A Young Woman Stoned for Adultery

[ChrisL]

I have indulged in no appeal to emotion, son.

You were too busy indulging in your false equivalencies and looking up other people's opinions to notice, however.

I realize that you are ignorant as to the structural and doctrinal differences between Islam, Christianity and Judaism, here, and I realize you are motivated by a desire to sound exactly like all your little peeps but just because you are ignorant, that does not mean they are all the same.

The scope, prevalence and severity of the misogyny inherent and practiced in the three religions is so different that a person would have to be monumentally ignorant to defend Islam as being little different from the other two.

.....and yes, it IS about Islam here, oh politically correct child.

Nope. It isn't. Read the title --- it's about HBV. "Islam" was brought in as an irrelevant red herring. Were we to choose a different red herring according to the Two Minutes Hate of a different day, we could invoke Hinduism or Sikhism. It would still be the same fallacy as describing a Klan lynching as a "Christian" practice.

This is about simple logic.

Lying does not win an argument, son, no matter how simple your views.

Indeed it doesn't. That's why you're losing.

This happened as an application of Islamic justice. Now, I realize you are extremely conformist and trying to protect Islam because of your fear of saying anything not pre-approved by your little peeps but to claim this isn't about Islam is downright stupid.

Did it now/Am I now.

If this is "Islamic justice", pray what the fuck is it when it takes place in India? Or ancient Rome? Or medieval England?

“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear. " -- Deutoronomy 21

"Whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall stone him. The sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death." -- Leviticus 24

"And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep." --- Acts 7

"While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation. They put him in custody, because it had not been made clear what should be done to him. And the Lord said to Moses, “The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” And all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, as the Lord commanded Moses." --- Numbers 15

“A man or a woman who is a medium or a necromancer shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones; their blood shall be upon them.” --- Leviticus 20

"You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery." -- Deuteronomy 20​

---- Old Testes. Centuries before Mohammed ever existed. A millennium at least.

Linear time, Dumbass. Cultural practice, QED.

I love the way Moses specifies "they shall stone him with stones". In case anybody was thinking of stoning him with, say, ice cream sammiches.

So, you are quoting the Old Testament, yet saying that these practices are not based on religious beliefs? Lol.

It's a time marker. If you're aware of when the OT was written, it predates Mohammed by a good thousand years. And the accounts tell us the practice was already in use then. Therefore it's impossible for Mohammed to have just made it up. There's also a reference in the NT where it's going on. None of these introduce the idea of social control execution as a new thing -- it's already a practice.

And specifically the case here (cause) is an HBV execution, which is not only prohibited by the Quran, it's far far FAR older. And I'm repeating the same thing now for the umpteenth time.

Sorry, but that is pointless. The people who practice these forms of punishment are doing so in the name of their religious beliefs. Nothing else really matters.

 

[Pogo]

Well, you know, Pogo -- we will just have to agree to disagree.

That's fine; I can lead you to the water but I can't do your thinking for you if you're already set on going and believe you can rearrange linear time however you want. The simple fact is these are ancient cultural practices, with no religious function, and I've documented that all over this thread. If you choose to ignore known anthropological history --- that's your self-delusion.

I support the liberal notion that women are the complete equal of men. You obviously do not,

Fuck you. Don't you EVER put words in my mouth. Get your own.

And grow the fuck up. This childish strawmanning is the maturity level of a 9-year-old. I know the lazy way to approach this is to accept simplistic Association Fallacies and then ululate when you're presented with the deeper causes that might require you to actually think or, perish the thought, challenge your own preconceptions, but the facts are the facts.

When the known facts change, I change my mind. What do YOU do, sir?

Exactly. Wimp.

 

[Pogo]

Nope. It isn't. Read the title --- it's about HBV. "Islam" was brought in as an irrelevant red herring. Were we to choose a different red herring according to the Two Minutes Hate of a different day, we could invoke Hinduism or Sikhism. It would still be the same fallacy as describing a Klan lynching as a "Christian" practice.

This is about simple logic.

Lying does not win an argument, son, no matter how simple your views.

Indeed it doesn't. That's why you're losing.

This happened as an application of Islamic justice. Now, I realize you are extremely conformist and trying to protect Islam because of your fear of saying anything not pre-approved by your little peeps but to claim this isn't about Islam is downright stupid.

Did it now/Am I now.

If this is "Islamic justice", pray what the fuck is it when it takes place in India? Or ancient Rome? Or medieval England?

“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear. " -- Deutoronomy 21

"Whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall stone him. The sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death." -- Leviticus 24

"And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep." --- Acts 7

"While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation. They put him in custody, because it had not been made clear what should be done to him. And the Lord said to Moses, “The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” And all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, as the Lord commanded Moses." --- Numbers 15

“A man or a woman who is a medium or a necromancer shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones; their blood shall be upon them.” --- Leviticus 20

"You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery." -- Deuteronomy 20​

---- Old Testes. Centuries before Mohammed ever existed. A millennium at least.

Linear time, Dumbass. Cultural practice, QED.

I love the way Moses specifies "they shall stone him with stones". In case anybody was thinking of stoning him with, say, ice cream sammiches.

So, you are quoting the Old Testament, yet saying that these practices are not based on religious beliefs? Lol.

It's a time marker. If you're aware of when the OT was written, it predates Mohammed by a good thousand years. And the accounts tell us the practice was already in use then. Therefore it's impossible for Mohammed to have just made it up. There's also a reference in the NT where it's going on. None of these introduce the idea of social control execution as a new thing -- it's already a practice.

And specifically the case here (cause) is an HBV execution, which is not only prohibited by the Quran, it's far far FAR older. And I'm repeating the same thing now for the umpteenth time.

Sorry, but that is pointless. The people who practice these forms of punishment are doing so in the name of their religious beliefs. Nothing else really matters.

Again, so were the Ku Klux Klan lynching black people; so were the various abortion bombers like Eric Rudolph and Scott Roeder. Exact same thing.

 

[Pogo]

In countries today where women are tortured and killed by methods such as "stoning," it can be directly traced to patriarchal religious beliefs that women are to "obey" and "serve" men, so when these women try to live their lives the way they want instead of how their "religious culture" dictates, they are put to death using methods according to the religious beliefs of that culture.

Do you think Christianity would be any different if it was allowed? Because most Christians live in a secular society or culture, they must also abide by man (or woman) made laws. They have been "moderated." Also, there is the New Testament which helps to moderate. If there was no New Testament, these crazy religious folks would be still living by the laws of the OT.

We both know that all these defenses of Islam are not based upon reason.

They are just the ravings of those with cases of arrested development forever stuck in that acting-out stage of their life where they identify with anything that seeks to destroy.

It's like one giant oppositional defiant disorder in action.

This must be too lofty a concept for your limited brain to grasp but none of this is a "defense of Islam", or a "defense of Hinduism" or a "defense of Sikhism" or a "defense of Christianity". I know you want to stomp your little feet and hold your breath 'til you turn blue insisting this is about religion, but IT ISN'T. And that is the point. This isn't about religion; this is about lying.

 

[ChrisL]

Lying does not win an argument, son, no matter how simple your views.

Indeed it doesn't. That's why you're losing.

This happened as an application of Islamic justice. Now, I realize you are extremely conformist and trying to protect Islam because of your fear of saying anything not pre-approved by your little peeps but to claim this isn't about Islam is downright stupid.

Did it now/Am I now.

If this is "Islamic justice", pray what the fuck is it when it takes place in India? Or ancient Rome? Or medieval England?

“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear. " -- Deutoronomy 21

"Whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall stone him. The sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death." -- Leviticus 24

"And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep." --- Acts 7

"While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation. They put him in custody, because it had not been made clear what should be done to him. And the Lord said to Moses, “The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” And all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, as the Lord commanded Moses." --- Numbers 15

“A man or a woman who is a medium or a necromancer shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones; their blood shall be upon them.” --- Leviticus 20

"You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery." -- Deuteronomy 20​

---- Old Testes. Centuries before Mohammed ever existed. A millennium at least.

Linear time, Dumbass. Cultural practice, QED.

I love the way Moses specifies "they shall stone him with stones". In case anybody was thinking of stoning him with, say, ice cream sammiches.

So, you are quoting the Old Testament, yet saying that these practices are not based on religious beliefs? Lol.

It's a time marker. If you're aware of when the OT was written, it predates Mohammed by a good thousand years. And the accounts tell us the practice was already in use then. Therefore it's impossible for Mohammed to have just made it up. There's also a reference in the NT where it's going on. None of these introduce the idea of social control execution as a new thing -- it's already a practice.

And specifically the case here (cause) is an HBV execution, which is not only prohibited by the Quran, it's far far FAR older. And I'm repeating the same thing now for the umpteenth time.

Sorry, but that is pointless. The people who practice these forms of punishment are doing so in the name of their religious beliefs. Nothing else really matters.

Again, so were the Ku Klux Klan lynching black people; so were the various abortion bombers like Eric Rudolph and Scott Roeder. Exact same thing.

I'm not the one denying those things.

 

[Pogo]

Indeed it doesn't. That's why you're losing.



Did it now/Am I now.

If this is "Islamic justice", pray what the fuck is it when it takes place in India? Or ancient Rome? Or medieval England?

“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear. " -- Deutoronomy 21

"Whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall stone him. The sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death." -- Leviticus 24

"And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep." --- Acts 7

"While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation. They put him in custody, because it had not been made clear what should be done to him. And the Lord said to Moses, “The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” And all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, as the Lord commanded Moses." --- Numbers 15

“A man or a woman who is a medium or a necromancer shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones; their blood shall be upon them.” --- Leviticus 20

"You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery." -- Deuteronomy 20​

---- Old Testes. Centuries before Mohammed ever existed. A millennium at least.

Linear time, Dumbass. Cultural practice, QED.

I love the way Moses specifies "they shall stone him with stones". In case anybody was thinking of stoning him with, say, ice cream sammiches.

So, you are quoting the Old Testament, yet saying that these practices are not based on religious beliefs? Lol.

It's a time marker. If you're aware of when the OT was written, it predates Mohammed by a good thousand years. And the accounts tell us the practice was already in use then. Therefore it's impossible for Mohammed to have just made it up. There's also a reference in the NT where it's going on. None of these introduce the idea of social control execution as a new thing -- it's already a practice.

And specifically the case here (cause) is an HBV execution, which is not only prohibited by the Quran, it's far far FAR older. And I'm repeating the same thing now for the umpteenth time.

Sorry, but that is pointless. The people who practice these forms of punishment are doing so in the name of their religious beliefs. Nothing else really matters.

Again, so were the Ku Klux Klan lynching black people; so were the various abortion bombers like Eric Rudolph and Scott Roeder. Exact same thing.

I'm not the one denying those things.

Yes I know you see that. I'm using an analogy to demonstrate how the fallacy works. It's prolly still over his head though. I need to take a Rosetta Stone course in Dumbdown.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Let's see here -- Muslims following the edict of an Imam versed in sharia law stone a woman to death, and a teenager on the internet is swearing and down that this Islamic punishment meted out by Muslims following this strict adherence to Islamic law has nothing to do with Islam.


The Kool aid being served must be particularly strong today.

 

[Pogo]

Let's see here -- Muslims following the edict of an Imam versed in sharia law stone a woman to death, and a teenager on the internet is swearing and down that this Islamic punishment meted out by Muslims following this strict adherence to Islamic law has nothing to do with Islam.


The Kool aid being served must be particularly strong today.

Open wide.

>> In many Arab countries, the practice of honour killing dates back to pre-Islamic times when Arab settlers occupied a region adjacent to Sindh, known as Baluchistan (in Pakistan).57 These Arab settlers had patriarchal traditions such as live burials of newly born daughters. Such traditions trace back to the earliest historic times of Ancient Babylon, where the predominant view was that a woman's virginity belonged to her family.58

There is no mention of honour killing in the Quran or Hadiths. Honour killing, in Islamic definitions, refers specifically to extra-legal punishment by the family against a woman, and is forbidden by the Sharia (Islamic law). Religious authorities disagree with extra punishments such as honour killing and prohibit it, so the practice of it is a cultural and not a religious issue. However, since Islam has influence over vast numbers of Muslims in many countries and from many cultures, some use Islam to justify honour killing even though there is no support for honour killing in Islam. << -- Origins of Honor Killing

--- Reposted from 35 posts ago, where it was reposted from 554 posts before that, after being reposted from other threads.

But that is of no consequence when we can just go and pretend we never saw it.

Guess we'll just keep reposting until it occurs to somebody that there are words and sources there and maybe one should READ THEM.


There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." -- Isaac Asimov, 1980

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Open wide.

>> In many Arab countries, the practice of honour killing dates back to pre-Islamic times when Arab settlers occupied a region adjacent to Sindh, known as Baluchistan (in Pakistan).57 These Arab settlers had patriarchal traditions such as live burials of newly born daughters. Such traditions trace back to the earliest historic times of Ancient Babylon, where the predominant view was that a woman's virginity belonged to her family.58

There is no mention of honour killing in the Quran or Hadiths. Honour killing, in Islamic definitions, refers specifically to extra-legal punishment by the family against a woman, and is forbidden by the Sharia (Islamic law). Religious authorities disagree with extra punishments such as honour killing and prohibit it, so the practice of it is a cultural and not a religious issue. However, since Islam has influence over vast numbers of Muslims in many countries and from many cultures, some use Islam to justify honour killing even though there is no support for honour killing in Islam. << -- Origins of Honor Killing

--- Reposted from 35 posts ago, where it was reposted from 554 posts before that, after being reposted from other threads.

But that is of no consequence when we can just go and pretend we never saw it.

Guess we'll just keep reposting until it occurs to somebody that there are words and sources there and maybe one should READ THEM.


There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." -- Isaac Asimov, 1980

It's really cute that you fancy yourself an intellectual when you are talking to a fellow who was admitted to Stanford back in 1972, child, but I do imagine you must have missed various passages in Sahih Bukhari that most certainly DO call for stoning.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

You obviously know nothing about Pogo.

I see little difference between Pogo and you, or any of a number of other authoritarian leftists who despise liberal principles to such a degree that you routinely defend their very antithesis.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Sahih Al-Bukhari | Hadith | Qur'an & Hadith | Alim.org

Sahih Al-Bukhari | Hadith | Qur'an & Hadith | Alim.org

 

[IsaacNewton]

This "primitive patriarchy" is hardwired into the primitive religion called Islam. You are trying to make a distinction without a difference, here, as anybody who knows even a little bit about Sharia realizes the religious law is extremely hostile towards women.

Bingo. It absolutely is. It's hardwired into all the Abrahamic religions, because, as I keep pointing out, that was the pre-existing culture. The culture precedes the religion, always, by definition. Culture is the first structural system of community; it has to be. Religion follows.

When the time comes that the two clash, the religion may proscribe it as a practice, as in the case of honor killing here (and in India with Hinduism and Sikhism) but the cultural roots are always deeper; the practice continues in spite of the religion. That's the whole POINT here.

But yes, all of these religions are obviously rooted in patriarchy. How else can you possibly come up with the absurd concept that a creator is male?


From my earlier post (last year) 237, since we're rehashing the whole thread:

In the interview, Sarhan explained, "'I killed her because she was no longer a virgin,' he told me. 'She made a mistake, willingly or not. It is better that one person dies than the whole family of shame and disgrace. It is like a box of apples. If you have one rotten apple would you keep it or get rid of it? I just got rid of it.' When I challenged Sarhan by pointing out that his act contradicted the teachings of Islam and was punishable by God, he said, 'I know that killing my sister is against Islam and it angered God, but I had to do what I had to do and I will answer to God when the time comes." He added, "I know my sister was killed unjustly but what can I do? This is how society thinks. Nobody really wants to kill his own sister." <<

(case history 2):

>> ... I, Rinde, grew up in Turkey and quickly realized it was not favorable to be born a girl. No matter what my brothers did it was accepted by my parents. On the other hand, they would talk over me as if I had nothing significant to say. My brothers and my parents would beat me on many occasions, especially when I did something to displease them, such as dare to talk back to them which was disapproved of since they were men. However, it was okay for them to slap me around to put me on "the right path".

Their abuse was not dictated by religion since my brothers were not really religious, nor did it come from love to "help me be a better person". However, I got off easy, because there were occasions where women would suddenly be missing. These women would vanish without a trace. It would be reported by a family in my village that "my daughter has committed suicide". It was obvious that they were killed by a family member, but no one would dare say anything. Being Kurdish, the customs of our culture even before Islam's arrival are more cemented than even the religion itself in the name of deeply rooted rituals and beliefs. Besides, most people never really study the Quran and have a very limited, distorted view of their own religion. Thus, they act on cultural impulse as Sarhan so aptly described it.<<

--- Deepak Chopra, Jim Buck and Rinde Pasori, "A Practical Approach to Talking about Honor Killing"​

This need among leftists to spring into obfuscating defense whenever the subject is Islam may guarantee you props from similarly reactive peeps, but such defense is so entirely contradictory to actual liberal ideals as to be nearly the antithesis thereof.

The topic is not "Islam" here Hunior. Just because some partisan wackaloon wants to fashion an Association Fallacy that can easily be disproven, doesn't mean rational people take it seriously. The topic here is logic and anthropological fact. So your Appeal to Emotion deflection is denied. Via the same Association Fallacy we could claim that Ku Klux Klan lynchings, the Matthew Sheppard murder, abortion bombings etc are "inherent in Christianism". Correlation does not equal causation. As long as we refuse to look deeply enough into the roots, we perpetuate and extend it.

The same is true in the US for kristians. Thankfully they haven't gone back to killing yet. For the most part.

- "but I had to do what I had to do and I will answer to God when the time comes." He added -

And that is the jist of it. Humans will do whatever they want, the only thing religion does is give them a handy excuse that is in easy reach to justify whatever it is they ALREADY WANTED TO DO. People in the south who claim to be Christian but don't like black people and then set about burning a Church. Even the very symbol of the house of the 'god' they pretend to worship is not sacred compared to their animalistic desires and motivations. People who wail about abortion being wrong because it's murder then go and murder a doctor. Ignoring all teachings of Christ.

Religion is like living at the base of Mt. Vesuvius. It keeps you warm and protected from harsh weather but at the right moment it can turn on you and wipe out your entire civilization.

 

[Pogo]

It's really cute that you fancy yourself an intellectual

Link?

 

[Coyote]

You obviously know nothing about Pogo.

I see little difference between Pogo and you, or any of a number of other authoritarian leftists who despise liberal principles to such a degree that you routinely defend their very antithesis.

Thanks

I happen to like Pogo.

The rest of your spew is idiocy.

 

[Pogo]

Perhaps when Stanford's restroom had to admit he was a fellow back in 1972 he should have taken an anthropology course.

 

[Coyote]

Perhaps when Stanford's restroom had to admit he was a fellow back in 1972 he should have taken an anthropology course.

He likes to look down on people with less education (or what he presumes is less education)and for all his implicit intellectual and ethical superiority over us "authoritarian leftists" - what ever he means by that - his arguments seldom go deeper than bumper sticker philosophy. You will likely not be able to engage him in a real discussion because he inevitably resorts to virulent personal attacks based on pre-conceived stereotypes. This discussion is a perfect example. You and I will now be labeled supporters of abusing women, or some rubbish.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I happen to like Pogo.

Well, that's certainly one strike against him.

 

[ChrisL]

I like Pogo and Dogmaphone. Just because you don't agree on the issues doesn't mean either of you are bad people.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I like Pogo and Dogmaphone. Just because you don't agree on the issues doesn't mean either of you are bad people.

But you told me last night that I was very, very naughty, Chris.

 

[theliq]

This "primitive patriarchy" is hardwired into the primitive religion called Islam. You are trying to make a distinction without a difference, here, as anybody who knows even a little bit about Sharia realizes the religious law is extremely hostile towards women.

Bingo. It absolutely is. It's hardwired into all the Abrahamic religions, because, as I keep pointing out, that was the pre-existing culture. The culture precedes the religion, always, by definition. Culture is the first structural system of community; it has to be. Religion follows.

When the time comes that the two clash, the religion may proscribe it as a practice, as in the case of honor killing here (and in India with Hinduism and Sikhism) but the cultural roots are always deeper; the practice continues in spite of the religion. That's the whole POINT here.

But yes, all of these religions are obviously rooted in patriarchy. How else can you possibly come up with the absurd concept that a creator is male?


From my earlier post (last year) 237, since we're rehashing the whole thread:

In the interview, Sarhan explained, "'I killed her because she was no longer a virgin,' he told me. 'She made a mistake, willingly or not. It is better that one person dies than the whole family of shame and disgrace. It is like a box of apples. If you have one rotten apple would you keep it or get rid of it? I just got rid of it.' When I challenged Sarhan by pointing out that his act contradicted the teachings of Islam and was punishable by God, he said, 'I know that killing my sister is against Islam and it angered God, but I had to do what I had to do and I will answer to God when the time comes." He added, "I know my sister was killed unjustly but what can I do? This is how society thinks. Nobody really wants to kill his own sister." <<

(case history 2):

>> ... I, Rinde, grew up in Turkey and quickly realized it was not favorable to be born a girl. No matter what my brothers did it was accepted by my parents. On the other hand, they would talk over me as if I had nothing significant to say. My brothers and my parents would beat me on many occasions, especially when I did something to displease them, such as dare to talk back to them which was disapproved of since they were men. However, it was okay for them to slap me around to put me on "the right path".

Their abuse was not dictated by religion since my brothers were not really religious, nor did it come from love to "help me be a better person". However, I got off easy, because there were occasions where women would suddenly be missing. These women would vanish without a trace. It would be reported by a family in my village that "my daughter has committed suicide". It was obvious that they were killed by a family member, but no one would dare say anything. Being Kurdish, the customs of our culture even before Islam's arrival are more cemented than even the religion itself in the name of deeply rooted rituals and beliefs. Besides, most people never really study the Quran and have a very limited, distorted view of their own religion. Thus, they act on cultural impulse as Sarhan so aptly described it.<<

--- Deepak Chopra, Jim Buck and Rinde Pasori, "A Practical Approach to Talking about Honor Killing"​

This need among leftists to spring into obfuscating defense whenever the subject is Islam may guarantee you props from similarly reactive peeps, but such defense is so entirely contradictory to actual liberal ideals as to be nearly the antithesis thereof.

The topic is not "Islam" here Hunior. Just because some partisan wackaloon wants to fashion an Association Fallacy that can easily be disproven, doesn't mean rational people take it seriously. The topic here is logic and anthropological fact. So your Appeal to Emotion deflection is denied. Via the same Association Fallacy we could claim that Ku Klux Klan lynchings, the Matthew Sheppard murder, abortion bombings etc are "inherent in Christianism". Correlation does not equal causation. As long as we refuse to look deeply enough into the roots, we perpetuate and extend it.

The same is true in the US for kristians. Thankfully they haven't gone back to killing yet. For the most part.

- "but I had to do what I had to do and I will answer to God when the time comes." He added -

And that is the jist of it. Humans will do whatever they want, the only thing religion does is give them a handy excuse that is in easy reach to justify whatever it is they ALREADY WANTED TO DO. People in the south who claim to be Christian but don't like black people and then set about burning a Church. Even the very symbol of the house of the 'god' they pretend to worship is not sacred compared to their animalistic desires and motivations. People who wail about abortion being wrong because it's murder then go and murder a doctor. Ignoring all teachings of Christ.

Religion is like living at the base of Mt. Vesuvius. It keeps you warm and protected from harsh weather but at the right moment it can turn on you and wipe out your entire civilization.

Didn't American Christians Lynch and Murder Black People.....They sure did.....God will slay all these "Christians" and good riddance.....