By Robert Spencer
Muslims commit 91 percent of honor killings worldwide. 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.
The Palestinian Authority gives pardons or suspended sentences for honor murders. Iraqi women have asked for tougher sentences for Islamic honor murderers, who get off lightly now. Syria in 2009 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.”
In light of all this, until authorities get the courage to tell the truth about honor killing, there will be many more such murders.
AMMAN — Jordanian police said on Sunday they found the burned body of a pregnant woman whose throat had been slit and belly cut open showing her four-month-old fetus, in an apparent “honor killing.”…
By Michael Kravshik
Cultural relativism has reached a new point of absurdity in Canada when the “barbarity” of female genital mutilation and honor killings is questioned and becomes a controversy.
A recently introduced manual by the Government of Canada intended to teach newcomers about Canadian values and Canadian society has been met with ongoing hostility from left-wing Canadians and politicians over the choice of words in describing female genital mutilation and honor killings. Jinny Sims, the immigration critic of the opposition New Democratic Party of Canada, suggested the word “barbaric” might “stigmatize some cultures.”
Aside from official protestations, everyone can imagine the type of cultural relativist rhetoric that has been used to attack the Conservative government for releasing this guide. The blogosphere has been filled with “liberal-minded” Canadians continuing in the same vein as Ms. Sims, suggesting the term “barbaric” is somehow discriminatory or offensive to a particular group. However, reasoned thought on the matter should conclude on the exact opposite; that it is offensive to those forced to endure such ordeals to call them anything but barbaric. Unfortunately, sensitivity towards this group (as per usual) is ignored.
Taking up the relativist banner was also none other than Justin Trudeau, front-runner for leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada, and son of the infamous Canadian Prime Minister who brought multiculturalist policy to Canada. He attacked the Conservatives for using the term “barbaric,” andsuggested that the term was a “pejorative” and that “there needs to be a little bit of an attempt at responsible neutrality.”
Of course the term is a pejorative, as it should be. Have we gone so mad with political correctness that we can’t even call cold-blooded murder of a family member “barbaric” in case it might “stigmatize” or offend? Rightfully, Mr. Trudeau was forced to step back from his comments as even members of his own party realized he had gone too far. This was done in the usual callous fashion people expect these days from politicians: Trudeau claimed that his words were somehow taken out of context and that they may have “misled” people….
by John Griffing
There’s a new controversy in Texas involving the online public school curriculum called CSCOPE, which already has been the subject of heated debate and state legislative hearings.
There are reports now that students were made to wear Muslim burqas as part of their public school lessons.
According to a student in the class, the lesson was to teach about the life of women in Islam. The burqa exercise focused on fashion and did not include the fact that to be in public without a burqa in many Muslim countries is punishable by death.
At the end of class, the students were assigned to write a paper about Egypt. According to one student, they were instructed to discuss “how Egypt was a good country until democracy took over, and that things were finally corrected when the Muslim brotherhood came into power.”
Muslim women are portrayed as liberated in CSCOPE literature. In a lesson entitled, “Thinking About Sexuality,” that utilizes a series of film clips, students are asked, “What do the women portrayed in these film clips think Islam teaches about sexuality? How are their thoughts similar or dissimilar to your own ideas about sexuality?”
Under the subheading, “For further discussion,” select quotes from Muslim women are included for student reflection, e.g. Harlina Halizah, who says, “I don’t think it is fair to say that Islam restricts your sexual desire. It is more directing it toward a more purposeful kind of life.”
Halizah goes on to say, “I don’t need to be liberated. I was born a free person.”
Students are then asked, “Do you agree? What would you define as the criteria for being ‘liberated’?”
Another Muslim female prototype, Zainah Anwar, is quoted under the subheading, “Thinking about Gender Relations,” as saying, “We found that it is not Islam that discriminates against women, it is not the verses in the Quran, it is the way that these verses have been interpreted by men, living in patriarchal societies who wish to maintain their dominance, and their superiority and control over women.”
To get a better understand of the situation, WND reached out to Mary Bowen. Bowen is a teacher of more than 30 years with a masters degree in curriculum who recently testified during the Senate Education Committee hearing about CSCOPE’s academic deficiencies and its politically driven nature.
In response to the picture and the companion lesson, Bowen said the following, “As for these smiling children, [pictured above] I wonder if they have been taught that the women they are representing cannot drive, cannot be schooled, that they do not have legal birth records and if they are accused of rape/sexual impropriety their father can legally take them out on the patio and kill them like a dog without legal penalty …I just wonder if they are being taught the real story behind the burqa.”
By Daniel Greenfield
This is about honor. And by honor, I mean slavery. And by slavery, I mean the belief that you not only own another human being because she is a female family member, but that if she defies your ownership, you are then obligated to kill her in the most brutal way possible….
….District Police Officer Shaukat Abbas confirmed that the mother had confessed to helping her husband kill Naureen. She told police that they tied her hands and feet and tried to strangle her. They said they then covered her mouth with a cloth and set her on fire by putting petrol on her.
Her father said that she had “brought shame to the family” by running away with a man. He told police that he had decided to kill Naureen the day she married.
“I have been at ease after killing… I had been in torment while she lived” he told police.
He feels better… and that’s what really counts.
Islam says that the majority in hell are women. I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that the majority in hell are Muslim men. (Concur. –ed.)