 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
onwaranupwar
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 28th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2625 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 12:32 am |
|
BTW, Steve in case you missed it:
Most "honour" killings of women occur in Muslim countries, the focus of this case study; but it is worth noting that no sanction for such murders is granted in Islamic religion or law.
Most "honour" killings of women occur in Muslim countries, the focus of this case study; but it is worth noting that no sanction for such murders is granted in Islamic religion or law.
Most "honour" killings of women occur in Muslim countries, the focus of this case study; but it is worth noting that no sanction for such murders is granted in Islamic religion or law.
Most "honour" killings of women occur in Muslim countries, the focus of this case study; but it is worth noting that no sanction for such murders is granted in Islamic religion or law.
Get the point yet?
|
stevecanuck
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 02:54 pm |
|
onwaranupwar wrote:
That's an interesting analysis coming from someone who apparently has a problem posting any stats or links to provide backing for his claims
You can't read? Go back to my original post. Read sura 18 for yourself. It describes and honour killing sanctioned by god and witnessed and accepted by Moses. Simple stuff, even for you.
|
onwaranupwar
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 28th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2625 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 04:26 pm |
|
stevecanuck wrote: onwaranupwar wrote:
That's an interesting analysis coming from someone who apparently has a problem posting any stats or links to provide backing for his claims
You can't read? Go back to my original post. Read sura 18 for yourself. It describes and honour killing sanctioned by god and witnessed and accepted by Moses. Simple stuff, even for you.
To begin with Steve, Surah 18 is a Christian legend adapted into the Qu'ran.
Secondly, it describes killing a non believer. Muslim men killing their Muslim wives has nothing to do with them being non believers. It has to do with them perceiving their wives as not respecting them. It's the same motivation responsible for Christian, atheist, Jewish, etc men who kill their wives. But there is nothing in the Qu'ran that sanctions the killing of disrepectful Muslim women nor is there anything in the judicial system of any Muslim country that does so either.
Of course, if you have enough irrational hatred for an entire group of people as you do for Muslims, you'll do your best to grasp at things like this to prove your point. Just don't expect intelligent thinking people to go along with your nonsense.
|
stevecanuck
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 05:29 pm |
|
onwaranupwar wrote: To begin with Steve, Surah 18 is a Christian legend adapted into the Qu'ran.
So, Mohamed was a plagarist! Who knew?!?!? He stole much from other beliefs, which is well established. So what? That it appears in the quran as a lesson from god is all you need to know. It is one of the "parables and similitudes from which man is supposed to take admonition". What difference does it make how many other un-holy books it appears in?
onwaranupwar wrote:
Secondly, it describes killing a non believer. Muslim men killing their Muslim wives has nothing to do with them being non believers. It has to do with them perceiving their wives as not respecting them. It's the same motivation responsible for Christian, atheist, Jewish, etc men who kill their wives. But there is nothing in the Qu'ran that sanctions the killing of disrepectful Muslim women nor is there anything in the judicial system of any Muslim country that does so either.
Of course, if you have enough irrational hatred for an entire group of people as you do for Muslims, you'll do your best to grasp at things like this to prove your point. Just don't expect intelligent thinking people to go along with your nonsense.
It describes the killing of a youth who is about to dishonour and grieve his believing parents by falling in rebellion and infidelity (kufran). Both are therefore sanctioned reasons for killing someone. Sometimes things really are as simple and straight forward as they appear. This would be one of them.
Btw, I hate ISLAM. The only Muslims I hate are the ones who want me dead or under their thumb.
|
onwaranupwar
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 28th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2625 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 05:31 pm |
|
For anyone actually interested in Surah 18 as something other than a desperate attempt to discredit the entire Muslim religion and portray them all as savages directed to do evil by the Qu'ran as good ole boy Steve would have us do, here's an interesting article about it.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/03/09/blogging-the-qur%E2%80%99an-sura-18-%E2%80%9Cthe-cave%E2%80%9D-verses-1-59/
Here's an excerpt from the piece about the origins of Surah 18.
This is an adaptation of the Christian story of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus (although the Qur’an is less sure of their number – see v. 22), who are revered as saints in Byzantine Christianity. These are young men who sought refuge in a cave from the pagans in the pre-Christian Roman Empire, were miraculously protected, and who woke up after the Empire had been Christianized. (Ibn Kathir, however, thinks the story is pre-Christian, since the Jewish rabbis know of it and ask Muhammad about it as one of their tests of his prophethood.)
|
stevecanuck
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 05:33 pm |
|
onwaranupwar wrote: But there is nothing in the Qu'ran that sanctions the killing of disrepectful Muslim women nor is there anything in the judicial system of any Muslim country that does so either.
Correct as far as I know. But these countries judicial systems only act when forced to, and then the punishment is a slap on the wrist compared to "real" murders.
If you can find where a Muslim man has been executed for the honour killing of a female relative, I would be surprised. If you do find one, trying looking for 2 or 3 or 50. The UN estimates 5000 die each year.
|
onwaranupwar
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 28th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2625 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 05:40 pm |
|
stevecanuck wrote:
It describes the killing of a youth who is about to dishonour and grieve his believing parents by falling in rebellion and infidelity (kufran). Both are therefore sanctioned reasons for killing someone. Sometimes things really are as simple and straight forward as they appear. This would be one of them.
Apparently so to you. But as I've said too many times, the Bible is full of descriptions of innocents being killed and tortured by God, sometimes for no reason at all as in the case of Job. Yet I think you'd be hard pressed to find a typical Christian who said this was a sanction to kill people who disobeyed the word of God.
That is, unless you hated Christians and wanted to prove how evil they are.
Btw, I hate ISLAM. The only Muslims I hate are the ones who want me dead or under their thumb.
I feel that same way about anyone who would want to kill me or keep me under their thumb. Why focus on the tiny amount Islamist radicals in the world?
Steve, you live in a world of over a billion Muslims. If they really had it in for you, you'd be gonzo long ago. You're just going along with the current hatred of Muslims that has been more or less made ok since 9/11.
Th
|
onwaranupwar
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 28th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2625 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 05:56 pm |
|
stevecanuck wrote: onwaranupwar wrote: But there is nothing in the Qu'ran that sanctions the killing of disrepectful Muslim women nor is there anything in the judicial system of any Muslim country that does so either.
Correct as far as I know. But these countries judicial systems only act when forced to, and then the punishment is a slap on the wrist compared to "real" murders.
If you can find where a Muslim man has been executed for the honour killing of a female relative, I would be surprised. If you do find one, trying looking for 2 or 3 or 50. The UN estimates 5000 die each year.
Steve, if you want to express outrage at the thousands of women killed by men in honor killings all over the world, I'm all for it.
And even if you want to discuss why it seems that these honour killings tend to happen predominately in Muslim societies and the possible connection to cultural/spiritual beliefs of those cultures, that's fine too.
I'm also more than willing to condemn the light sentences that Sharia Law courts tend to hand out--if they hand them out at all--to men who kill, rape or even hurt women.
But here's what I'm not willing to do. I'm not willing to say that raping and killing women is specifically sanctioned by a particular religion. I'm also unwilling to agree that killing women because they aren't submissive to mens' demands is something that happens only within a particular culture or society. As far as light sentences for killing women, do a little research and you'll see historically that sentences for killing women are significantly lower in all countries than for killing men (it's worse for killing and/or raping children) I made mention on this forum recently about a Canadian judge who sentenced a man to 750 days in jail for raping his daughter almost daily for 10 years beginning when she was five. This didn't happen in rural Aghanistan. it happened in Alberta.
Both you and AE completely avoid the fact that in Brazil until 1991, it was perfectly legal to kill your wife or lover if you could prove (or even come close to proving) that she was being "unfaithful". Brazil is a Roman Catholic country, btw, and this law had everything to do with Christian tenets. Do we condemn the bible for this cultural imperative?
If these men killed these women in Ontario put them away in a hole in the ground for the rest of their lives and feed them on fisheads. But using them to prove that their sacred texts explicity state that it's a good thing for a Muslim to kill a woman or child who doesn't show proper respect for them or their religion, is just false and is nothing but hatemongering
|
onwaranupwar
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 28th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2625 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 06:11 pm |
|
Back in the 90's a Maryland truck driver named Ken Peacock came home and found his wife in bed with another guy. He went out, came back, and shot her to death.
Peacock was sentenced to 18 months for this honour killing. Here's how sentencing judge Cahill rationalized his decision:
"I seriously wonder how many men married five, four years would have the strength to walk away without inflicting some corporal punishment,"...Judge Cahill couldn't think of a situation that would provoke "an uncontrollable rage greater than this: for someone who is happily married to be betrayed in your personal life, when you're out working to support the spouse." The judge almost apologized for sentencing Mr. Peacock: "I am forced to impose a sentence . . . only because I think I must do it to make the system honest."
Do you think this says something about universal attitudes about women that goes way beyond country, culture and religion? I do and I think that pointing fingers at one group of people for perpetrating it while ignoring others is wrongheaded.
|
Ae
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 09:26 pm |
|
| <dp> Last edited on Fri Jul 31st, 2009 09:27 pm by Ae
|
Ae
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 09:26 pm |
|
If you are of White Asian or European descent, then your culture blows, and anything done by your culture now, or in the past, imagined or real, is YOUR FAULT. Individual responsibility is just a mask for white people to escape their badness. Your culture is to blame, and every individual in it must bear that, own it, and pay for it.
If you are not from the two previously mentioned categories, then your culture rocks. Nothing done by your cultures or religions is your fault. You are all individual. Any and all things done wrong in the names of the religions or cultures you subscribe to are only the faults of individuals, and even if you agree or only semi-agree with those thoughts you are not your culture or religion. Even if you say you are. You, are merely misunderstood.
Good stuff.
Last edited on Fri Jul 31st, 2009 09:27 pm by Ae
|
onwaranupwar
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 28th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2625 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 09:35 pm |
|
Ae wrote: If you are of White Asian or European descent, then your culture blows, and anything done by your culture now, or in the past, imagined or real, is YOUR FAULT. Individual responsibility is just a mask for white people to escape their badness. Your culture is to blame, and every individual in it must bear that, own it, and pay for it.
If you are not from the two previously mentioned categories, then your culture rocks. Nothing done by your cultures or religions is your fault. You are all individual. Any and all things done wrong in the names of the religions or cultures you subscribe to are only the faults of individuals, and even if you agree or only semi-agree with those thoughts you are not your culture or religion. Even if you say you are. You, are merely misunderstood.
Good stuff.
Interesting take on things, AE. But the fact is that you're the one who is creating these false divisions, not me.
Male violence towards women is universal and universally repugnant in all cases. Every man who commits violence against women should be held accountable regardless of race or religion.
But you're not doing that. What you're doing is saying if a white Christian kills a woman, he's acting on his own and his act is not sanctioned by his culture (which is to some degree bullshi* as the evidence I've posted shows.)
If it's a Muslim, you hold his entire religion to be at fault.
In reality, Muslim men kill women for exactly the same reasons any other man does. If you want dispute that, fine. But at least provide evidence to back it up. Until then, all you're proving is that you cling to a double standard when it comes to men who kill women.
Last edited on Fri Jul 31st, 2009 09:37 pm by onwaranupwar
|
Ae
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 09:36 pm |
|
onwaranupwar wrote: Back in the 90's a Maryland truck driver named Ken Peacock came home and found his wife in bed with another guy. He went out, came back, and shot her to death.
Peacock was sentenced to 18 months for this honour killing. Here's how sentencing judge Cahill rationalized his decision:
"I seriously wonder how many men married five, four years would have the strength to walk away without inflicting some corporal punishment,"...Judge Cahill couldn't think of a situation that would provoke "an uncontrollable rage greater than this: for someone who is happily married to be betrayed in your personal life, when you're out working to support the spouse." The judge almost apologized for sentencing Mr. Peacock: "I am forced to impose a sentence . . . only because I think I must do it to make the system honest."
Do you think this says something about universal attitudes about women that goes way beyond country, culture and religion? I do and I think that pointing fingers at one group of people for perpetrating it while ignoring others is wrongheaded.
You are STILL trying to get an atheist and a pagan to defend Christianity because.....you're only argument is that "well CHRISTIANS do that too!"
Brazil is NOT similar to all societies which have religious or even some cultural antecedents in common. In many many ways Brazil is highly unique, both culturally, religiously, and racially. It bears littel in common with even other Roman Catholic countries in many very important ways. And it surely says something that no one thought to challenge that this was based legally on Catholic doctrine because it surely is NOT in anyway.
I don't even like Catholism. If it was a purely "Catholic" law, it would not have existed because it DIRECTLY could be argued to be wrong from the Bible itself. Which is the OPPOSITE of the Quran, where you can directly argue FOR IT.
(The story of the man throwing the first stone is actually exactly about this topic. Seriously.)
Catholism and Christianity often morphs with the culture it encounters and encompasses. Islam displaces or annihilate previous cultures. Again, no similarity.
In the man above's case, he certainly was angry and his pride was hurt. And there is NO culture acceptance of this behaviour no matter how good his excuse is. People might be able to understand but they don't AGREE, and there is no story, no religious undertone, no legal or human right that makes it okay. It would be hard to make something less acceptable culturally.
|
Ae
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 09:41 pm |
|
onwaranupwar wrote: Ae wrote: If you are of White Asian or European descent, then your culture blows, and anything done by your culture now, or in the past, imagined or real, is YOUR FAULT. Individual responsibility is just a mask for white people to escape their badness. Your culture is to blame, and every individual in it must bear that, own it, and pay for it.
If you are not from the two previously mentioned categories, then your culture rocks. Nothing done by your cultures or religions is your fault. You are all individual. Any and all things done wrong in the names of the religions or cultures you subscribe to are only the faults of individuals, and even if you agree or only semi-agree with those thoughts you are not your culture or religion. Even if you say you are. You, are merely misunderstood.
Good stuff.
Interesting take on things, AE. But the fact is that you're the one who is creating these false divisions, not me.
Male violence towards women is universal and universally repugnant in all cases. Every man who commits violence against women should be held accountable regardless of race or religion.
But you're not doing that. What you're doing is saying if a white Christian kills a woman, he's acting on his own and his act is not sanctioned by his culture (which is to some degree bullshi* as the evidence I've posted shows.)
If it's a Muslim, you hold his entire religion to be at fault.
In reality, Muslim men kill women for exactly the same reasons any other man does. If you want dispute that, fine. But at least provide evidence to back it up. Until then, all you're proving is that you cling to a double standard when it comes to men who kill women.
I dare you to find 10 men who are in non-Islamic or Hindu cultures who promote and excuse and can make laws that say that a man can and should be allowed to kill his wife and girls. You can probably find some - it'll take you sometime.
I can find dozens in Islamic countries who have both religious and political power in under 10 minutes.
Why do you think that is?
|
stevecanuck
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 09:42 pm |
|
| I'm off to Saskatchewan and out of touch (is that redundant?) until Tuesday.
|
Ae
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 10:01 pm |
|
stevecanuck wrote: I'm off to Saskatchewan and out of touch (is that redundant?) until Tuesday.
Enjoy!
|
onwaranupwar
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 28th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2625 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 10:13 pm |
|
Ae wrote: onwaranupwar wrote: Back in the 90's a Maryland truck driver named Ken Peacock came home and found his wife in bed with another guy. He went out, came back, and shot her to death.
Peacock was sentenced to 18 months for this honour killing. Here's how sentencing judge Cahill rationalized his decision:
"I seriously wonder how many men married five, four years would have the strength to walk away without inflicting some corporal punishment,"...Judge Cahill couldn't think of a situation that would provoke "an uncontrollable rage greater than this: for someone who is happily married to be betrayed in your personal life, when you're out working to support the spouse." The judge almost apologized for sentencing Mr. Peacock: "I am forced to impose a sentence . . . only because I think I must do it to make the system honest."
Do you think this says something about universal attitudes about women that goes way beyond country, culture and religion? I do and I think that pointing fingers at one group of people for perpetrating it while ignoring others is wrongheaded.
You are STILL trying to get an atheist and a pagan to defend Christianity because.....you're only argument is that "well CHRISTIANS do that too!"
It's not my only argument but it is a valid argument to rebut people who claim that Islam is an anomaly when it comes to misogynist interpretation of scriptures. On one hand, you're taking me to task for making this a religious argument. On the other, you're condemning an entire religion for the acts of a relatively small group of men within that religion. You can't have it both ways. Brazil is NOT similar to all societies which have religious or even some cultural antecedents in common. In many many ways Brazil is highly unique, both culturally, religiously, and racially. It bears littel in common with even other Roman Catholic countries in many very important ways. That isn't true. Other non-Muslim countries where honour killings are routinely carried out are Italy, Ecuador, and some Eastern European countries with a heavy RC population. Read the Amnesity International report on violence against women.
Catholism and Christianity often morphs with the culture it encounters and encompasses. Islam displaces or annihilate previous cultures. Again, no similarity.
The first part of this statement is true. And that's why even though our culture is not entirely comprised of devout Christians, it is informed by Christian values to some extent and some Christian value have been historically based on misogynistic interpretation of Biblical scripture. You can deny until hell freezes over but it's a fact. the second part of your statement is nonsense and I can't believe you'd say it. White European Christianity NEVER morphs with the culture it encounters. It destroys and replaces it and has done so for 1500 years. Are you joking? We are right now dealing with the ramifications of that imperative in this very country, not to mention Africa and South and central America and to some extent India/Pakistan and other countries in the middle-East where British Imperialism driven by Christianity failed to overturn Islam. Didn't stop them from trying though. Yes, Islam has also conquered other cultures but nowhere near the extent that Christianity has.
In the man above's case, he certainly was angry and his pride was hurt. And there is NO culture acceptance of this behaviour no matter how good his excuse is. Apparently you didn't read the judge's view on the situation, which was that he sympathized with him and saw nothing wrong with this man killing his wife in cold blood. This judge is a representative of our judicial system and his views were/are not anomolies. In our legal system, men have historically received lighter sentences for killing women (and children) than killing other men. Call it what you want but in my mind it's no less repugnant when it happens here than when it happens in Iran. People might be able to understand but they don't AGREE, and there is no story, no religious undertone, no legal or human right that makes it okay. Even if this were true, it's meaningless. Men kill women who they think don't respect them in all cultures and societies and the reasons are the same. If you want to create false divisions in order to make one culture or religion look superiour to the other, that's your business. A dead woman is a dead woman. Period. It would be hard to make something less acceptable culturally. So what? The fact is that it still happens frequently in our culture, acceptable or not. Male violence runs deep whatever its motivation. My impression is that at this point you have completely divorced yourself from the fact that violence against women always has exactly the same end: the death of innocent women regardless of culture or religion. What you seem to be doing now is trying to prove that killing women in our culture is somehow less repulsive because...well, you haven't really been able to show why. But the fact you're struggling to do it is mystifying. I think it's probably because like Steve you have an axe to grind with Muslims and are looking for any reason to support your views. But the fact is that most Muslims don't kill and although some of them do, this is no good reason to judge them unfit to live in Canadian society anymore than it's logical to bar Brazilians or Italians from living here though homour killings happen frequently in those societies.
|
onwaranupwar
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 28th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2625 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 10:23 pm |
|
Ae wrote:
I dare you to find 10 men who are in non-Islamic or Hindu cultures who promote and excuse and can make laws that say that a man can and should be allowed to kill his wife and girls. You can probably find some - it'll take you sometime.
I can find dozens in Islamic countries who have both religious and political power in under 10 minutes.
Have at it, AE. I'll settle for a dozen men with proof that they have made laws to promote men to kill wives and girls.
But remember that even if you do you're still going to prove that they do this because of a specific command found in the Qu'ran. Then in context of this specific topic, you'll have to go further and prove that the majority of Muslims accept that men should be allowed to kill women, that it's a universal tenet of Islam and accepted by the majority This will be a particularly difficult task because the majority of Muslims are female. But have at it.
I'll look for your edifying research.
.
|
onwaranupwar
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 28th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2625 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 31st, 2009 10:24 pm |
|
stevecanuck wrote: I'm off to Saskatchewan and out of touch (is that redundant?) until Tuesday.
You have my sympathies.
|
Ae
Member
|
Posted: Sat Aug 1st, 2009 12:34 am |
|
You going to find ten men who live in North America or Europe of European descent with some influence and aren't looked upon as nut bars, who promote killing your wife and girls when they dishonour you?
Here are sixty men in Germany who contend exactly the opposite of you - that it is a cultural obligation.
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/1/4/4/5/p114456_index.html
This is a direct descent of the fact of what women's stated place is in Islam - a source of shame.
This is practiced in ALL lslamic societies. Showing that the people who practice it enmass, not just the select few, directly disagree with your interpretation. And are willing to live it, and kill for this meme.
Honour killing is domestic violence. But it isn't JUST domestic violence.
If a man here kills his daughter because he believes she's slutty, he's considered a criminal and deranged.
What he is NOT is considered valiant and a warrior of God sacrificing his own for the greater good. Nor could you usual find that members of the family helped plan and commit these murders.
If an individual here claimed that, he'd be sent for a psychological assessment. I mean, I guess you could claim that personality disorders in these cultures are considered to be a good thing and therefore it is just coincidence that Islam and Hinduism happen to have some sort of affinity for those personality disorders. That could be the other possible way to rationalize it.
Memes aren't nothing.
It is RARE in Western cultures for men to kill their teenage daughters. It is even rarer for them to do so in a planned manner. With family accomplices. And if profiled, it would be very unlikely that they raped and brutalized and tortured them in advance of doing so to punish them before death. Only the intensity of exactly this crime done by Muslims and Hindus would often include all of those things. They show no remorse - because they are heroes. The sort of brutality one might only expect if someone's very mental ecology was at stake.
Pretending that there isn't something about these cultures that is feeding and promoting this is not honest, and isn't useful. Going into a therapy session with a man who believes those things, and is backed by a couple of billion people in that thought process and telling him that his religious thought on the matter isn't relevant would be STUPID. But for political reasons, we're supposed to be exactly that stupid about our society.
Really, arguing with ME about how it isn't Islamic or Hindu to kill your daughters for dishonouring them is ridiculous. Go argue with the couple of billion people who do believe that it is Islamic and Hindu to do so. Asking us to not notice that a third of the planet belongs to cultures that practice these things is asking us to be intentionally blind. As a matter of fact, the FEW scholars and Imams and other religious leaders who are saying that are all saying it TO ME. How odd is that? I mean, really, shouldn't you be telling the people who are IN your religion and living in cultures that sanction it? Or are they afraid that they'll be targetted by their "fellow" religious leaders for it?
The people leading the charge against these crimes and saying that it isn't Islam or Hinduism are pretty much ALL FROM WESTERN COUNTRIES. And their fellow Muslims who are still living across the ocean see them as being corrupted by Christians. A charge that is almost impossible to contest.
Imam - http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009617story_17-6-2009_pg7_5
For all ridiculous things that fatwa have been issued for, one for men killing their daughters and wives and female cousins for "dishonour" has never happened.
It is also interesting that for all that you say that these aren't "honour killings" there are women all over the Muslim world who are running, at great personal risk to themselves, campaigns and websites and journals and organizations to end honour killings. They don't call them "domestic violence" or "interpersonal partner violence." They call them honour killings, because that's why their being killed for. For honour. And they seem to know it, even if you don't.
Last edited on Sat Aug 1st, 2009 12:39 am by Ae
|
Current time is 03:45 am | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...   |
|
|
|
|
