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
Skithus
I think MyTie is on the right track when it comes to calling out Islam for its bat^&*! laws/ way of life. I just feel we should take it to the next step and just call out all religions every time any of them do something stupid.
Other religions have a history of being equally backwards, the majority of them however have either moved on from the barbarism of the medieval period, and or no longer possess the sway, political and social might to enforce many of the more inane things written in the various religious books.
As for this article, if I was Her, and planning on killing myself anyway, I'd make damn sure I took him with me. And the judge too, if I could.
Post by
gamerunknown
MyTie, you should know better to call this a duck. You've read the Quran: there's absolutely no textual support for the judge's decision. Rape isn't even a concept in there: one can have intercourse with any of one's wives or slaves, consent doesn't come into that... Adultery is held as an evil deed, but no punishment is prescribed.
As far as I know this derives from "the book" as they call the Bible. There are numerous times in the Quran where Muhammad instructs his followers to consult the people of "the book": the Quran is the highest authority (and parts of it quite blatantly contradict the commandments in the Torah, as do the Gospels), but a Muslim is meant to follow the rules of the covenant where possible. As for women not having to marry a rapist: bull@#$%. Read the rest of Deuteronomy: if a woman cannot prove she's a virgin on her wedding day (by giving her bloody nuptial sheets to her father in law), the town has a moral duty to stone her to death. If she doesn't shout loud enough while being raped, the town has a moral duty to stone her to death. There's no equivalent moral duty written in for the townspeople to help a woman that's shouting, because that'd inconvenience heterosexual males.
Post by
MyTie
MyTie, you should know better to call this a duck. You've read the Quran: there's absolutely no textual support for the judge's decision. Rape isn't even a concept in there: one can have intercourse with any of one's wives or slaves, consent doesn't come into that... Adultery is held as an evil deed, but no punishment is prescribed.
As far as I know this derives from "the book" as they call the Bible. There are numerous times in the Quran where Muhammad instructs his followers to consult the people of "the book": the Quran is the highest authority (and parts of it quite blatantly contradict the commandments in the Torah, as do the Gospels), but a Muslim is meant to follow the rules of the covenant where possible. As for women not having to marry a rapist: bull@#$%. Read the rest of Deuteronomy: if a woman cannot prove she's a virgin on her wedding day (by giving her bloody nuptial sheets to her father in law), the town has a moral duty to stone her to death. If she doesn't shout loud enough while being raped, the town has a moral duty to stone her to death. There's no equivalent moral duty written in for the townspeople to help a woman that's shouting, because that'd inconvenience heterosexual males.
Islam is not to blame here. Islamic law is. Whether their application of law is in line with the Koran and additional texts isn't a defense for the use of it. I'll be more clear: Application of Islamic tradition as judicial precedent is the "duck". I'm more peeved that the article didn't mention that the traditions are Islamic, or that the Judicial government utilizes Islamic law. This would be like if the Pope justified raping children, and a news article said "A local Italian offical has employed historical traditions this justification", instead of coming out and saying "The Catholic Pope" or "Catholicism". It's using semantics deceptively for the purpose of a social double standard.
Post by
Adamsm
No, Moroccan Law is to blame here, not Islamic.
Post by
MyTie
No, Moroccan Law is to blame here, not Islamic.
I didn't eat half a dozen eggs! I only ate 6.
Post by
asakawa
But it's that country's laws right? Why would they need to specify that it's Islamic-based any more than a story about Italian law would have to note that it's laws are based on Catholic traditions or England's on CofE?
I dunno, seems like you're barking up a weird tree here MyTie.
edit: ah, late to the party.
edit2: As much as I'd like for it not to be the case, each countrys laws are infused with their religious history. MyTie, your concentrating on Islam is now just distracting from the idea that, whatever the reason for the law, this is a terrible state of affairs.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##asakawa##DELIM##
Post by
MyTie
According to the newspaper, this type of forced marriage is rooted in local rural traditions to safeguard the honor of girls who are raped.
This here is what bothers me.
Post by
asakawa
So take it up with the newspaper.
Post by
MyTie
So take it up with the newspaper.
No no. You don't get to be patronizing or condescending. I am here to discuss the news article, including how it was written. If you want to discuss that with me, fine. If you want me to just stop discussing it then you can go fly a kite.
Edit:edit2: As much as I'd like for it not to be the case, each countrys laws are infused with their religious history. MyTie, your concentrating on Islam is now just distracting from the idea that, whatever the reason for the law, this is a terrible state of affairs.The root of this problem is indicative to a huge chunk of the world for millions, perhaps billions of people. We can address this instance, but why not discuss the real problem, which is religious law being applied to peoples lives in inappropriate way. The issue isn't that the country used to use religious law, or has roots in religious tradition, but that it lets religion dictate its laws to it still. This is not "tit for tat". This is wrong as it stands. There is no need to "
well, the rest of the world
" this issue, because it is an issue and it needs to be addressed.
Post by
Adamsm
Then change the actual laws.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
Out of curiosity, MyTie, if the tradition of a woman marrying her rapist isn't written in their religious texts anywhere, but is a part of their cultural beliefs, wouldn't the paper's statement be more accurate than to say "Islamic Law," if this particular law isn't rooted in Islamic religion?
A comparable example would be...I don't know...to write an article about abortion in the UK. Currently, I believe that the Church of England is tied to the state, and their laws are based in a Christian tradition. Abortion is currently legal in the UK. If, 100 years from now, someone was describing the root of abortion laws in the UK as being rooted in traditional Christian Law vs. a cultural belief that an infant is not alive until X number of weeks into the pregnancy, which would be more accurate?
Islamic countries have traffic laws, and copywrite laws, and laws about visas and passports. Just because a law exists in a country which bases it's laws on their religion, doesn't mean that every single law is rooted in that religion.
There are plenty of laws that ARE rooted in Islamic tradition that I think are disgusting. I'm just saying that, in a case where there is no religious basis for the law, saying it's rooted in the culture is accurate. I would be more inclined to agree with an argument that the position of women based on Islamic law has created a culture where the rights of women are not regarded when passing laws like this, but I don't think that makes the paper's description wrong.
Post by
asakawa
@MyTie
Lol, I'm not trying to stop you doing anything
/rolleyes
My guess is that if a journalist called this local decision an Islamic thing then they would get some reaction from Muslims who do not see that behaviour as part of Islam. What
is
this law, undeniably? It's local and that location is rural.
Meh, journalists can't go generalising an entire religion when writing story like this. Perhaps a state law in the US is clearly derived from the Old testament - is it fair to write a story about a judgement and specify that this law is a Christian thing? I can't see many good journalists doing that unless the story was about that.
My point is that you've got an agenda here and I think it's causing your reaction expressed in this thread to be disproportionate to the issue.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##asakawa##DELIM##
Post by
MyTie
@Elhonna - Agreed. That could be true. However, this law, and this type of treatment of human being is much more indicative of countries employing Islmaic Law and Islamic traditions than it is countries that are not.
@awakawa - The truth shouldn't be avoided out of fear of making people upset.
As far as my "agenda", I agree. It is my agenda to help stop human rights abuses all over the world. Covering it up, shrugging it off, and not looking at the root causes is the enemy of freedom and justice. I've got an agenda. Proud of it.
Post by
Adamsm
Covering it up, shrugging it off, and not looking at the root causes is the enemy of freedom and justice. I've got an agenda. Proud of it.But the Root here, isn't Islamic Law(since if you read the article you linked, it's actually about giving women more rights), it's a back ass left over regional law; you want to change the laws to get better results in areas that still follow things like that.
Post by
asakawa
@awakawa - The truth shouldn't be avoided out of fear of making people upset.
But your assumption that this is the case here is a big one. Maybe you're used to irresponsible journalism in the US (This is mostly just a silly comment based on having seen some Fox "news" stuff) but I don't think fear is what makes journalists only say what they know to be fact and avoid reporting skewed views... it's integrity.
Post by
MyTie
Covering it up, shrugging it off, and not looking at the root causes is the enemy of freedom and justice. I've got an agenda. Proud of it.But the Root here, isn't Islamic Law(since if you read the article you linked, it's actually about giving women more rights), it's a back ass left over regional law; you want to change the laws to get better results in areas that still follow things like that.
Yeah. But application of Islamic law and these traditions are very closely correlated. It would be unwise to not see the apparent causation. Without being an expert on Islamic law, I can't speak to the words in the Koran and the other Islamic texts. However, I've seen many of these "rape victim killed" or "rape victim forced to marry" and they are all in Islamic countries.
Examples: (the following contain graphic images, language, and situations)
14 year old rape victim flogged to death
rape victim jailed
general brutality to afghan women
Saudi woman jailed for being raped
Post by
Adamsm
Which again....Change The Laws.
Post by
MyTie
Which again....Change The Laws.
Yeah. That's what needs to happen.@awakawa - The truth shouldn't be avoided out of fear of making people upset.
But your assumption that this is the case here is a big one. Maybe you're used to irresponsible journalism in the US (This is mostly just a silly comment based on having seen some Fox "news" stuff) but I don't think fear is what makes journalists only say what they know to be fact and avoid reporting skewed views... it's integrity.
I know. Saying that a bunch of women who were raped murdered and jailed under countries governed by Islamic law and traditions, were raped murdered and jailed under countries governed by Islamic law and traditions just REEKS of skewed views and lacks integrity!
Post by
gamerunknown
MyTie, I think you've argued too forcefully against special pleading and are in danger of hypocrisy. You've said before that Christians as a whole should not be held responsible for the Crusades since they were not based on tenets held by Jesus nor any textual support in the Bible.
As Elhonna points out, there are horrible principles supported by the Quran (freely having sex with a slave the right hand posseses for example) but this one isn't based on Quranic law or the hadith, it's based on the Torah. Can't you accept that a horrible cultural practice in a Muslim majority country could be based on anything other than the Quran?
Hell, even the practice of executing adulterers, homosexuals and witches is not explicitly referred to in the Quran, but is in the Torah.
Post by
Adamsm
Which again....Change The Laws.
Yeah. That's what needs to happen.Yes MyTie it does; you yourself provided a link on the version of Islam they follow in Morocco; a version that is working on women's rights and making them into equals with men...but in this case that ass backwards law killed a girl; those laws need to change.
It's not any different then the laws in the south of the US that have been changed over the years, especially since the Civil Rights movement.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.