Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

shaf ... maximum 6 months in jail (IF CONVICTED) , for murder, is an endorsment of honor killing.

I dont know why sikh's kill, that s not the point, the point is they dont do it in the WEST, only moslims do.

^Caps, really, stop embarrassing yourself.

The story was about Pres Abbas saying he was going to abolish this defence within the judicial system due to the public outcry. It showed the general abhorence of these crimes within Palestinian society. So thanks for pointing it out.

I repeat:

Show where any Islamic cleric or authority says honour killings are ok. You can't. Fail number 1.

Explain why Hindus and Sikhs etc carry out honour killings - and explain how come eh thinks it is a Muslim problem. That's fail no. 2.

(And tell me why you think only Muslims carry out honour killings in the west? Has there not been sikh and hindu honour killings in the West?)

Cheers,
Shafique

Oh why spend a few seconds on google when it will clash with your bias.

The Jordanian Islamic Action Front (IAF) disagrees. In the heat of the Jordanian debate, this parliamentary coalition of several Islamist groups, most of whom affiliate with the Muslim Brethren, issued a fatwa that declared honor-killings are seen as favorable by Islam; male relatives should punish their female relatives and not leave this duty to the state. Ibrahim Zayd al-Kaylani, head of the IAF's Ifta ' committee, said that a man who restrains himself from committing an honor killing, leaving this unpleasant burden to the government, "negates the values of virility advocated by Islam." Article 340, Kaylani added, is based on "the Islamic principle that allows a Muslim to defend his honor, property, and blood."36 Muhammad 'Uwayda, dean of Zarqa University's Shari'a College and a member of the lower house, stated that while the Shari'a does prohibit individuals from taking the law into their own hands, "cases where a man catches his wife committing adultery are the exception."37 The IAF issued a fatwa to the effect that "canceling Article 340 would contradict the Shari'a."38...

http://www.meforum.org/50/honor-murders ... t-off-easy

Two scholars of Islamic law clearly advocate honor killings to me.

I'll also consult the Reliance of the Traveler,

A manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that "retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right." However, "not subject to retaliation" is "a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring." ('Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2).

http://www.bakelblog.com/nobodys_busine ... lings.html

If one recalls, the passage appears to reflect the Koranic verse where a child was put to death because he would eventually dishonor his parents. So, there you have it.

shaf, DD, may I ask you…hypothetically …what should be the best response from the Muslim parents of an 18 y / o girl who go out in mini skirt, converts to Christianity, is pregnant and does not know who of her 3 black bf’s is the father?

^Well, the Quran and God's commandments are quite clear about what happens - "There is no compulsion in religion'" - i.e. the 18 year old woman makes her choice when it comes to religion.

Now, what happens in practice will depend on what cultural norms are and what the parents' views are. As to whether she breaks any laws of the land, if she does then she pays the consequences - but nothing in Islam says the parents/family can harm her for her choices.

BTW - have you noticed how eh is avoiding the simple facts?

Fact no 1. eh can't find an Islamic cleric who says that honour killings are allowed (just some loon interpretations of a snippet attributed to a political group)

Fact no 2. eh's belief that this is a "Muslim problem" falls at the fact that Hindus and Sikhs etc also commit these crimes.

Interesting that, eh?

Cheers,
Shafique

funny, I was under the impression that EH made his point, it seems the only one here ignoring the facts is you.

^LOL

Which of the facts did eh address? I could only see his usual loon fantasies which are based on bible camp stories.

(Don't tell me you also confuse fairy stories with reality?)

Facts are: Islam does not condone honour killings; and eh is wrong when he believes only Muslims carry out honour killings.

Cheers,
Shafique

Well, I see my quotes from two present day Muslim scholars and a Sunni Muslim legal manual aren't good enough.

Who would have guessed it?

As I said, loon fantasies and reality are hardly on speaking terms.

We'll just wait for the young lad to see whether any of his friends can ever dig up a direct quote that says Islam condones honour killings. (And note how the spin is now of 'scholars' and 'legal manual' - rather than the reality which is 'loon interpretations of snippets')

I guess we'll have to abandon any hope of getting an answer to why the young loon thinks honour killings is exclusively a Muslim problem when the reality is that Hindus, Sikhs etc also conduct this crime.

Better luck next time eh. As caps says - you're busted.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I guess we'll have to abandon any hope of getting an answer to why the young loon thinks honour killings is exclusively a Muslim problem when the reality is that Hindus, Sikhs etc also conduct this crime.

Better luck next time eh. As caps says - you're busted.

Cheers,
Shafique

No al shafique YOU are busted here is your response:

According to Worldwide trends in honor killings published in the Middle East forum, Muslims are responsible for 91% of honor killings
http://www.meforum.org/2646/worldwide-t ... r-killings

Oh dear hervey baby - I see that your knowledge of English is letting you down yet again - as is your eternal enemy, Statistics. But nice of you to try and step in and help the 'young loon'.

The question was why he thinks Honor killings is EXCLUSIVELY a Muslim phenomenon. You've shown that even the best loon approximation gives 9% of honour killings - approximately one in 10 of them - being carried out by non-Muslims.

Thanks for showing that caps was completely wrong to believe it was an exclusive Muslim crime.

Now, it is for him to explain what reasons the 9% non-Muslim criminals have for committing this crime (and then showing why this is not the SAME reason Muslim criminals have for carrying out the crime). It can't be 'Islam' as the reason for the 9%, can it?

As my dad always tells me - 'always be grateful'. So thanks for making my point herve, much appreciated.

Your link provides us with exactly the clarification many have made:

Representatives of Islamist pressure groups including Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Canadian Islamic Congress, various academics (e.g., Ajay Nair, Tom Keil), activists (e.g., Rana Husseini), and religious leaders (e.g., Abdulhai Patel of the Canadian Council of Imams) have insisted that honor killings either do not exist or have nothing to do with Islam; that they are cultural, tribal, pre-Islamic customs, and that, in any event, domestic violence exists everywhere.

We can also compare the numbers of honour killings listed with the numbers of women killed by what the article calls 'Western domestic femicide'.

(A quick search reveals that in the USA alone, around 2000 women are killed each year by intimate partners - and that this is a worldwide problem. Alcohol is also one of the main contributory causes:
http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prev ... /chap4.pdf
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=971
)

Cheers,
Shafique

do you know how to read????

This study analyzes 172 incidents and 230 honor-killing victims. The information was obtained from the English-language media around the world with one exception. There were 100 victims murdered for honor in the West, including 33 in North America and 67 in Europe. There were 130 additional victims in the Muslim world. Most of the perpetrators were Muslims, as were their victims, and most of the victims were women.

Although Sikhs and Hindus do sometimes commit such murders, honor killings, both worldwide and in the West, are mainly Muslim-on-Muslim crimes. In this study, worldwide, 91 percent of perpetrators were Muslims.

91% qualifies pretty good for honor killings to be an exclusive muslim crime. and again you flip a 9% stat trying to spin the fact 180deg.
so in case you did not get it


Although Sikhs and Hindus do sometimes commit such murders, honor killings, both worldwide and in the West, are mainly Muslim-on-Muslim crimes. In this study, worldwide, 91 percent of perpetrators were Muslims.

Do you not know the meaning of the word 'Exclusive'?

You know it is different from 'majority', don't you?

So, given that you've provided caps with more headaches - why don't you take up my challenge and work out the numbers of women killed by intimate partners around the world - I've given you the figures for the USA in the last post - around 2000 a year.

In 2008 females age 12 or older experienced about 552,000 nonfatal violent victimizations (rape/sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated or simple assault) by an intimate partner (a current or former spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend).

Over half a million! In the USA alone. In one year. That's a lot by any standard.

Cheers,
Shafique

Its not just killing, in many cases torture is involved.

Worldwide, more than half the victims were tortured; i.e., they did not die instantly but in agony. In North America, over one-third of the victims were tortured; in Europe, two-thirds were tortured; in the Muslim world, half were tortured. Torturous deaths include: being raped or gang-raped before being killed; being strangled or bludgeoned to death; being stabbed many times (10 to 40 times); being stoned or burned to death; being beheaded, or having one's throat slashed.

Finally, worldwide, 58 percent of the victims were murdered for being "too Western" and/or for resisting or disobeying cultural and religious expectations (see Table 1). The accusation of being "too Western" was the exact language used by the perpetrator or perpetrators. Being "too Western" meant being seen as too independent, not subservient enough, refusing to wear varieties of Islamic clothing (including forms of the veil), wanting an advanced education and a career, having non-Muslim (or non-Sikh or non-Hindu) friends or boyfriends, refusing to marry one's first cousin, wanting to choose one's own husband, choosing a socially "inferior" or non-Muslim (or non-Sikh or non-Hindu) husband; or leaving an abusive husband

Shafique, do you find it according to Islamic rulings justifiable that if a teenage girl refusing to cover her head and walks in tight jeans to eventually give her corporal punsihment?

You want to include murders by intimate partners (spouses) that were commited for other reasons, which have nothing to do with honor killings committed by relatives (parents and siblings), in a poor attempt to deceit. The perps are not even the same.
The point here is that Muslims are responsible of honor killings in a overwhelming majority.

Although Sikhs and Hindus do sometimes commit such murders, honor killings, both worldwide and in the West, are mainly Muslim-on-Muslim crimes. In this study, worldwide, 91 percent of perpetrators were Muslims.

No, I don't find any excuse in Islam for any honour killing or torture - corporal punishment for a teenage girl who refusing to cover her hair would be classified as child abuse and is not allowed in Islam.

Corporal punishment in Islam, as you well know, is only allowed in extreme circumstances after a series of lighter punishments - and the Quran is clear on this and puts strong limitations on when and who can apply corporal punishment. Islam is quite clear - violence or battery against women is not allowed - corporal punishment as a last resort and after a few months of warnings etc is the extent that a husband can punish his wife, anything in excess of that is illegal.

The figures for the USA for non-fatal violence against women is horrendously high - over half a million. These, and other crimes against women are just that - crimes.

As I quoted in the prior post, honour killings are categorically unIslamic:

Representatives of Islamist pressure groups including Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Canadian Islamic Congress, various academics (e.g., Ajay Nair, Tom Keil), activists (e.g., Rana Husseini), and religious leaders (e.g., Abdulhai Patel of the Canadian Council of Imams) have insisted that honor killings either do not exist or have nothing to do with Islam; that they are cultural, tribal, pre-Islamic customs, and that, in any event, domestic violence exists everywhere.

(Emphasis for herve)
-- Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:57 pm --

Edit - yes herve, I want to compare the numbers of women killed by intimate partners and compare them with the equally brutal crime of honour killings. In both cases the women are dead.

As FD points out there are also crimes which don't involve the killing of the women. We can compare these non-fatal crimes as well. Both are as heinous as each other. In the USA - over half a million women each year are raped etc by intimate partners.

We should denounce ALL violence against women, shouldn't we?

(And thanks for making my point:
Sikhs and Hindus do sometimes commit such murders
)

Cheers,
Shafique

-- Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:02 pm --

Edit 2: herve, if you look at the links I gave - it states clearly that the incident rates in India are grossly under reported. Many 'accidental burns' are actually women who are doused with kerosene and set alight.

You'll see that the problem is one from Hindu, Sikh and Muslim.

shafique wrote:No, I don't find any excuse in Islam for any honour killing or torture - corporal punishment for a teenage girl who refusing to cover her hair would be classified as child abuse and is not allowed in Islam.
Shafique

Yes do, you just pretend otherwise for your propaganda

shafique wrote:Corporal punishment in Islam, as you well know, is only allowed in extreme circumstances after a series of lighter punishments - corporal punishment as a last resort and after a few months of warnings etc is the extent that a husband can punish his wife, anything in excess of that is illegal.
Shafique

On your admission it is allowed. it does not matter if it is after 2 days , 2 weeks or 2 months, it is allowed period, in the free world it is always illegal. no warning is allowed, no punishment is allowed.
Warnings?!?!, and what kind of animal do you think you are to beleive you are entitled to warn your wife, nutter.

Representatives of Islamist pressure groups including Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Canadian Islamic Congress, various academics (e.g., Ajay Nair, Tom Keil), activists (e.g., Rana Husseini), and religious leaders (e.g., Abdulhai Patel of the Canadian Council of Imams) have insisted that honor killings either do not exist or have nothing to do with Islam; that they are cultural, tribal, pre-Islamic customs, and that, in any event, domestic violence exists everywhere.

Yes right they dont exist. how about this:
Although Sikhs and Hindus do sometimes commit such murders, honor killings, both worldwide and in the West, are mainly Muslim-on-Muslim crimes. In this study, worldwide, 91 percent of perpetrators were Muslims.

shafique wrote:Edit - yes herve, I want to compare the numbers of women killed by intimate partners and compare them with the equally brutal crime of honour killings. In both cases the women are dead.
Shafique

Feel free to start another thread if you want, this thread is about honor killings.

shafique wrote:We should denounce ALL violence against women, shouldn't we?
Shafique

Start denouncing mouslim honor killings, then we can see.

LOL herve, I've denounced Honour killings and all other crimes against women. Do you even read what is posted here?

You still seem to be misunderstanding the word 'exclusive' - my point has always been that Caps was wrong to blame honour killings on Islam, because other faiths also carry out this crime. As you keep pointing out - Caps was wrong, and I was right - Sikhs and Hindus also carry out honour killings.

Therefore honour killings aren't something that is inherent in Islam - indeed they are crimes against Islam.

In context, it seems that these are part of wider problem of crimes against women. In the USA alone over half a million are raped etc by intimate partners and about 2000 are killed each year.

In the links I gave you, all these crimes against women are grouped together.

But I thank you again for making my point that it is not an exclusive Muslim problem, and for giving us the links to show it is part of a wider problem of violence against women.

Cheers,
Shafique

corporal punishment for a teenage girl who refusing to cover her hair would be classified as child abuse and is not allowed in Islam.

What about hitting a young child for not praying?

Favor or oppose?

If you want to claim either of your views (corporal punishment for girls refusing to wear scarves and children for not praying) are in line with Muslim teachings, then I suggest you provide a convincing and easily recognizable intellectual process for arriving at any such conclusion.

Islam is quite clear - violence or battery against women is not allowed

Uh, yeah, it is.

You need to get acquainted with a dictionary sometime. Allowing wife beating - which the Koran does - means that *violence* is allowed.

Otherwise, you would quote a verse that says to never hit your wife, under any circumstances.

Corporal punishment: "hitting", "slapping" = violence.

and the Quran is clear on this and puts strong limitations on when and who can apply corporal punishment. Islam is quite clear - violence or battery against women is not allowed - corporal punishment as a last resort and after a few months of warnings etc is the extent that a husband can punish his wife, anything in excess of that is illegal.

Where does the Koran say any of that? Please provide the verse where a husband must wait several months before 'beating' his wife?

What are the 'strong' limitations the Koran puts on wife beating?

I think there are only two, last I knew. And these limitations don't change the fact that violence is still allowed.

Only a passage that says you can't hit your wife would make that true.