Now wait a minute: the mainstream media has told us, whenever an honor killing has taken place in North America or Europe, that honor killing is a cultural practice that has nothing to do with Islam -- despite the fact that Muslims commit 91 percent of honor killings worldwide. What's more, 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).
In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law. Nonetheless, the media drumbeat is constant: honor killings have nothing to do with Islam. And so if honor killings have nothing to do with Islam, why should the Canadian Council of Muslim Women think that a law against honor killing have anything to do with them?
"Muslim women's group opposes addition of honour killings to Criminal Code," by Juliet O'Neill for Postmedia News, August 5 (thanks to Twostellas):
OTTAWA -- The Canadian Council of Muslim Women opposes the addition of "honour killings" to the Criminal Code on the grounds "murder is murder" and a special category could stigmatize new immigrants and some ethnic or religious groups...."We as an organization don't want the term honour killing used in Canada because it's making it exotic, something alien, and foreign, and people are using that as a rationale to understand the murders," said Alia Hogben, a social worker and executive director of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women, a national non-profit voluntary organization.
"Let's not go that route. A murder is a murder. Let's not separate us as new immigrants or ethnic groups from the rest of Canadian women. It doesn't matter which culture, which religion or which ethnic origin we come from, the same laws should apply to us."
Law professors Isabel Grant of the University of British Columbia, Debra Parkes of the University of Manitoba and Elizabeth Sheehy of the University of Ottawa all said the Criminal Code already contains tools to deal with "honour killings" and said it would be difficult to define it in law....
Sheehy said creation of a separate crime would embed in the law the erroneous notion that murders of wives and daughters only happens in minority groups.
"It would be racializing the crime to consider honour killing as a different form of murder," she said.
In response to public outrage, Grant said governments have a record of adding to the kinds of murders -- related to stalking, terrorism, and organized crime for example -- that must be considered first-degree murder.
But in this case she wondered how it would be defined.
"How would you draft one that wasn't discriminatory against certain ethnic communities?" she asked. "I think that would be really tricky."...
Why? What does this have to do with ethnicity at all? Islam is not a race, and in any case, an honor killing law doesn't have to make any mention of Islam at all. But I have an idea for how Canada can formulate an honor killing that doesn't "discriminate" against "certain ethnic communities." Syria recently scrapped a law limiting the length of sentences for honor killings, but "the new law says a man can still benefit from extenuating circumstances in crimes of passion or honour 'provided he serves a prison term of no less than two years in the case of killing.'" And 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."
So Canadian lawmakers can simply study the Syrian and Jordanian laws that mandate relaxed penalties for honor killings as compared to other murders, and formulate their own honor killing law based on the definitions made in those legal codes as to what constitutes an honor killing.
And as a lagniappe, since the new Canadian law would be modeled after the Syrian and Jordanian codes, no one could legitimately charge Canada with "discriminating" against any particular "ethnic community" by legislating against honor killing.
Problem solved!
"...why should the Canadian Council of Muslim Women think that a law against honor killing have anything to do with them?"
Because their husbands told them to, that's why.
I mean to say "told them to come out against it, "
What a mess I am today.
Sheehy said creation of a separate crime would embed in the law the erroneous notion that murders of wives and daughters only happens in minority groups.
"It would be racializing the crime to consider honour killing as a different form of murder," she said.
I am so sad that a lawyer would have one, so little regard for logic, and two, so little regard for equal protection under the law. What about this motive "honour" is racial or "minority"?
How does one pass the bar with these reasoning skills?
Oh, Canada. What have you done to yourself?
I agree with the Canadian Council of Muslim Women. Murder is murder. The legal distinction of honor killing to me seems to me the first step to giving leniency to these mysoginist Islamic husbands.
From an ideological point of view I oppose the creation of "special" crimes as proposed by Robert here. Unlawful killing (such as honour killing) is by definition against the law in democratic countries. There is no need for a separate offence.
I oppose also the creation of "hate crimes" beyond traditional offences of incitement to violence. It's a dangerous path because it introduces overtly political considerations (what is a race? what is a religion? and so on) into what was a fairly pure ethical area.
Once again, I feel that this focus on honour killings is a distraction. Why isn't Robert exercised by the many more "alcohol killings" which are clearly non-Islamic in character? Perhaps he is, but he never seems to mention that here...
Of course honour killings reflect the reality of Islamic ideology but as soon as you put this argument on this level of categorising murder by proximate cause, then Muslims and others are bound to focus attention on alcohol-related murders. And - incidentally - in terms of cultural bias we do seem to accept pleas of mitigation on the basis of alcohol use (something I have never found acceptable myself).
I think the focus should be on the totalitarian character of Islam and the many designs it has on our freedom, not particular cultural manifestations that, strictly speaking, cannot really be said to fall within the system of Shariah law.
The more I think the more I conclude the problem is dhimmis of non-Muslim world who continually side with Muslims and don't tell the truth about Islam and lie about real true nature of Islam. What is happening in Canada is a real eye opener when these dhimmis cannot call honor-killing a honor killing. The consequence of not facing the truth about Islam is leading us towards self annihilation!!!
"We as an organization don't want the term honour killing used in Canada because ..."
" because it's making it exotic, something alien, and foreign," ....erm, yes ....isn´t it something alien?
"because people are using that as a rationale to understand the murders" ....ah ...yes, they are irrational. An interesting suggestion. And?
"because a murder is a murder." But certainly!
"because the same laws should apply to us". They do not?
"because of the erroneous notion that murders of wives and daughters only happens in minority groups". Erm ... isn´t that why the new concept is being discussed, because it is a matter of concern specific to some minority groups?
"because it would be racializing the crime to consider honour killing as a different form of murder." Racializing? Oh, they mean tolerance towards other religions and cultures ....well, the crime certainly is quite a newcomer on the scene.
Hey, let us call it "minority deliberate family execution". No?
"We as an organization don't want the term honour killing used in Canada because...people are using that as a rationale to understand the murders."
God forbid we should understand the rational for the murders!
Muslims are always victims. Even when they kill their own children.
"What's more, 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).
"In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law." - RS
As shown above, Honor Killings are codified in Islamic law. They have everything to do with Islam as Islamic culture is an Honor culture. Not recognizing murders of females' in the name of "Honor," specific to Islam and Muslims, is doing a huge disservice to the thousands and thousands of Muslim females who have been killed in the name of "Honor" in Islamic culture for 1400 years.
Re-naming Honor Killings as simply "murder" is the same as re-naming Jihad as "man-caused disasters," as our Orwellian/Muslim president Hussein has done. He wants to cover up the truth. The truth is Jihad and the truth is Honor Killings.
The Canadian Council of Muslim Women seems to be all over the map. On the one hand, they seem to have come out against the UN resolution on "Combating Defamation of Religions"—really a thinly-veiled Muslim "blasphemy" law.
On the other hand, they are vociferously against any efforts to combat anti-Semitism—including larding in the usual about how Muslim are actually "semitic" themselves.
They seem to have—sorta–come out against the imposition of Shari'ah law in family law (although they *never* use the term). On the other hand, part of their problem with it seems to be that it might give Muslims 'bad press' in Canada.
Indeed, this seems to be one of their main concerns over a proposed "Honor Killing" law. As if the specter of large numbers of murdered women doesn't make Islam "look bad" to civilized Canadians all by itself...
How about "Islamic Divorce Procedures"? Or "Islamic Population Control Measures"?
Morons, excuse me, I meant to type Muslims, need to understand that when they declare themselves followers of the great towel head in the sky they automatically relinquish all legal rights.
They are permitted to eat and defecate but not to open their damn mouths.
If they do, they will get a koran shoved down it.
http://www.jewishdailyreport.wordpress.com
Call it what it is, "honor killing".
Put the spotlight directly on this practice by calling it what it is and slamming the people involved . It's the only way to stop it and yes it does matter which culture, which religion or which ethnic origin you come from if you practice "honor killing".
Shine a big, bright light on it.
Islam is the true religion
Islam is not a terrorist
What is Islam
Muhammad’s Biography
Jesus in Islam
http://www.islamreligion.com
Live Help by Chat
http://www.islamreligion.com
Islam is the true religion
Islam is not a terrorist
What is Islam
Muhammad’s Biography
Jesus in Islam
http://www.islamreligion.com
Live Help by Chat
http://www.islamreligion.com
The irony is; these women should realize that sharia punishment is not applicable in a "non-muslim state" and that the only way they could have the Canadian Supreme Court's decision overturned is by having the entire Canadian Constitution overturned and replaced with Islamic sharia law.
That would eliminate all of our Canadian Constitutional Rights and Freedoms and would be replaced with Medieval Islamic Laws, heaven forbid.
The nerve of these people.
sayed sadsafasdg ssda asdadsadas
what is islam ?
http://www.islamhouse.com
"It would be racializing the crime to consider honour killing as a different form of murder," she said.
'Racializing'...Now that's a good trick, Islam is not a race, but if you say 'honor killing', it becomes one...
So now if you want to make honor killing a special kind of murder, you are a racist...Isn't that just too magical?
I think we should stop calling it "honour killing", and call it something more accurate, like "honour murder".
Go away!
The objective of making honor killings a specific crime is probably to deter them, since some muslim immigrants seem to believe that they are free to practice their vile religion in its entirety anywhere they invade. I doubt if muslims would be strongly influenced by the knowledge that honor killings are illegal in Canada. Muslims establish isolated enclaves that are replicas of home sweet home, where they live among other muslims in a microcosm identical to their native countries. The same attitudes, rules, and expectations prevail and when a woman shames the family, the humiliation is probably amplified in the smaller community. The assimilation of muslims into mainstream society might mitigate their putrid cultural practices and reduce honor killings. However, when honor killings occur and are publicized as such, people gain valuable insight into the depravity of islam and its perverted moral code, which is a good thing. The more non-muslims know about islamic values and 'morality', the better.
Also, it might allow women who are vulnerable to murderous family members an escape option or better protection if they feel threatened. Naturally muslims would be opposed because it would place the onus directly on them, exposing them as the sole practioners of this aberration. They would prefer that honor killings be called 'domestic violence' since we all know that domestic violence is found in all cultures and societies. Muslims want to practice islam with no stigmas attached but I'm afraid it's too late for that, whether they add honor killings to the criminal code or not. And they should take note of the fact that very few domestic violence cases in the West involve fathers murdering their daughters for any reason, certainly not 'honor'.
Islam a true religion?.....surrre...
after the opening Islamic words, the rest is in English
http://ayaanhirsiali.web-log.nl/ayaanhirsiali/2005/04/view_the_film_s.html
Joseph is right. The intention behind the law might be good, to draw attention to the special iniquity of murdering relatives for reasons of family honor. But murder is murder, and once certain murders are defined in a different way they will come to seem different. It's a very dangerous road to go down.
"They would prefer that honor killings be called 'domestic violence' since we all know that domestic violence is found in all cultures and societies. Muslims want to practice islam with no stigmas attached but I'm afraid it's too late for that, whether they add honor killings to the criminal code or not. And they should take note of the fact that very few domestic violence cases in the West involve fathers murdering their daughters for any reason, certainly not 'honor'.
Right. Honor Killings are SPECIFIC cases of murder directed against females in Islamic culture and should be recognized as such.
Both Jihad and Honor Killings are specific to Islam, and to blur them as "man-caused disasters" and "murder" makes Islam seem like any other culture and ideology - and it's not. NOT. NOT. NOT.
"We as an organization don't want the term honour killing used in Canada because it's making it exotic, something alien, and foreign, and people are using that as a rationale to understand the murders," said Alia Hogben, a social worker and executive director of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women
The motives for killing women by their husbands of family are important to understand from a criminology perspective why they were killed. If Islam is part of the equation for such femicide murders, it should be identified as such by law enforcement authorities and legal proceedings, and not blandly dismissed as 'discriminatory' or alien. Speak the truth, or else criminals involved in femicide are getting special treatment. The law is the law, applies equally for all, and the motives for breaking the law applies equally to all as well. So to define 'honor' femicide as something different than murder can serve two purposes: one is to make punishment more lenient, because it is a crime of passion; the other is to make legal prosecution for such murders more focussed on what is a criminal act against society, women in particular. If it is to be lenient on cultural grounds that men who kill their wives are to be given a lesser sentence, then this idea of labeling "honor killing" a criminal act fails the test of social equality, because it is discriminatory. But if it is to spotlight this criminal problem in society with better law enforcement, then it benefits all society equally, and labeling such murders as "honor killings" is merely legal semantics.
But why is it every time Muslims speak there is 'deceit' present? Is femicide merely a cultural thing? Heaven forbid we see through their taqiyya. If the murder and rape of women is an Islamic cultural thing, shouldn't they address the problem truthfully, rather than try to dismiss it as 'discrimination'? Muslims live in a different universe from the real world. Their cultural history has redefined them to accept deceits as normal, while facing the truth as something abhorrent. Of course, this would not be a concern within Western society if they were not here. But once they've chosen to come here, and nobody forced them to migrate to the West, they must adapt to our system of equality and justice, or pay the price for their 'cultural' criminal activities. Semantics have nothing to do with this issue of killing women because they allegedly 'dishonored' the family. It is still murder, no matter what the motive. But the motive must be stated if such murders are to be stopped. Muslims should be the first to say so... except their 'cultural' dislike of the truth stops them, so they do taqiyya instead. It's a curse they must live with... or die.
Next stop, "death for apostasy", also clearly a Muslim cultural thing. Should we not address it for what it is? Or is that discriminatory? Same for Muslim femicide.
The first honor killing in Denmark I really know of happened in 1985. A Turkish family made their youngest son kill the Turkish boyfriend of his sister for having dishonored the family.
It was all very deliberate and cynical: the murderer was 12 years old and thus a minor.
"Deliberate family execution".
I'm with Joseph on this one. Murder is murder.
In the USA, we've opened cans of legal worms by declaring "hate crimes" somehow more heinous than ordinary crimes--as if there's a category of "love crimes" or "simple respect crimes". What they are is simply a way to stroke the client communities of various Leftist politicians and lawyers. Maybe, as liberal jurists become more and more dhimmified, we'll label honor killings as love crimes or respect crimes?
What is Canada trying to do? Do we have a group of right-wing bigots who want to slap a label on Muslim immigrants? Or do we have bleeding-hearts trying to find a mitigating circumstance that might allow leniency? Apparently, Joseph thinks it's the latter.
I suspect it's just a bunch of somnolent PeeCee idiots trying to prove how "culutrally sensitive" they are.
All these years, I've neglected to keep a file of the subcategory one could call "Muslim women as enablers of the Islam that endangers us". This article would fit well there, among a thousand others indicating in a thousand different ways that problem.
The reason I've tended to neglect this subcategory is that I found other facets of the problem of Islam more worth my time and attention -- at least, until I began to notice this dismaying tendency among Jihad Watchers over the past year or two (cresting with the ridiculously romantic support of the "Iranian People" last year) of a sentimental soft spot for Muslim women as victims of Islam, with the concomitantly illogical corollary that, being victims, they therefore apparently cannot be dangerous enablers of the same monster that is victimizing them -- and endangering us.
abdoeladawy wrote:
Islam is the true religion
Islam is not a terrorist (sic)
..................
And where does "Honor killing" fit in with your vision of Islam as the "true religion"? Did it occur to you that Da'wa on a thread about vicious murder in the name of Islam might fail to persuade?
Ah the bad old days when there were no 'honour killings' and FGM to enrich our lives. We used to read about this if we really wanted to know, but now we can order it 'take away'.
Am so glad that Muslims have culturally enriched us. We need more enrichment.
"It would be racializing the crime to consider honour killing as a different form of murder,"
------
These women are not seeing the forest for the tree. The tree they are predictably concerned with avoiding here is discrimination, or "racialization", or some horrible imagined profiling that might make some immigrants "unhappy".
Some here have argued that creating a new "honour" category is unwise (not on the grounds of "racialization", which is idiotic), but rather that it is pointless in that a murder is a murder, and that creating a separate category like "crime of passion" might lead judges to punish these criminals less severely. I heartily agree with this fear. It shouldn't matter to a court WHY you plotted to murder someone, the same punishment should fit the crime no matter what the reason.
However, the inclusion of the category "honour killings" IS useful in being able to track this specific-motivation crime and determine if preventative measures are working or not.
So my 2 cents is: Include the category "honour killings" purely for tracking purposes, with the express instructions to jurists not to treat the perpetrators any differently than any other convicted murderers.
Oh, and also tell those 3 "professors" to think things through before they open their yaps. "Oh, the poor dears might feel their culture is 'backward'" Yeah, like THAT is the most important danger here.
There is a special on FOX News tonight on honor killing, focusing on the Amina and Sarah Said case, and featuring Ayaan Hirsi Ali. It's airing at 10pm ET, and will probably be rerun several times.
Good to see them covering this.