This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Moroccan girl commits suicide after being forced to marry her rapist
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
MyTie
So what do all the cases tried under Islamic law that call for rape victims to be jailed, and support honor killings? What is that?
They're as much an Islamic law court as English courts are Christian law courts because England has Anglicism as the official religion. The laws are based on horrible tradition and given textual support by a crappy rule in Deuteronomy. Nothing to do with Islam.
The Islamic religion requires application of their rules as a nation. Christianity doesn't do this. The analogy doesn't hold up.
Post by
gamerunknown
The Islamic religion requires application of their rules as a nation. Christianity doesn't do this. The analogy doesn't hold up.
Oh come on. You've read the Quran, you should remember Sura 4:60. Muslims are required to obey the rules of the nation they live in, no matter whether it is a Muslim nation or not.
You're arguing special pleading. If the cultural traditions of a country with a majority religion are religious traditions, then Roe v. Wade was rooted in religious Christian law, if we're pulling out cheap canards.
If they actually have to concord with the practices of the prophet and the doctrine of the holy book, then abortion isn't a Christian practice any more than rapists marrying victims is an Islamic practice.
Post by
MyTie
Hmmm.. perhaps we are not on the same page, here.
Let's try it this way:
The middle east is ripe with X laws, and those X laws justify murder, rape, honor killings, and all sorts of atrocities. I move that we continually put pressure to remove X laws.
As a side not, this may be just a coincidence, but all of the countries we are discussing apply Islamic religious code to their laws. Although the Islamic religion may not openly condone the actions justified by law, it seems to create the culture and environment that leads to these types of laws.
Acceptable gamer?
Post by
gamerunknown
The history of Christianity is rife with instances where science and dogma came into conflict, such as with Galileo, Darwin and Russell. I move that we continually put pressure on churches so that they don't take any positions that contradict science because they've always been wrong in the past.
Does that seem fair?
Post by
MyTie
The history of Christianity is rife with instances where science and dogma came into conflict, such as with Galileo, Darwin and Russell. I move that we continually put pressure on churches so that they don't take any positions that contradict science because they've always been wrong in the past.
Does that seem fair?
If the churches were in charge of the courts, and if the courts were letting people off with rape, then yep. It isn't a matter of being factually wrong. People can believe whatever they want to and be wrong about it. Now if you want, I'll say that the Catholic church was wrong for its persecution of people, along with other church actions. However, I'm talking about stopping people from RAPE, not stopping them from believing that the earth is the center of the universe.
It's amazing. You are somehow saying that since churches are factually wrong now, or that people were hurt hundreds of years ago, we are somehow hypocritical in trying to defend rape victims now. You can't make this stuff up.
Post by
Adamsm
Priests and little boys, and the charges just being covered up, rather then dealt with in a court. I can see a bit of a comparison here.
Post by
b4xx
So even though the west and every other different culture all have different views on things like you listed, we should all of a sudden apply our culture on them because its right? My how cultural.
If their culture supports rape and murder, then, yes. I feel morally justified in applying my culture on them. That is wrong and I don't care what their culture says, it is wrong. Now, I'm not going to tell them to start wearing blue jeans, watching baseball, and driving a Hummer. They can keep their overall culture and traditions.
By western standards its wrong. you are from a western nation looking into a nation whos culture has developed seperatly from yours over the course of thouands of years and you see issues that come up that you feel are wrong. Why do you think you can justify your belief in that culture is wrong and then use your own culture to back up your points? Thats like saying our culture is wrong because we allow women to vote or to work or to have a life outside of obeying her husband, having children, and keeping the house clean.
Again i ask what view is the right one? No matter how you slice it you cant say what one is wrong and what one is right because how each one developed influenced its position on issues and imposing one culture including its morals on another is just wrong.
/headdesk
All im going to say to that is /shrug, im both playing devils advocate and defending my position on issues of cultural differences which is really what this boils down to. This is going ot be my last post on the subject because its inevtibly going to turn into a debate in which we go around in circles.
Man, you're beating a dead horse. There's
NO WAY
you're going to turn rape and honor killings to an acceptable thing. If someone justifies these with a different culture or moral, I claim that person plain dumb.
I mean seriously, freedom of religion, culture blah blah... You don't have to throw away thousands-years-old legacy, just remodel it, for the love of Nine Divines!
Post by
MyTie
Priests and little boys, and the charges just being covered up, rather then dealt with in a court. I can see a bit of a comparison here.
Yep. Horrible. They should be arrested and brought to justice.
I just can't say "Islamic courts are murdering people" without getting a history lesson.
Ok, you all convinced me. I see now the error of my ways. This is just culture. This is just normal for religion. Places that force rape victims to marry the rapist are just as bad as the laws of every other country. Now that I know this, I'll stop being so critical of them. I'll start being more open minded. How cultural!
Post by
588688
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
b4xx
The history of Christianity is rife with instances where science and dogma came into conflict, such as with Galileo, Darwin and Russell. I move that we continually put pressure on churches so that they don't take any positions that contradict science because they've always been wrong in the past.
Does that seem fair?
The history
If I didn't make myself clear enough, that was hundreds of years ago, we're talking about present day here.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
The thing is, is that laws like these have been a fixture in most societies at some stage of their development, or another.
The old testament is every bit as brutal, in terms of severity of punishment, and unequal in terms of the status and rights of women to be treated as human beings, as most of the things we read today.
If you go back several hundred years in Europe, you'll see women treated with the same disregard. They were traded as property, rape was not a crime in any way other than making a woman unmarryable, or encroaching on the rights of her father or husband. If a woman was not a virgin, and had no husband, then there was no such thing as rape. There were laws about how a woman could be beaten, and with how large a rod in Europe as well.
In the US, slaves were owned, beaten, raped, treated as less than human, based on the color of their skin. Even after the abolition of slavery, there were still widespread judicial inequalities prior to the civil rights movements that would leave women of a minority essentially powerless to prosecute a rapist who was white.
In China, women's feet were bound as a status symbol. I don't know if any of you have ever read exactly what that process involved, but what the innocuous name leaves out is that a girl's feet were pounded with a mallet until all of the bones were broken, folded in two different ways, and then bound, so that they'd be small and "pretty". And much more recently, there have still been issues of families in the more rural, backwards parts of China killing female children in response to the one-child policy.
There have been similar stories about the historical treatment of women in Hindu countries, and in African countries of various religious beliefs (female circumcision in particular). I haven't had all that much education about the position of women in traditional North or South American indigenous societies, so I'll refrain from including them.
What seems glaringly obvious, at least to me, is that most or all cultures seem to have gone through a phase where women were considered property, to be done with as their husbands, owners, fathers, etc. decided. It's not unique to any one culture, or region, or race. It seems to be indicative of a certain level of cultural development. And it seems that what the countries that have taken the longest to shed these ideas and practices are the poorer, less educated countries. That includes many Middle Eastern countries, and many African countries as well (both Muslim and non-Muslim).
I think we do need to, as a global community, stand up and root out these barbaric and archaic practices and protect human rights. We also need to recognize that this is something that has occurred in our own people's histories as well as others. It's sadly not the product of only one or two cultures, but seemingly a stage of development in most cultures. That's the point people are trying to make- it's not just a Muslim phenomenon, and to label it as such alienates the large population of Muslims who are not from rural communities and undeveloped countries, who are as disgusted by what is going on as we are, and who are now torn between condemning what's going on and defending themselves from being lumped in with these people who allow and commit such atrocities.
Post by
MyTie
I think we do need to, as a global community, stand up and root out these barbaric and archaic practices and protect human rights. We also need to recognize that this is something that has occurred in our own people's histories as well as others. It's sadly not the product of only one or two cultures, but seemingly a stage of development in most cultures.
That's odd. I was under the impression that everyone else was perfect. Thanks for pointing this out.
Post by
gamerunknown
However, I'm talking about stopping people from RAPE, not stopping them from believing that the earth is the center of the universe.
Great, the first step you'll need to make is to recognise when the tolerance of rape is part of their creed (rape of slaves) and not (rape of strangers). It's a stupid traditional practice, it's a part of their culture that they'll hopefully excise and a healthy dose of secularism certainly wouldn't hurt in helping to remove stupid legislation, but the only religious doctrine that supports such a principle comes from Deuteronomy.
My entire point is that it is special pleading to ask that culture and religion are considered separately in your case (you argue convincingly on that point every time someone brings up the Christians doing something not
assigned in the Gospels
) but to instantly attribute a crappy cultural rule to religion is hypocritical and special pleading.
Post by
MyTie
My entire point is that it is special pleading to ask that culture and religion are considered separately in your case (you argue convincingly on that point every time someone brings up the Christians doing something not
assigned in the Gospels
) but to instantly attribute a crappy cultural rule to religion is hypocritical and special pleading.
Yikes dude. Islam isn't to blame. I don't think it is. I think it is this thing called "Islamic Law". Maybe all the Muslims that practice it are religiously incorrect. That is why I offered you the compromise about calling it X law. If it is the comparison to the actual religion, fine, but that's not what this is about.
Post by
gamerunknown
"Islamic Law"
It's no more an Islamic law than the commandment not to eat meat on Fridays was a Christian one. It's a terrible law prescribed by an ignorant judge. There are other terrible laws prescribed by ignorant judges that have their basis in the practices and teachings of Muhammad. This isn't one of them.
Post by
MyTie
"Islamic Law"
It's no more an Islamic law than the commandment not to eat meat on Fridays was a Christian one. It's a terrible law prescribed by an ignorant judge. There are other terrible laws prescribed by ignorant judges that have their basis in the practices and teachings of Muhammad. This isn't one of them.
This concept
needs to be stopped. Whatever you want to call it. I don't care. You seem to be tripping over the actual issue in an attempt to defend Islam. That's what I don't like. People are so quick to defend Islam and condemn the rest of the world that atrocities like this don't get addressed as they should. LIKE I SAID, we will call it X law if you find that more accurate. My problem isn't with the Koran, but with the application of these laws, which is common in countries that practice Islam.... again.... like I said.. over and over... and over...
Post by
b4xx
"Islamic Law"
It's no more an Islamic law than the commandment not to eat meat on Fridays was a Christian one. It's a terrible law prescribed by an ignorant judge. There are other terrible laws prescribed by ignorant judges that have their basis in the practices and teachings of Muhammad. This isn't one of them.
There's a difference; those laws aren't in use anymore. In western civilization, when things get outdated, they're removed from use. This doesn't seem to be the case with prementioned islamic countries.
Okay I'm generalizing, but you get my point.
Post by
gamerunknown
The old testament is every bit as brutal, in terms of severity of punishment, and unequal in terms of the status and rights of women to be treated as human beings, as most of the things we read today.
It's interesting to note that the punishment for rape is marriage, but for consensual sex it's death.
This doesn't seem to be the case with prementioned islamic countries.
How about the Biblical law that requires homosexuals to be executed? That's going to be reinstated in Uganda.
This concept needs to be stopped. Whatever you want to call it. I don't care. You seem to be tripping over the actual issue in an attempt to defend Islam
I've criticised Islam repeatedly and consistently. You used to complain when I linked Christopher Hitchens on religious matters. What I'm defending is factual accuracy. The only religious justification for this practice is in the Bible. It doesn't appear in the Quran, nor the hadith, nor did Muhammad ever practice it - which is the entire central premise of Islamic jurisprudence and the accompanying legal code of Shariah.
My problem isn't with the Koran, but with the application of these laws, which is common in countries that practice Islam.... again.... like I said.. over and over... and over...
Deductive fallacy.
P: Islamic countries have some laws are based on the Quran.
P: Some of the laws based on the Quran are horribly repressive.
P: This Islamic country has a horribly repressive law.
C: This horribly repressive law is based on the Quran.
Post by
asakawa
This is a cheap coverup way of saying that it is rooted in religious Islamic law. I hate it when people are so sensitive to not offending Islam that they won't call a duck a duck. Let's not play coy. Islamic law is barbaric to women.
You want everyone to call a duck a duck so how about you do the same. Stop pushing your agenda and simply call the barbaric treatment of women barbaric. You jumped into this issue with both feet and now you're trying to get yourself out of it. Everyone was condemning the treatment of the woman in the story but you derailed with your own issues meaning that the goal toward which you profess to fight, you only do a disservice. The discussion hasn't been about condemning the actions of ignorant brutes, it's been about whatever you want to talk about.
I guess your aim is to treat the sickness not just the symptoms but (pushing the analogy a bit too far probably) you're not a doctor.
Post by
MyTie
I guess your aim is to treat the sickness not just the symptoms but (pushing the analogy a bit too far probably) you're not a doctor.
Dang, you got me. I'll go back to what I'm good at, and not bother trying to argue for human rights.
I've criticised Islam repeatedly and consistently. You used to complain when I linked Christopher Hitchens on religious matters. What I'm defending is factual accuracy. The only religious justification for this practice is in the Bible. It doesn't appear in the Quran, nor the hadith, nor did Muhammad ever practice it - which is the entire central premise of Islamic jurisprudence and the accompanying legal code of Shariah.
Christopher Hitchens attacked stuff like Mother Theresa. He was pretty general in his criticisms of Christianity itself by attributing the actions of everyone who professes to be Christian. That's the opposite of what I'm doing here.
You jumped into this issue with both feet and now you're trying to get yourself out of it.
Not at all. From the very beginning of this, I've been critical of the application of Islamic Law, just like the local Morrocans are. This doesn't have to do with the writings of the Koran (as I've told gamer over and over and over). This is about the judicial system in the Middle East. Stop trying to defend Islam. I'm not attacking it. Stop trying to defend the Koran. I'm not attacking it. I've been consistently critical of the application of Islamic Law. This is the same as me being critical of actions of the Catholic Church. I'm not equating this to the religion of Islam. I would say that the actions are religious, and I would say that we call the application "Islamic Law" or "Sharia". That's what it is called. That's what it is. And that is what is causing the problem.
Both of you are so... intent on defending Islam... that you can't see what I'm arguing against. Like I said, you are tripping over the actual issue in an attempt to defend Islam. When I tell you that I'm not attacking Islam itself, you say I'm trying to "get myself out of it".
Ok, now I'd like to predict what comes next: gamer explains to me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of that religion, but may not be a good representation of the actual religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point. Then gamer will tell me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of religion, but may not be a good representation of the religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point.Then gamer will tell me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of religion, but may not be a good representation of the religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point. Then gamer will tell me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of religion, but may not be a good representation of the religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point. Then gamer will tell me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of religion, but may not be a good representation of the religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point. Then gamer will tell me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of religion, but may not be a good representation of the religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point. Then gamer will tell me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of religion, but may not be a good representation of the religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point. Then gamer will tell me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of religion, but may not be a good representation of the religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point. Then gamer will tell me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of religion, but may not be a good representation of the religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point. Then gamer will tell me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of religion, but may not be a good representation of the religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point. Then gamer will tell me that I can't say it is Islam because nothing in the Koran justifies this. At that point I'll post that I'm being critical of a judicial system that came out of religion, but may not be a good representation of the religion, and that his argument is a distraction from my actual point.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.