors have been re-introduced by the previous poster - I give up - this Article is now worse than worthless.

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://epistle.us/hbarticles/neareast.html (content entered in this series of edits; see Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Lionhead99 for background.. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:21, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Edits by User:Jllproductions

Can you please come to the talk page instead of edit warring? AcidSnow (talk) 23:30, 15 March 2014 (UTC) re: Edits by AcidSnow

Executions in both Somalia and Iraq happen and I have the sources for them both? We should mention they they do get killed, although we can specify that it happens illegally. Any suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jllproductions (talk • contribs) 23:32, 15 March 2014 (UTC)