Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

Well I wouldn't say the majority and I wouldn't say everywhere either. But countries like Pakistan and India have a major problem with it, because sadly many of these people are uneducated and believe everything the radicals tell them. Plus much of it is cultural, not religious.

Interesting that the Pakistani guy, also laid into my friend, who is his superior by the way, saying 'My wife would never dress like you!' - at work my friend dresses pretty convervatively. He also stated that women from his culture should be in the home, rasing the family and looking after things there and not work.

She said, oh so you think the same of me then? Should I be in the home and not working? I'm a woman and I'm your boss, you have to do what I tell you!

Surprisingly he didn't have a come back.

^Good on you Chocs!

I agree - the honour killing thing is cultural and certainly not condoned by any religion. Honour killings also occur in Christian, Sikh and Hindu families

Just to be a bit pedandtic: I would dispute that the majority of the over 1 billion Muslim parents would kill their child (or daughter in most cases) for sleeping with a guy before marriage. The stats don't back this up.

But it is indeed rife in many societies which happen to be Muslim. They tend to be the ones with the tribal mindsets though. It takes a pretty hard heart for one to kill one's own daughter - and nothing in Islam's teachings or the Prophet's , pbuh, practices can give anyone the impression that this is ok. You'll have to invent pretty outrageous justifications or false interpretations to get there (and our Islamphobic bloggers excel at this).

Cheers,
Shafique

True as shaf pointed out , I did exaggerate the frequency and amount of its occurrence in the muslim world. And i did that intentionally to draw attention to the alarming rate of its occurrence,there have been several reports of muslim immigrants committing this crime, Which has received much media coverage and fueling the fires of islamophobia.

And the root of the problem as chocs pointed out, is indeed ignorance, lack of understanding , unwillingness to research matters in depth , relying on external sources without any verification coupled with religious practices being infected with cultural practices which generations down the line come to be thought of as dictated by the religion.

Chocs, that guy sounds like a real loser. I feel sorry for his wife and children who potentially need to fear him if they cross over the line of what he thinks is acceptable.

A critic will have an honest debate whilst an Islamophobe constructs a fantasy view of Islam and ignores reality - in this case making a fanatastic argument that the Quran says it is ok for parents to kill their children if they are rebellious.

For a minute there, I thought I was reading someone's post directed towards you.

But I agree, we should ignore the trolls who lift their arguments from missionary websites and proof text verses in order to tell Christians and Jews how they are to 'properly' follow their religion - though these self appointed scholars manage to get some of the most basic facts on Judaism and Christianity wrong, leaving some to question the wisdom that our resident Google scholars preach.

But at least Berrin has acknowledged that Muslims should not ignore the passage in the Koran where honor killing is rationalized for us by Allah.

event horizon wrote:But at least Berrin has acknowledged that Muslims should not ignore the passage in the Koran where honor killing is rationalized for us by Allah.

What is honour killing? and where is it in the quran that instructs parents kill children due to this effect?

^ I'll show you the passage when I'm shown the verse instructing Muslims to prevent houses of worship from being destroyed.

Berrin wrote:

event horizon wrote:But at least Berrin has acknowledged that Muslims should not ignore the passage in the Koran where honor killing is rationalized for us by Allah.

What is honour killing? and where is it in the quran that instructs parents kill children due to this effect?

It isn't in the Quran - but eh (who hasn't actually read the whole Quran, and neither has his guru Bob Spencer) insists that it is in there somewhere (presumably it is really well hidden).

And note - this is all a bluff to counter the passage I quoted in passing in the first page of this thread (and worth repeating):

shafique wrote:The Bible and Quran do give maximum punishments for crimes that are quite horrific and for crimes which some may consider trivial.

Eg. Exodus 21:15, 17 (King James Version)
15And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
17And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.

So just swearing at your parents is worthy of the death penalty.

However, what happens in reality is that these laws describing maximum punishments are applied by judges who assess the merits of the case. These aren't minimum sentences, but rather maximum.

Indeed, the original article quoted by eh went on to make the point about interpretations that exist of these Scriptural laws for an eye-for-an-eye - I quoted that bit in my first reply in this thread.

The challenge for eh is he made this fantastic claim that he can't now back up:

event horizon wrote:

So just swearing at your parents is worthy of the death penalty.

Interesting, the Koran says it's 'ok' to kill your children if they will (sometime in the future) disobey their parents.

Don't know of any other religious text that allows for that.

All mouth, no trousers - again.

Cheers,
Shafique

kanelli wrote:Chocs, that guy sounds like a real loser. I feel sorry for his wife and children who potentially need to fear him if they cross over the line of what he thinks is acceptable.

I agree, to come across someone like that is pretty horrific. Interestingly while their conversation about 'cultures' was going on, my friend stated that where she comes from the women mostly go topless, most of the time. Surprisingly, no come back from the guy at this either.

Koran 18:74 - So they departed; until, when they met a lad, he slew him. He said, 'What, hast thou slain a soul innocent, and that not to retaliate for a soul slain? Thou hast indeed done a horrible thing.'

Koran 18:80-81 - As for the lad, his parents were believers; and we were afraid he would impose on them insolence and unbelief;

so we desired that their Lord should give to them in exchange one better than he in purity, and nearer in tenderness.

event horizon wrote:Interesting, the Koran says it's 'ok' to kill your children if they will (sometime in the future) disobey their parents.

Don't know of any other religious text that allows for that.

Indeed.

^Isn't this a classic 'what about-ery' argument that also relies on a selective quote and a fantastical interpretation? Wow - that's a TRIPLE Islamophobic whammy!!

Taking an allegorical passage about Moses (who doesn't do the killing in the allegory), trying to fantastically interpret it ... and all in order to excuse/draw attention from a Biblical commandment to kill children who swear at their kids!

(Given that you've refused to condemn war crimes committed by Moses in the Bible, I could also throw in hypocrisy - but that's really a given when it comes to your arguments relating to the Quran. )

Congratulations. You've distilled the essence of Islamophobic technique into one post. It shows you have no clue about the Quran, dude and I guess even your most extreme Bible camp attendees would cringe at the way you're trying to argue that the Quran says it is ok to kill your children (in the way the Bible commands).

Impressive, but sad.

Cheers,
Shafique

Well, as eh has presented those stanzas, it sounds like the lad was killed because his parents feared insolence and unbelief and they wanted a new child from the Lord who would be more pure and tender. However, eh, you go from stanza 18:74 and jump to 18:80-81. I don't know what was in between - context is important.

Not to our resident phobe, anything that confirms his bias is good enough.

Here is the allegory in a better context

[18:70] He said, "If you follow me, then you shall not ask me about anything, unless I choose to tell you about it."

[18:71] So they went. When they boarded a ship, he bore a hole in it. He said, "Did you bore a hole in it to drown its people? You have committed something terrible."

[18:72] He said, "Did I not say that you cannot stand to be with me?"

[18:73] He said, "I am sorry. Do not punish me for my forgetfulness; do not be too harsh with me."

[18:74] So they went. When they met a young boy, he killed him. He said, "Why did you kill such an innocent person, who did not kill another person? You have committed something horrendous."

[18:75] He said, "Did I not tell you that you cannot stand to be with me?"

[18:76] He said, "If I ask you about anything else, then do not keep me with you. You have seen enough apologies from me."

[18:77] So they went. When they reached a certain community, they asked the people for food, but they refused to host them. Soon, they found a wall about to collapse, and he fixed it. He said, "You could have demanded a wage for that!"

[18:78] He said, "Now we have to part company. But I will explain to you everything you could not stand.

[18:79] "As for the ship, it belonged to poor fishermen, and I wanted to render it defective. There was a king coming after them, who was confiscating every ship, forcibly.

[18:80] "As for the boy, his parents were good believers, and we saw that he was going to burden them with his transgression and disbelief.*

(**18:80 Adolf Hitler, Stalin, Pol pot were seemingly innocent children. Had they died as children, many would have grieved, and many would have even questioned God's wisdom. We learn from these profound lessons that there is a good reason behind everything )

[18:81] "We willed that your Lord substitute in his place another son; one who is better in righteousness and kindness.

[18:82] "As for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city. Under it, there was a treasure that belonged to them. Because their father was a righteous man, your Lord wanted them to grow up and attain full strength, then extract their treasure. Such is mercy from your Lord. I did none of that of my own volition. This is the explanation of the things you could not stand."

^Thanks DDS for quoting the allegory in full. The previous verses establish that this is a parable about Moses - and in it the companion can be considered an Angel of God (doing God's will and having knowledge of the future) or the whole episode is considered an allegorical spiritual journey that Moses undertook.

Indeed, it has a 'Christmas Carol' element to it.

There's nothing in the allegory that gives parents the right to kill their children - now had the parable had a parent killing a child and a justification given for it, then that would be something else.

In short, there's nothing in the Quran comparable to the Biblical commandment that kids swearing at their parents should be killed. If there were, then Muslims would be just like Christians who have to reject certain verses of their holy book. As there aren't, we don't have that issue. That is probably what is frustrating eh the most.

Cheers,
Shafique

Interesting! However, a person with little concept of these kinds of allegories could pull that stanza as proof that children who commit transgressions or who disbelieve can be killed. I can see the different ways it can be taken and used. Have we got any examples of Muslim religious leaders using these stanzas to support people killing their children?

kanelli wrote: Have we got any examples of Muslim religious leaders using these stanzas to support people killing their children?

I certainly quote you many instances of Muslim leaders re-emphasising that honour killings form no part of Islam (and even Pakistan has a law which makes it explicitly a crime - given that their tribal areas is one of the worst culprits - and there Pakistani laws which contradict the Mullah's views of Islam don't get through).

To be honest, my brief research only shows up this line of argument from non-Muslim (anti-Muslim) bloggers - which is peculiar, given that the same bloggers admit to not understanding Arabic or having read the whole Quran. It will be interesting to see if any person supporting honour killing or having actually carried out such a killing cites this verse in support of their actions - that would be proof that the interpretation is more than just a blogger's weird interpretation.

(Indeed, many bloggers who do make the argument that Islam condones honour killings either state that the Quran and Hadith don't condone it, but it is something that comes from other Islamic teachings, or don't mention this verse at all, eg:

Honor killing is neither in the Quran nor is it specified in any hadith.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina50128.htm



I guess it is up to eh to show which Muslim religious leaders agree with this belief that the Quran condones the killing of children for being rebellious.

Cheers,
Shafique

Let's go eh

The answer is apparently yes - they do exist in some countries and I hope they come into the 21st century.

Recently a member of the religious police in Saudi killed his daughter (in fact tortured her to death) for converting to Christianity, however it seems possible that this person won't be convicted of a crime as many Wahabists scholars don't consider it a crime to kill an apostate.

^blueshift - killing apostates is another innovation which has no Quranic basis, and has been discussed in other threads.

We are now awaiting eh to produce examples of Muslim religious leaders who use the allegorical verses relating to Moses to justify the killing of rebellious children. From your example in Saudi, the verse in question is not being used as an excuse (and I'd argue that the cleric who murdered his daughter has done so against the teachings of Islam - but that's for another thread).

Cheers,
Shafique

So now you want Muslim scholars to interpret the clear passages of the Koran for you on this one passage when past interpretations of key Koranic passages (9:29) have gone ignored when they were provided.

Curious and curiouser.

Sorry, what was that?

Was that a resounding sound of silence when asked for a religious scholar that uses this verse to justify killing of rebellious children????

All mouth, no trousers - again.

Cheers,
Shafique

Why there is a need for an evidence when it is clearly stated in Quran?!

I'm surprised at you Shaf. You denied stoning because it is not in Quran, although it been practiced during prophet and other khalifas time. and for this other rule which is exactly in Quran, if you have a child which is going to disobey you and become a nonmuslim--->murtid, you can kill them! You want evidences from scholars!

I'm so lucky my parents are nonbelievers as well!

^The point is that the Quran does not contain any verse which says a parent can kill their child for rebellion - and this just appears to be a fantastical interpretation by some anti-Muslim bloggers.

I could quote the Quran and say it says 'Do not pray'. These words do appear in the Quran, in that order - but I'd look pretty silly to say this is what Islam teaches.

Kanelli's request was quite straightfoward:

kanelli wrote:Have we got any examples of Muslim religious leaders using these stanzas to support people killing their children?

So far, the answer is: No.

(Perhaps you can help out the young lad, mel?)

Cheers,
Shafique

Was that a resounding sound of silence when asked for a religious scholar that uses this verse to justify killing of rebellious children????

Great, while you want others to search for Muslims who cite the verses from ch 18 of the Koran to justify honor killings, I'll ask you to find Christians or Jews who interpret the passages of an 'eye for an eye' to mean that if someone takes your eye, you have a legal right to take theirs.

We'll see if kanelli is still around or if she'll vanish from this thread.

-- Tue Jan 04, 2011 11:40 am --

kanelli wrote:Well, either the bible and quran say that it should be "eye for an eye" or they don't. Whether or not societies practice that is interesting, don't you think? Maybe the Christians are going against God by not chopping off hands and severing spinal cords?

Woah, what's up with this?

Why the double standard here, O Wise One?

Christians who don't poke out someone's eye if their eye was poked out are going against the Bible, so says our resident scholar, kanelli - but it's 'Islamophobic' to say that in the Koran honor killings are legitimized because I can't find current Muslims who cite a particular passage from the Koran? Hmmm.

Maybe Muslims who don't honor kill their children are going against what Allah allows in the Koran? What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Dontchya know, O Wise One?

Any one catching this?

If you come back with zilch examples of Jews and Christians who interpret the eye for an eye passages in the way Muslims do, can I go into an indignant rant like our fellow forum scholars have in this thread?

Will you admit to being a Jew hater?

eh - a simple - 'no, I could not find a religous leader that agrees with the blogger's argument' would have sufficed.

Cheers,
Shafique

If you need the example, I can tell you of Iranian clerics who support killing the children if they became nonbelievers.But I can't find the resources in English!

Again, when it is stated in Quran, why do we need the example for?

And the rule is not "you can kill them for rebellion", it says "you should kill them for rebellion"

^Killing of apostates is a different issue Mel - we've had already an example from Saudi.

It is the fantastical claim by eh about the Quran teaching it is ok to kill rebellious children that is without foundation and seems to be only a figment of an anti-Islamic blogger's mind.

eh dug himself a hole that he can't now get out of.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:^Killing of apostates is a different issue Mel - we've had already an example from Saudi.

It is the fantastical claim by eh about the Quran teaching it is ok to kill rebellious children that is without foundation and seems to be only a figment of an anti-Islamic blogger's mind.

eh dug himself a hole that he can't now get out of.

Cheers,
Shafique

What I understood from Event horizon's post was by rebellious he meant apostate. He can comment on this himself.

Well, the young lad quoted a verse of the Quran - insisted this said the Quran said it was ok to kill rebellious children, and was challenged to find one religious scholar who agreed with this interpretation.

So far he has failed - but it is nice of you to help him out though. (But even allowing for your interpretation of apostacy=rebellion, the Quran does not say it is ok to kill apostates - so that's a double-fail)

Cheers,
Shafique

LOL yea I already know in your version of Quran there is nothing about killing murtids or nonbelievers! Apparently it's all about having fun!