In 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that "Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values."
"Jordanian jailed for sister's 'honour killing,'" from AFP, January 29 (thanks to Maxwell):
AMMAN (AFP) - A Jordanian court sentenced a 19-year-old man to 10 years in jail for stabbing his sister to death in order to "cleanse the family honour," a judicial official said on Friday.The defendant turned himself in to police after killing his 22-year-old sister last year for many unexplained absences from home, said the official who requested anonymity.
"The court sentenced the defendant to 15 years in prison for premeditated murder, but reduced the sentence to 10 years after the family dropped any legal claims" against him, the source said.
"The defendant killed his sister with knife stabs on April 5, 2009 to cleanse the family honour, because of her many absences from home," the official said. "He then turned himself over to the police."
Murder is punishable by death in Jordan but in so-called "honour" cases a court sometimes commutes or reduces sentences, particularly if the victim's family urges leniency.
Between 15 and 20 women are murdered in honour killings each year in Jordan despite government efforts to fight such crimes....
"Between 15 and 20 women are murdered in honour killings each year in Jordan despite government efforts to fight such crimes...."
Why am I suspicious about these numbers............?
Because, Tanstaafl, Muslims lie.
Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values."
....................
Yes, because nothing bolsters family togetherness like some of its members murdering their sisters. sarc/off
This poor girl was stabbed to death for nothing more than "unexplained absences from home". She might have just been visiting her girlfriends.
more:
Murder is punishable by death in Jordan but in so-called "honour" cases a court sometimes commutes or reduces sentences, particularly if the victim's family urges leniency.
....................
This sort of clannishness is questionable at the best of times, but is *grotesque* in the case of "honor killings". This is not "the victim's family" so much as it is *the family of the murderer*.
Now, it is quite possible that this "19-year-old man" was so controlling of his sister that he took it upon himself to murder her when she got out of line.
But at least as common is the hideous scenario where the family that wants one of their members killed picks a young man or boy to commit the murder, because the court is more likely to lenient with them.
Clearly, the victim here is the poor dead young woman.
But you have to wonder about these boys as well, who are in many cases coerced into murdering their own loved ones in the name of "cleansing their family honor".
Of course, I'm sure that many of these killers are anything but reluctant, and relish their sick roles as restorers of their "family honor".
THERE IS NO VISITING GIRLFRIENDS IN ISLAM. Khomeini said so.
(Or was that laughter?) But if you're a member in good standing of Mo's Worship the Penis Club and you want to have sex with a two year old, knock yourself out.
Priorities, my friend. Priorities.
BUT: Queen Rania of Jordan is against it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/jordan/6736576/Queen-Rania-of-Jordan-takes-on-hardliners-over-honour-killings.html
Going against the Head of State's wife's point of view is not a good idea for Jordanians. She also does not always wear a headscarf. I wonder how this all stacks up with Sharia?
Kuffar, go back and read the story again. It is a puff piece full of Islamic propaganda. The message is, yeah, it's really sad and it's not Islamic but if she did leave the house without permission she deserved what happened to her.
And the beat goes on.
I stand corrected - my apologies.
For the uninitiated, 10 years for an honor killing is quite severe by Islamic standards.
From the article cited by Kuffar England:
When Abu Ishmael and his brothers arrived at their sister's house, they were greeted by catcalls from her relatives, goading them to carry out the killing. "Are you men?" they shouted. "Show us you are men."
The brothers knew what they were expected to do. They bundled their sister into the back of their van, and drove her home in silence.
Within half an hour, she was dead. When her body was handed over to the police, it had 28 stab wounds, including a fatal blow to her heart.
.........................
As I noted in my post above, this is a plot by the whole clan—or, at least, all of those with any power in the family.
more:
"I was angry with her," Abu Ishmael told The Sunday Telegraph as he sat in his lawyer's office. "I looked at her in the rear-view mirror as I drove. She said nothing, but she had a barbarous look."
.........................
Projection of the most grotesque kind. This woman is surrounded by family members howling for her blood, and *she* is the one described as "barbarous".
more:
His sister's crime was simple. Her husband complained that she had left the house on the middle of the night carrying her 16-month-old baby son. The police had found her wandering the streets half an hour later.
.........................
The police were at least somewhat complicit, since they presumably returned her to her husband's house, rather than offering her any protection.
more:
The dishonour such wanton behaviour brought on her own family, it seemed, could only be expunged by her death.
.........................
Her "wanton behaviour" was wandering the streets after her husband had beaten her and *thrown her out* of the house. My only question is whether the husband actually set her up for an "honor killing" because he wanted to get rid of her.
In any sane society, a woman can turn to her family if she isn't getting along with her husband. In Islam, she is more likely to be murdered by them.
more:
Researchers found that families often forced the weakest or youngest brother to carry out the killing, so he would be most likely to get a reduced sentence.
.........................
This is just what I noted above.
And now for some Taqiyya:
"We are not for taking the law into your own hands," said Sheikh Hamza, an affable, white-bearded man who is among the government's more measured critics. He insists that Sharia, or Islamic law, does not support honour killings.
.........................
That is because under full-fledged Shari'ah—as in Somalia or Taliban-era Afghanistan—these murders are not even somewhat furtive—they are carried out with the full support of the state, often in the form of barbaric public stonings.
Tanstaafl:
“Why am I suspicious about these numbers............? “
The official rate is about 20 per year, but an estimate of the actual number is about 60:
Husseini, Rana, "Murder in the Name of Honour," The Jordan Times, October 6-7, 1994
In the US, 1,700 people per year are killed by “intimate partners”:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5003a1.htm
Also, the overall murder rate in the US is three times higher than it is in Jordan. But I supppose the difference is that in the US we have better reasons to kill each other.
Kuffar England:
Your Telegraph article says:
“More important is article 98, a "crime of passion" defence, which is commonly used and gives reduced sentences to those who claim they commit violence in the fury of the moment.”
The issue in Jordan revolves around repealing this law, which allows for lighter sentences if the violence is deemed a “crime of passion”. If an honor crime in Jordan is committed in a premeditated manner, the case is dealt with like any other murder charge:
“A court issued Jordan's harshest punishment ever for an honor killing - 7 1/2 and 10-year jail terms for two brothers who stabbed their pregnant sister. But the judge said Wednesday he wasn't setting a principle, but felt the men deserved hard time because they didn't act in a sudden fury. The ruling comes amid a campaign led by Jordan's Queen Rania to amend lenient laws that provide for sentences as light as six months in prison for honor killings. An average of 20 women a year killed by male relatives each year, some for simply dating, according to government figures...But [the judge] underlined that the sentence was because the two brothers plotted the killing beforehand. "The case lacked the factor of the act of fury," he told The Associated Press."So far there is no general intention to deal differently with the honor crimes and impose harsher punishment," [the Judge] said.”
AP, “Jordan's Criminal Court convicts two brothers for killing their sister in an honor crime,” 18 May 2005 by Shafika Mattar
In Jordan there is a “crime of passion” defense. Know what? Other countries have the same defense:
“Crime of passion can be a full or partial defence in a number of countries including Argentina, Iran, Guatemala, Egypt, Israel and Peru.”
The Observer (England), “The Victims: Ending he Silence on Honour Killing,” 25 October 2009 by Tracy McVeigh
Israel? I guess they are evil as well. The UK just recently ended their “crime of passion” defense:
“After years of consultation, the Government will next week announce the end of the "crime of passion'' defence. The claim of provocation is used by most male defendants denying murder of a female partner. About 100 men a year kill their former or current partners. Provocation, such as failing to cook a meal, or persistent nagging, is the main defence used by barristers...While provocation is likely to remain on the statute book as a defence, it will be limited to the most serious instances, and will not include adultery or nagging.”
The Daily Telegraph, “Killers Can’t Blaim Naggin Wives,” 22 July 2008 by Rosa Prince
I guess primitive cultures kill for honor, and civilized cultures kill for nagging.
Australia also recently removed their defense of provocation:
“Men who kill women in a jealous rage may no longer benefit from the defence of provocation when the Victorian Government succeeds in abolishing an outdated legal recourse to conviction for manslaughter instead of murder. The Victorian Law Reform Commission has urged the scrapping of an excuse for violence seen as out of step with 21st century expectations of self-control, only a few weeks after Melbourne businessman James Ramage relied on provocation to escape a murder conviction for killing his estranged wife Julie...Ms Ramage was strangled by her husband in September last year. He was convicted last month of manslaughter after claiming he was provoked by his wife's taunts that sex with him repulsed her. He is yet to be sentenced.”
The Australian, “End 'jealous rage' defence to murder,” 19 Nov 2004 by Kate Legge
Primitive cultures kill for honor, and civilized cultures kill because their wives tell them they suck in bed.
BTW, the guy will likely be free in less than 7 years:
“Sentencing the Melbourne businessman to a maximum 11 years in prison, Justice Robert Osborn said he was not persuaded that Ramage felt genuine remorse for the "brutal killing" of his wife…After serving a mimimum non-parole period, he could be free in fewer than seven years - a prospect that prompted renewed calls yesterday from relatives of the victim and activists for the legal defence of provocation to be dumped.”
The Age, “Wife Killer May Go Free in Fewer Than 7 Years,” 10 Dec 2004 by Jamie Barry
In primitive cultures, you get 10 years for killing in the name of honor. In civilized cultures, you get 7 years for killing after receiving a rude comment.
Cornelius:
"For the uninitiated, 10 years for an honor killing is quite severe by Islamic standards."
For Jordan, 10 years is pretty standard, even if you kill a male for honor related reasons:
“According to "Jordan Times", the Criminal Court sentenced two brothers to a 10-year prison term each after convicting them of murdering their sibling with a wheel spanner in July 2003. S.S., 36, and his brother R., 43, were originally handed the death penalty by the tribunal for murdering their brother M. on July 18, 2003. But their sentence was immediately commuted to 10 years because the victim's family dropped charges against them. Court papers said the defendants plotted to murder their sibling, who was unemployed, because he was a troublemaker, alcoholic, and drug addict with a criminal record for the past 15 years.” ”
InfoProd, “Jordan: Brothers Receive Ten Year Sentence for Murder of Sibling
Also:
"A Jordanian court sentenced a 61-year-old man to 10 years in prison on Wednesday after convicting him of killing his teenage daughter last year to "defend his honour," a judicial official said."
AFP, "Jordan jails man for 10 years over 'honour' killing," 30 December 2009
The AP story I quoted above gave the two people 7.4 and 10 years.
"A Jordanian court has sentenced a young man to 10 years hard labour for murdering his sister in a so-called honour killing after she allegedly committed adultery, a court official said on Tuesday. The unnamed 23-year-old had been condemned to death in a verdict issued on Monday but the sentence was commuted after the family waived any personal charges against him."
AFP, "Ten years hard labour for Jordanian over 'honour killing'" 13 May 2008
The sentence of 10 years in this case is pretty standard for Jordan.
BTW, I was recently posting at Pajamas Media, and my posts were being routinely blocked and altered for no reason, and the people at PM did nothing about it when I asked for an explanation. I thank Mr Spencer for not doing this to me ever, and for allowing debate. Any site that blocks debate is pathetic, and PM is pathetic.
A Jordanian court sentenced a 19-year-old man to 10 years in jail for stabbing his sister to death in order to "cleanse the family honour," a judicial official said on Friday.
More proof that a woman's life is worth nothing in a Muslim country. Where are the feminists on this? Oh, they're busy slagging off Western Christian men again, as usual.
Dave742, as you hate Western civilization so much, all I can say is Fu*k off to Iran, demented benefit-scrounging parasite.
Dave742 sez:
"I thank Mr Spencer for not doing this to me ever, and for allowing debate. Any site that blocks debate is pathetic, and PM is pathetic."
This website has always allowed Muslims to post....it serves to educate people about the truths of Islam....and about how Muslims think and what they think about...you will learn more here than from any newspaper or magazine that you could buy....
Dave742, you said:
“Also, the overall murder rate in the US is three times higher than it is in Jordan.”
I looked at:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
And saw
# 24 United States: 0.042802 per 1,000 people
Jordan was not in this list of 62 countries.
But the UN added the following qualification:
“DEFINITION: Total recorded intentional homicides, completed. Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence. Per capita figures expressed per 1,000 population.” (this seems more honest than your absolute figure of “1700 murders by intimate partners in USA”. A country of 305 million. Opposed to “60 of such murders in Jordan”, a country of perhaps # 6 million? Both per year. The per capita murder rate than would be a little bit better in the USA!)
So here’s Jihad Watch monitoring behavior in Islamic countries and communities, by self-confessed Muslims, often perpetrated on women or religious minorities.
Then you come and compare statistics. So far so good.
But the statistics can also mean that “actual prevalence” is not indicated but much more both prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime. Both of which are to be commended in the police and population of a nation. This must be sorted out first and until then you have no case.
Admittedly maybe sometimes we have no case, either, as not always all the relevant facts are fully known. But I think Jihad Watch is doing a tremendous service to mankind to monitor, report, criticize the actual teachings of Islam and the actual behavior of self-confessed Muslims all over the world.
Responses like yours are indeed welcome, they ensure that both Muslims and non-Muslims get to think very hard about Islam and Democracy. It causes people to take notice of warnings and actual behavior. And I daresay it makes potential culprits a bit wary, knowing they and their religion are being watched. And that it makes potential and actual victims more aware of their rights and their possibilities and natural allies.
I would hope this is the spirit in which you give your responses. And those who criticize, like JW-posters, should also be open for counter-criticism, so that we in turn can improve the behavior of all sorts of other people than Muslims.
But I think you are primarily out to shut up the Islam-critics, or when that fails, to character-assassinate them, to nullify/ neutralize their arguments as much as possible.
In the case of honor-killings, would not a nobler Islamic/ apologist reaction to Islam-critics be: “OK, we see your point, we support you on this issue 100 % and we will strive to diminish at least THIS kind of Islamic motivation mentioned by you as best we can, in order to at least diminish the overall murder by intimate relatives in THIS way.”
Dave742, you said:
“Also, the overall murder rate in the US is three times higher than it is in Jordan.”
I looked at:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
And saw
# 24 United States: 0.042802 per 1,000 people
Jordan was not in this list of 62 countries.
But the UN added the following qualification:
“DEFINITION: Total recorded intentional homicides, completed. Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence. Per capita figures expressed per 1,000 population.” (this seems more honest than your absolute figure of “1700 murders by intimate partners in USA”. A country of 305 million. Opposed to “60 of such murders in Jordan”, a country of perhaps # 6 million? Both per year. The per capita murder rate than would be a little bit better in the USA!)
So here’s Jihad Watch monitoring behavior in Islamic countries and communities, by self-confessed Muslims, often perpetrated on women or religious minorities.
Then you come and compare statistics. So far so good.
But the statistics can also mean that “actual prevalence” is not indicated but much more both prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime. Both of which are to be commended in the police and population of a nation. This must be sorted out first and until then you have no case.
Admittedly maybe sometimes we have no case, either, as not always all the relevant facts are fully known. But I think Jihad Watch is doing a tremendous service to mankind to monitor, report, criticize the actual teachings of Islam and the actual behavior of self-confessed Muslims all over the world.
Responses like yours are indeed welcome, they ensure that both Muslims and non-Muslims get to think very hard about Islam and Democracy. It causes people to take notice of warnings and actual behavior. And I daresay it makes potential culprits a bit wary, knowing they and their religion are being watched. And that it makes potential and actual victims more aware of their rights and their possibilities and natural allies.
I would hope this is the spirit in which you give your responses. And those who criticize, like JW-posters, should also be open for counter-criticism, so that we in turn can improve the behavior of all sorts of other people than Muslims.
But I think you are primarily out to shut up the Islam-critics, or when that fails, to character-assassinate them, to nullify/ neutralize their arguments as much as possible.
In the case of honor-killings, would not a nobler Islamic/ apologist reaction to Islam-critics be: “OK, we see your point, we support you on this issue 100 % and we will strive to diminish at least THIS kind of Islamic motivation mentioned by you as best we can, in order to at least diminish the overall murder by intimate relatives in THIS way.”
I never understood how Lisa Halaby, an American, could marry Hussein the Mohammedan. Oh, excuse me - Queen "Noor" - the "light" of Hussein.
"Also, the overall murder rate in the US is three times higher than it is in Jordan." - dave742 (troll)
Let me get this straight - you are comparing the gigantic United States to the tiny country of Jordan? You need a lesson in what constitutes a valid analogy.
Also, the subject is not murder in general - it's "honor killings," specifically honor killings. Which only happen in the evil and corrupt and brutal uber-patriarchal woman-hating Islamic societies.
You also need a lesson in the contrast between "general" and "specific."
Demsci:
Your post is unlike most at JW, and it’s a refreshing change. Of course you have to look at murder rates on a per-capita basis.
(As an aside, I am currently posting on another JW thread here: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/01/us-embassy-trumpets-muslim-aid-to-haiti.html On that thread, I refer to a short paper I wrote where I emphasize that when comparing international aid giving of various countries, the correct way to do so is as a percentage of GDP. For example, comparing the total aid given by the US to the total aid given by another nation that has less than 1% of the population of the US is silly. Also, the comparative wealth of the nations must also be taken into account. Both of these factors are taken into account when expressing aid as a percentage of GDP. JW readers are unable, or, more likely, unwilling to understand this when talking about donating aid. In that situation, only the total value of the aid package matters. But when the size factor works against the US, like when comparing total number of murders, then it is much easier for readers to understand the per capita idea. I think that is funny.)
Here’s why I said that the US murder rate is 3 times higher than Jordan. One reference says that Jordan’s 25 honor killings per year constitute 25% of the total number of yearly murders, which gives a total of 100 murders per year. (note 1) Jordan’s population is 6,198,677, which puts their total murder rate (per 100,000) at 1.61. Another source gives a value of 0.9, (note 2) but we can stick with the 1.61 value. My reference for the US murder rate is 5.35,(note 3) which is slightly higher than you Nationmaster value of 4.28. 5.35/1.61 = 3 times higher (rounded down).
I compared Jordan’s value of 25 honor killings per year with the value of 1,700 cases of intimate partner homicide in the US. Comparing honor killings with intimate partner homicide is certainly a very rough comparison, but I think it is instructive. Most cases of intimate partner homicide in the US are likely due to infidelity, and this type of murder would likely be termed an honor killing in an Islamic country. Anyway, 1,700 murders works out to a rate of 0.559 (per 100,000). Jordan’s official “honor killing” total of 25 gives a rate of 0.403, and the estimated, actual “honor killing” value of 60 gives a rate is 0.968. So the US rate of intimate partner homicide is 42% less than Jordan’s actual rate of honor killings. Jordan, BTW, is known for having the highest incidence of honor killing, on a per capita basis, in the Islamic world. So if Jordan is pure evil because of their honor killings, I don’t think that 42% less than pure evil for a similar type of crime is anything to be proud of.
My point in bringing these types of things up is that I think the US has its own problems, and for us to constantly preach to the world makes us the most arrogant nation on the planet. The US has a very high murder rate for a developed country, and I think we should concentrate on our own problems. Islamic countries have honor killings, and I believe they are addressing the issue. Societal change takes time, however. It might be a hundred years before the US allows gay people the basic right to marry each other, for example. It takes a long time for attitudes to move in the right direction. Some Muslims kill for honor (and I would like to emphasize the word “some.” There are 60 honor killings a year in Jordan, but I think it is safe to say that far more than 60 dishonorable acts occur in Jordan every year. Most dishonorable acts do not result in murder), and some Americans kill because the spouse cheated on them, or nagged them, or told them they are bad in bed. Honor killings are deplorable, but I don’t think that killing your spouse for nagging you is any more respectable. BTW, honor killings occur in all cultures and nations. For example, if homophobic citizen in the West kills a member of their family because they are gay, and they are ashamed of the fact, then that is an honor killing. The exact same emotions are involved. The term “honor killing”, however, is only used with respect to Muslims for propaganda reasons.
People in all cultures do bad things. To run a website that basically lists every single bad act committed by individual Muslims is simply deception. If a Muslim ran a website and posted a thread on every story they could find about individual Americans doing horrible things, it would be seen by Americans for what it is; a crude propaganda site whose purpose is to demonize the US. It is important to looks at societies as a whole, not individual acts.
You bring up the following:
“But the statistics can also mean that “actual prevalence” is not indicated but much more both prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime.”
I have been reading lately about transnational comparative criminology. What you bring up is certainly an issue, but in general these issues can be dealt with in a systematic way, and it is possible to make valid comparisons between nations, as long as it is done correctly. With respect to murder rates, however, this is not an issue:
“Homicide (murder and manslaughter) constitutes one of the few crime categories where the majority of experts are agreed that not only trends over time, but also crime levels may be compared across different countries – particularly when data are drawn from internationally standardised cause of death statistics. The reason for this is that the dark figure for homicides is assumed to be relatively small."
Sheptycki and Wardak, editors, “Transnational and Comparative Criminology,” page 38
Also, when looking at the honor crime data, we were looking at the actual, estimated value, not the official, reported value. If you do some reading in this field, you will find that Saudi Arabia is what is termed a “low crime rate” society, and much has been written about the reasons for this. The book I referenced above is a good starting point, if you’re interested in the subject.
Whoops. Here are my notes:
Note1: See Jamal J. Halaby, “In Jordan the Price of Honor is Women's Blood”, WOMEN'S E-NEWS (2000), quoted in Major David J. Western, “Islamic ‘Purse Strings’: The Key to the Amelioration of Women’s Legal Rights,” The Air Force Law Review, 61 A.F.L. Rev. 79 (2008)
Note 2: The Statesman (India), “Safe Tourist Destination,” April 24, 2009
Note 3: 16,272 murders in a population of 304 million:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_01.html
Above I talked about the "crime of passion" and "provocation" defenses being outlawed just recently in the UK and Australia. It hasn't been that long since the "honor defense' was used in the US:
"The ‘honor defense’ or ‘unwritten law’ that allowed a court to acquit a defendant entirely when he killed to protect his honor (i.e., his exclusive right to possess the sexuality of his wife and his female relatives) had supporters in the legal community as recently as fifty years ago. (note 1) Until the 1960's and 1970's, statutes in four states made it justifiable for the husband to kill his wife's lover. (note 2)"
Taylor, Laurie J., “Provoked Reason in Men and Women: Heat-of-Passion Manslaughter and Imperfect Self-Defense,” UCLA Law Review, 33 UCLA L. Rev. 1679 (1986)
Note 1) See Roberts, The Unwritten Law, 10 KY. L.J. 45 (1922) (jury acquittals of defendants in "honor" killings reflect popular sentiment); Comment, Recognition of the Honor Defense Under the Insanity Plea, 43 YALE L.J. 809 (1934) (acquittals of "honor" killings through insanity pleas).
Note 2) See Note, Sex Discrimination in the Criminal Law: The Effects of the Equal Rights Amendment, 11 AM. CRIM. L. REV. 469, 500-01 & n.244 (1973). These states were Georgia, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah. In Reed v. State, 123 Tex. Crim. 348, 59 S.W.2d 122 (1933), the court held that a wife who killed a woman committing adultery with her husband was not justified by the Texas statute. See also Mays v. State, 88 Ga. 399, 14 S.E. 560 (1891) (when defendant kills wife'slover, he would be justified if the killing is to prevent rather than to punish or avenge the adultery); Scroggs v. State, 94 Ga. App. 28, 93 S.E.2d 583 (1956) (wife killing to prevent adultery is justified, but were she to kill in the heat of passion upon discovering commission of husband's adultery, she would be guilty of manslaughter).
Also, honor killing in Brazil was not outlawed until 1991:
"Brazil's Supreme Court has ruled that a man can no longer kill his wife and win acquittal on the ground of 'legitimate defense of honor.'"
The New York Times
March 29, 1991, Friday, Late Edition - Final
'Honor' Killing of Wives Is Outlawed in Brazil
BYLINE: By JAMES BROOKE, Special to The New York Times
SECTION: Section B; Page 16; Column 3; National Desk
DATELINE: RIO DE JANEIRO, March 26
OK Dave742, my main concern is in comparing democratic countries and Islamic countries in regard to rates of murder, rape and crime. I confess I cannot win the debate on this for now with you, because you have strong logic and arguments, at least for me. But I only concede a draw, because I studied but still don’t trust the statistics of the UN and you entirely.
The comparison I mentioned is important because on the one hand JW/ IW/ FFI and other websites and persons point to honor-killings perpetrated by Muslims and connected with Islamic teachings/ “customs”. And on the other hand we frequently hear from Muslims/ apologists that especially America is so bad in regard to murder/ rape/ crime-rates, in comparison with Islamic countries especially.
Well, the importance of this comparison to me is that of the choice of mankind for a system of governance; A. The democratic system. B. A theocratical Islamic system, in favor of the supposed “Laws revealed by Allah”. If Muslims in a vast majority would accept Democracy this comparison would not be necessary.
If the comparison is made, then all relevant characteristics, results of both societies, in practice, should be compared. A comprehensive valid comparison should help mankind decide which system to choose.
As you wrote:
“It is important to looks at societies as a whole, not individual acts.”. Mostly, yes, but then also to religious followers as a whole, from whatever religion/ life-conviction they are.
If there is a draw by and large between the results of the 2 systems, then Allah’s laws are not exceptionally better. And then they are not worthy of implementation, practicing anywhere. And Islam has had 1350 years to implement and practice “Allah’s laws”.
And if Muslims believe that only Allah really knows what benefits his laws should have and do have, then comparisons are not even relevant. Then a part of the Muslims would want to implement and practice them regardless of outcome.
You wrote:
“My point in bringing these types of things up is that I think the US has its own problems, and for us to constantly preach to the world makes us the most arrogant nation on the planet.”
I see, but I on the other hand think that ALL humans should look worldwide and compare, and argue to and fro, and follow the most succesfull models for countries. The choice for mankind I see is this:
Nr 1. Should a few rule over the many or should mankind, as best as is possible be ruled by itself, at least by a majority? Should there be in charge: “Allah’s laws” primarily or the manmade laws supported by the majority of a country?
Nr 2. In relevance to this huge question; which of these 2 systems, works out the best in practice? And here freedom of speech is of vital importance to inform as many people as possible as best as possible. But freedom of speech is not allowed in the second system.
This is what Western defenders and leaders point out, it is not preaching in my opinion, only promoting democracy, openness, the fairest, freeest and arguably best working system mankind yet devised. Especially for the female half of mankind. And the people who would stop that or even take that away, need to come up with a much better working system than this one.
You wrote:
“People in all cultures do bad things”.
Answer: True, but still we humans want to choose wisely between, and therefore inform ourselves about, and compare different cultures, or systems to organize societies.
“To run a website that basically lists every single bad act committed by individual Muslims is simply deception. If a Muslim ran a website and posted a thread on every story they could find about individual Americans doing horrible things, it would be seen by Americans for what it is; a crude propaganda site whose purpose is to demonize the US.”
Answer: Arguably many Muslims already do that, and it is done in Islamic countries, communities, mosques almost certainly and massively. So let the partisans of both systems, Democracy and Islam, do it. That way they are also allowed to monitor, notice what the other side is saying/ doing. If anything, CULTIVATE this and dialoque between the 2 parties.
The deception you talk about would much, much more be in censuring, trying to stop the one side, but not the other side, from monitoring, criticizing that other side. And that is what Muslims do, much much more than Democrats do or even desire, rude as they may be.
Besides the democratic-minded people are very varied and divided and Islam-critical people are only a minority of them. Many other democrats defend Islam, are very fair-minded and impartial to Islam. You should see this perspective and appreciate it and accept this variety, which is what a good democrat would do.
Demsci:
You're now talking about some pretty big subjects. I don't know how we got from honor killings to comparing entire cultures. I'll just make a few comments about your last post. First of all, I do not want to live in an Islamic culture, but not because I judge it to be inferior. I am a product of Western culture, and I like some parts of it. I am in Vegas drinking, gambling, etc, and I like doing that. Also, I am not religious at all. There are other parts that I find horrific, however. I can't even begin to least those things. I'd have to write a book.
If Muslims want to live by Islamic law, then they should. You seem to think that some grand choice should be made regarding cultures, and all people on the planet should follow one mold, and of course that mold should be Western culture. This sounds boring to me. I like differences. I like different people, different cultures, etc. Living in a world where everyone is the same would be boring.
When you compare Islamic law to Western systems, I think it is important to compare them before the west colonized Islamic lands. The reason is because at that point, Islamic law ceased to exist in the form that it did for a milennia. When you compare cultures at that point in time, Islam was clearly ahead of West. I have made this comparison starting an page 73 of this paper I wrote:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20753339/Gates-of-Ijtihad
Since the colonial period started, Islamic law has not been allowed to develop, due to the retarding effects of being completely subjugated by another culture. If the West had left Islamic lands the hell alone, they would likely still be far ahead of the West. What the West (in particular, Usrael), should do now is close their 800 military bases, cut the defense budget by 90%, and leave everyone else the hell alone. One of my favorite quotes is from William Blum, who wrote:
"If I were the president, I could stop terrorist attacks against the United States in a few days. Permanently. I would first apologize to all the widows and orphans, the tortured and impoverished, and all the many millions of other victims of American imperialism. Then I would announce, in all sincerity, to every corner of the world, that America's global interventions have come to an end, and inform Israel that it is no longer the 51st state of the USA but now -- oddly enough -- a foreign country. I would then reduce the military budget by at least 90% and use the savings to pay reparations to the victims. There would be more than enough money. One year's military budget of 330 billion dollars is equal to more than $18,000 an hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born. That's what I'd do on my first three days in the White House. On the fourth day, I'd be assassinated."
Of course, those who run the Usrael will not do any of this, and instead will run this country into the ground, and then it will be China's turn to run things, but not to the extent that the US has. I can't wait for all this to happen, The rest of the world will be very happy.
Also, it's very funny to me that you think we live in democracy, and that we have freedom of speech or thought. Rich people run the West through their corporations, and people are told what to think. Again, too big of a subject to really discuss.
Dave, we got from honor killing to comparing entire cultures because I tried to explain the reason that seems most valid and pressing to me for comparing statistics for murder, rape, crimes in the 2 competing cultures, Islamic and Democratic. It is for establishing a picture of how these 2 are working out in reality, and which one is on that grounds preferable over the other. If I did not have this motivation I would consider comparing these statistics useless.
Talking about choosing entire cultures IS a very big subject, but I love to talk about a few relevant ideas.
OK, so you see the differences between the 2 cultures, live in the one and prefer living in that one over living in the other one. But still you consider those 2 cultures at least equal in value, both have drawbacks and advantages.
Whereas I definitely prefer the democratic culture, even though you might well be right about the rule of rich people over us and our thoughts. But so what? I cannot fathom some kind of 3rd choice, that is better than the 2 we discussed, I choose the lesser of 2 evils, so to speak.
You say:
“First of all, I do not want to live in an Islamic culture, but not because I judge it to be inferior. I am a product of Western culture, and I like some parts of it. I am in Vegas drinking, gambling, etc, and I like doing that. Also, I am not religious at all. There are other parts that I find horrific, however. I can't even begin to least those things. I'd have to write a book.”
Response: It seems to me you have no good reason to argue with JihadWatch-editors and posters. Why do you defend a culture (Islamic) when that culture is not where you want to live in? Why do you want to stop criticism on that culture then? Because that is what you now seem to be doing mainly, STOPPING, BRAKING the critical monitoring, reporting, judging of Islamic culture. You don’t admit that you actually prefer that culture over the democratic culture. So you don’t have a positive goal, only a negative goal, of STOPPING, BRAKING? Is that only what all your TU QUOQUE-Culture-relativism-efforts is for?
You say:
“If Muslims want to live by Islamic law, then they should.” Agreed!
That’s just it, as a democrat it is my sincerest wish that people get to do what they want. Perhaps in the future, Muslims can go to Saudi Arabia on invitation of the Saudi’s and live there under Islamic law, perhaps there can be more nations or regions with Islamic laws where Muslims can go to. At the same time the governments of these regions/ nations must then let go all those citizens who want to live under democratic law and around the world these opting-out-of-Islamic law-citizens should be welcomed in Democratic nations/ regions.
The main democratic point continues to be; Do not FORCE Islamic Law on people who don’t want it. If a majority of a nation/ region clearly wants it and wants to keep it, please show this by regular elections, and let the rest of population accept it and adapt to it. But Muslims want to force upon others the rule of the few over the many. They want their faith to dominate the most well-known 5 others; Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism and the small divers ones too. While these in turn all accept equal rights/ opportunities for power.
You say:
“You seem to think that some grand choice should be made regarding cultures, and all people on the planet should follow one mold, and of course that mold should be Western culture. This sounds boring to me. I like differences. I like different people, different cultures, etc. Living in a world where everyone is the same would be boring.”
That’s just it, I agree with this mostly!!! Only it is Islam and other kinds of ideologies that want to make the world less different, divers. Within democracy diversity and difference and competition are all accepted, and appreciated and cultivated. And it benefits it’s citizens, in prosperity, freedom, happiness, progress. Much more than in Islamic culture. That does not add anything in my opinion that the already incredibly divers democratic system already has. But it does threathen that diversity enormously.
By the way, I do not consider democratic culture specifically Western, but Universal. By the same token I concede that Islamic culture also may well be Universal. But only as some special version of theocracy, dictatorships that we have had so many of in human history, especially before enlightenment. And before enlightenment maybe you are right that Islamic culture was ahead.
demsci
you made some good points.
However: whenever 'dave742' starts praising sharia, just remember: Dhimmitude is part of sharia.
And no matter how hard 'dave' tries to spin the supposed virtues of sharia, dhimmitude is frankly evil. No sane, free non-Muslim human would want to live as a dhimmi for even one minute: in a condition of grinding humiliation, degradation and extreme physical peril, subject to the fickle whim of sneering, strutting malevolently narcissistic Muslim overlords who do not even regard one as human but as something akin to farm livestock or furniture. there to be used and abused at will; and who may at any moment, just for fun, or to indulge a grudge or feed a psychopathic vindictiveness, choose to trump up against one a false charge on the basis of which the ecstatically howling mobs are unloosed against one's entire community, burning, smashing, robbing, raping, torturing, and kill, kill, killing.
Here are two discussions of dhimmitude, in connection with a new book by Australian scholar Dr Mark Durie, entitled 'the third choice: Islam, dhimmitude and freedom'.
The first
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/25636
contains lots of specific practical examples of how Muslims in many places are formally or informally instituting the dhimma system, today. Those examples involve such blatant cruelty and injustice that they will make you sick.
Now for the second.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/25637
Bat Yeor in the foreword states:
"The strict scholarly rationalism of the author is particularly evident in the chapter on the theological significance of jizya, the head tax paid by non-Muslims under Islamic rule.
"Here Durie brings numerous and irrefutable sources illustrating the meaning, implications and religious justification of the jizya, which is the cost paid by non-Muslims for the right to live, albeit in humiliation.
"The jizya ritual, writes Durie, forces the dhimmi subject – through his participation in it – ‘to forfeit his very head if he violates any of the terms of the dhimma covenant, which has spared his life’.
"The author sheds new light on the jizya ritual, which he calls an ‘enactment of one’s own decapitation’."
Durie's own words:
"For the dhimmi, the annual jizya payment was a powerful and public symbolic expression of the jihad-dhimmitude nexus, which fixed the horizon of the dhimmi ’s world.
"Although the ritual varied in its specific features, its essential character was an enactment of a beheading, in which one of the recurrent features was a blow to the neck of the dhimmi, at the very point when he makes his payment...
“*The intended result of the jizya ritual is for the dhimmi to lose all sense of his own personhood.* {Nota bene: this is the part that should cause revulsion in any decent human being - dda}.
“In return for this loss {i.e, the loss of the sense of personhood, of his own dignity as a human being - dda}
, *the dhimmi was supposed to feel humility and gratitude towards his Muslim masters* {my emphasis - dda}."
END QUOTE.
Frankly: a system that is deliberately intended to do that - to force a whole population of human beings to *lose their very sense of personhood* - can only be named as EVIL. And that those, the Muslim overlords, who seek to rob the dhimmi of his personhood, to degrade and deny and indeed altogether erase his humanity, should then demand, forsooth, that the victim of their crime, the victim of this act of soul-murder, should respond to them, his victimisers, with *gratitude* for having been thus destroyed, exhibits a depth of amoral or anti-moral depravity before which language itself fails, shuddering.