Thursday, September 09, 2010

“The crimewave that shames the world” [update 2]

When Ayaan Hirsi Ali recommends reading a piece by Robert Fisk, it’s worth taking notice. So let’s do that.

On her Facebook page she recommends

5030390_447743t _Quote this important, horrific piece by Robert Fisk of the Independent on honor killings. Fisk writes: ‘It's one of the last great taboos: the murder of at least 20,000 women a year in the name of 'honour'. Nor is the problem confined to the Middle East: the contagion is spreading rapidly.’

This relates to the post below. When 20,000 women a year are killed in the name of “honour,” can the culture in which this is done be called a “civilization”?  Good to see that Mr Fisk is finally losing his “blinkers of moral equivalence,” and taking notice of the crime whose name the left generally dares not speak—or as he titles it:

UPDATE 1: Speaking of “moral equivalence,” Doug Reich offers today’s leading example:

_QuoteWhen a renowned Muslim cleric calls for the beheading of a Dutch politician, we hear nothing from Western leaders. However, when some reverend in Podunk, USA decides to burn some Quran's on his lawn, we get fiery condemnations from General Petraeus, the State Department, and the White House.

UPDATE 2: Here’s the second part of Robert Fisk’s important series (words I never thought I’d write):

Labels:

21 Comments:

Blogger ZenTiger said...

I consider honour killings another form of abortion. It's a warped response to ensuring the bloodlines are managed according to the whim of the patriarch.

Not only do you get rid of the potential unwanted child being a product of rape or adultery, but you ruthlessly remove the female that might continue with similar behaviour.

One of the last great taboos indeed. It is truly barbaric and evil.

But then again, our society has a total blind spot to the way we regard abortion. The irony will be lost on many.

9/09/2010 10:25:00 am  
Blogger ZenTiger said...

that might continue with similar behaviour.

I'm not suggesting a women asks to be raped, I'm suggesting that they think that way.

9/09/2010 10:26:00 am  
Anonymous Anti-muslim said...

ZenTiger,

So, if someone rapes you, then it's not Ok, to abort the baby as a result of that rape?

9/09/2010 10:53:00 am  
Anonymous Jason said...

Honour killings aren't always carried out after a rape, sometimes acting in a way that's merely thought to be sexually 'inappropriate' (oh dear how can you talk with that man outside the house, don't make eye contact or you are a whore) is enough to be killed.

9/09/2010 11:48:00 am  
Blogger PC said...

@ZenTiger: There certainly is a blind spot w.r.t abortion--but it's not
"society," it's you.

"I consider honour killings another form of abortion" ... because clearly a piece of protoplasm is the same as a living, breathing, thinking woman. Not.

Your comment is yet another example, as if it were needed, of how religion tends to poison everything.

9/09/2010 11:52:00 am  
Anonymous James said...

if God aborts thats ok...but if man aborts wrong.

The real issue for Christians I feel in the abortion debate,and the stem cell one for that matter isn't actually the life that may or may not eventuate...its the secret fear that man,by increasing his knowledge and skill in adjusting the world about him whether in science ,medicine, etc has made God seem weaker and not as omnipitent in comparison.That man is playing God and god is becoming surpassed as it were..

Its like they need to fight to keep God God...for their own fragile sense of esteem.If "God" collapses they will collapse as well...

9/09/2010 12:24:00 pm  
Blogger ZenTiger said...

I'm not making a religious argument PC. I'm making a moral argument. Nothing to do with God, everything about my definition of (a) life) and (b) what constitutes being human.

Anti-Muslim said: So, if someone rapes you, then it's not Ok, to abort the baby as a result of that rape?

Isn't that just another form of honour killing? It punishes the innocent. However, in our society, we have very, very good reasons for killing the unborn (or so people argue) so I guess that's OK then.

Peter said: I consider honour killings another form of abortion" ... because clearly a piece of protoplasm is the same as a living, breathing, thinking woman. Not.

I think we could both agree that there are physiological differences between a fetus and a grown women. We'd possibly also agree they are both human. However, that's not my point. My point is that that bit of protoplasm would develop into a human, and that outcome is a strong component to what constitutes the shame brought upon the family. Do you not see that element, or do you restrict honour killing to be only about the women, and not the potential for the offspring? I think you are missing an important point.

Jason said: Honour killings aren't always carried out after a rape, sometimes acting in a way that's merely thought to be sexually 'inappropriate' (oh dear how can you talk with that man outside the house, don't make eye contact or you are a whore) is enough to be killed.

Spot on. What we are looking at here is the result of ongoing "evolution" of honour killing. Where even the suggestion of "bad behaviour" is enough to trigger an inhumane response. Inhumane in that this is a brother's sister, or a father's daughter. How f**ked can a family unit be to look upon their blood relatives as something to be killed for this?

It's barbaric.

Perhaps their attitude has "evolved" from their baseline attitude of not respecting and loving life in the same way.

So perhaps, by the same token, it would be good for our society to stop writing of a fetus as a bunch of protoplasm, and abortion as housekeeping? At least have the honesty to say "we are terminating a life, but we have our 'good' reasons".

As I said, our society has a total blind spot to the way we regard abortion. The irony will be lost on many.

9/09/2010 12:48:00 pm  
Anonymous James said...

Off topic but worthy of your examination and comment..

http://nominister.blogspot.com/2010/09/freedom-is-not-and-never-has-been.html


Freedom is not and never has been absolute.

..."In exercising those freedoms one is required to act responsibly. Where that freedom is abused then condemnation follows just as surely as night follows day.

And so it is that the intention of American Pastor Terry Jones to burn 200 copies of the Quran on the anniversary of 9/11 can be rightly condemned.

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/08/florida-pastor-says-koran-burning-still-on/

"All religions (like political parties) have their rogue elements. Jones qualifies as such because his action gives aid and comfort to radical Islam and will undoubtedly put the lives of western soldiers and civilians further at risk.

Just as during WW2 when members of the British Union of Fascists were
interned under Regulation 18B as posing a danger to the war effort so similar legislation should be enacted to sideline the likes of Pastor Jones (and those 'Western' Muslim Clerics who equally abuse 'freedom' by calling for Jihad against the infidel majority in their respective countries)."

Posted by "The Veteran"


(of what?...the SS?


Discuss.

9/09/2010 01:06:00 pm  
Blogger ZenTiger said...

James

f God aborts thats ok...but if man aborts wrong.

What a silly argument. If a man dies of old age, that's OK, but if you kill that man, that's wrong.

So what's your point. exactly???


The real issue for Christians.. its the secret fear that man, by increasing his knowledge and skill in adjusting the world about him whether in science ,medicine, etc has made God seem weaker and not as omnipotent in comparison.That man is playing God and god is becoming surpassed as it were..

So many people of faith have been scientists, so I'm not sure how much your generalisation holds.

Personally, I welcome the advancement of science. My understanding of God is not at odds with a much greater understanding of the universe. Bring it on! I really want to be able to teleport to work and back. Who knows, that might be across the galaxy one day. Sweet.

9/09/2010 02:02:00 pm  
Anonymous Richard McGrath said...

@James: ..."In exercising those freedoms one is required to act responsibly. Where that freedom is abused then condemnation follows just as surely as night follows day."

Depends on one's definition of "abuse of freedom".

If by "abuse" you mean "using in a way that someone somewhere might find distasteful or offensive" then I disagree.

No-one has the right not to be offended. Otherwise morris dancing could be considered an abuse of freedom.

9/09/2010 03:43:00 pm  
Anonymous the drunken watchman said...

James has a good point.

Many religionists say that God is omnipotent, in which case he must give the "go ahead" for a child to be killed in a car accident.Alternatively, he stands by and allows it to happen.

Both acts I think are illegal for a human, so we have a double standard.

9/09/2010 04:41:00 pm  
Anonymous James said...

Just to clarify Richard...that was a quote from "The Veteran"...not me in case its unclear..

;-)

9/09/2010 04:55:00 pm  
Anonymous James said...

"God aborts thats ok...but if man aborts wrong.

What a silly argument. If a man dies of old age, that's OK, but if you kill that man, that's wrong.

So what's your point. exactly???"

Its your point!When God kills,or allows death nothing is said by you belivers as thats ok....but if a human aborts some cells etc thats wrong as you see it.

Your real issue is with man stepping in and surplanting God.

9/09/2010 05:01:00 pm  
Blogger mojo said...

This has always been something I could never quite get my head around.
Quite simply, honour killings are as you describe PC (&Zen), primitive & unacceptable ... 'the crimewave that shames the world,' 'taking out' bloodlines, well we have had a few examples of this in New Zealand.
Abortions though, are seldom 'at the whim of the patriarch,' moreso, 'it is my body, it is my decision.'
Having sat in a room, where I have known that a number of the women have had numerous abortions, have expressed disgust at women they know who have brought variably sired offspring in to the family home, and dusgust at the abuse of animals ... mmm, confusing.
One suspects that if meat is bought vacuum packed from the super market in unidentifiable bits, it is ok. If one has to kill ones own meat & butcher it in to the unidentifiable, it is not.
Presumably, since abortion is medically sanctioned, & is effected as a medical procedure, it is acceptable ... no more knitting needles, 'my body is my castle,' makes it ok.
Being a hunter or slaughterman or having guns has greater impact in family court proceedings than does having had one, two or three abortions. Surprising really, but then, 'my body, my decision.'
The similarities are there, they are both convenience killings.

But that aside, that honour killings constitute an infectious phenomenon does indeed mandate that this must be addressed and put a stop to. It is a surprise that the 'feminists' that have so espoused their right to abortion independent of the wishes of the father, and have so emphatically sanctioned abortion are so quiet in relation to their 'sisters' being so expendable.
So, I agree Zen, quite simply, this is sick shit.

9/09/2010 06:14:00 pm  
Blogger Ruth said...

When a renowned Muslim cleric calls for the beheading of a Dutch politician, we hear nothing from Western leaders. However, when some reverend in Podunk, USA decides to burn some Quran's on his lawn, we get fiery condemnations from General Petraeus, the State Department, and the White House.

Why should America care about some Dutch politician. It's rational self-interest Peter. You know that dear.

9/09/2010 06:28:00 pm  
Blogger ZenTiger said...

James, that is not "my" point. That is *your* conception of what you think I believe, and you are wrong. You might want to look into that a little further.

Here's a clue: I don't have a problem understanding free will, issues of science and issues of cause and effect, so you can stop imagining that I do.

9/09/2010 07:19:00 pm  
Blogger Jeff Perren said...

"Why should America care about some Dutch politician[?]"

Because his murder is symbolic of the horror America is - and should be more strongly - fighting: jihad and the philosophy behind it.

In any case, your objection misses Peter's point. It's not about the murder of a Dutch politician. He's making a point about the ongoing hypocrisy and inverted moral values of the Leftist media and so-called intellectuals here.

9/10/2010 07:47:00 am  
Blogger Jeff Perren said...

Correction: not "media and intellectuals" but "Western leaders." My point, with that modification, stands.

9/10/2010 07:48:00 am  
Blogger gregster said...

Exactly Jeff; "He's making a point about the ongoing hypocrisy and inverted moral values of the Leftist media." Ruth is a longstanding puzzle.

9/10/2010 12:15:00 pm  
Anonymous DenMT said...

"...the crime whose name the left generally dares not speak."

Boo. Honestly. I'm not going to waste time attempting to prove anything to you here, but firstly, the issue here is not a partisan one, and secondly, it is a special kind of blind/deafness that is required to pretend the 'left' has been silent on this.

DenMT

(As a postcript, pretty tasteless of ZenTiger to attempt to subvert the thread into some sort of commentary on abortion.)

9/10/2010 09:09:00 pm  
Blogger PC said...

@Den: It shouldn't be partisan, but it seems it is. I've been astonished by how few western feminists, for example, have spoken up for mutilated Muslim women. I love to be proved wrong, however. and when someone like Mr Fisk--who in every other respect I hold in contempt--does so speak out, then I'll say "Bravo!"

As a postcript: I agree. But worse than tasteless. Odious. And hugely informative.

9/11/2010 01:38:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Respond with a polite and intelligent comment. (Both will be applauded.)

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. (Do others the courtesy of being honest.)

Please put a name to your comments. (If you're prepared to give voice, then back it up with a name.)

And don't troll. Please. (Contemplate doing something more productive with your time, and ours.)

<< Home