This is topic Secular vs Islamic Law in Muslim Countries in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=042246

---

Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
 
On the news, when talking about Abdul Rahman (the Christian convert sentenced to death in Afghanistan), the media talks about how Secular and Islamic law have to be reconciled as illustrated by this case.

My confusion stems from there being no argument over whether or not Islamic Law demands this man's death, and if it does, how we can expect a constitutionally Islamic country to ignore it. So I ask you:

Is the law in this case so cut and dried that there is no point in wasting time wrangling over the wording of said law? Is it as simple as "You convert from Islam you die"? And if it is that simple, do we really have a right to intervene in a matter as theological as it is secular? Help!?!
 

---

Posted by Epictetus (Member # 6235) on :
 
I just heard about it on the radio, and I got the impression that there's no discussion going on about it. Currently, though the courts have dismissed the case, there are Several Clerics in the country who are calling for his death anyway. Rahman is currently seeking assylum in another country.
 

---

Posted by Tstorm (Member # 1871) on :
 
*cough*asylum*cough*


 

---

Posted by Epictetus (Member # 6235) on :
 
whoops
 

---

Posted by Fahim (Member # 5482) on :
 
To be honest, I think this is another instance of where people pervert religion to their own needs. As far as I'm aware, there is no Islamic law which states you can't break away from Islam or convert to another religion and if you do so, then you have to die. This is not religious law, it's simple human tyranny. Just another instance of how stupid we, as a race, can get ....
 

---

Posted by Dragon (Member # 3670) on :
 
from "Understanding Islam" by Thomas W. Lippman:

quote:

---

As for apostasy, the Koran pledges punishment for it in the next world only, not on earth... abandonment of Islam, while sinful and reprehensible, does not require death for the apostate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fahim:
To be honest, I think this is another instance of where people pervert religion to their own needs. As far as I'm aware, there is no Islamic law which states you can't break away from Islam or convert to another religion and if you do so, then you have to die. This is not religious law, it's simple human tyranny. Just another instance of how stupid we, as a race, can get ....

---

quote:

---

In the Hadiths --- Al-Bukhaari (6922) narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas said: Mohammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever changes his religion, put him to death.”

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Morbo:
[QB]Fahim, I know you know more about Islam than I, but just a few minutes of web searching turned up the judgement of execution for apostates in Sharia (Islamic law).

---

Given how many interpretations (or should I say misinterpretations? ) of the Qur'an and hadith are floating around on the Net, I wouldn't trust anything till I saw it in the actual Arabic. For instance, what exactly did the translate as an Apostate? There are many different words describing various states for a Muslim denying Islam to be in. Without knowing what was actually meant when they said "aposttate", I really wouldn't jump to any conclusions Of course, this probably the self-same argument that those guys in Afghanistan are posing - that the prophet said that apostates should be put to death ...
 

---

Posted by Fahim (Member # 5482) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
Did you guys also hear about the case in India, where a man said "divorce" (in his own language) three times in his sleep, so now the couple has to divorce. They've been married 11 years and have three kids, but now cannot remarry for 100 days, and until she has remarried and divorced another man, after having slept with him. And this is supposedly a form of Islamic law, though I don't know what crazy passage of the quran mentions this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fahim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
Did you guys also hear about the case in India, where a man said "divorce" (in his own language) three times in his sleep, so now the couple has to divorce. They've been married 11 years and have three kids, but now cannot remarry for 100 days, and until she has remarried and divorced another man, after having slept with him. And this is supposedly a form of Islamic law, though I don't know what crazy passage of the quran mentions this.

---

I'd be interested to see some links about this story. Who actually is enforcing things in this particular case? Some of the laws mentioned sound correct but some don't. I'd be interested to see what the original account said ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by airmanfour:
That really isn't the issue.

If that law exists at all (and I have a feeling it does), it does not discriminate. Conversion=death. Who in the world the particular cases offend would change, but the premise being identical, should concern everyone.

The reason I think this law does exist is that I assume the preeminent Islamic scholars live in Muslim countries. These clerics, wielding the power they do as they interpret Islamic law, could come out against this. But all we see is western "scholars" that have no following in the middle eastern Islamic countries explaining to us that this is not what the Quran says. No-one seems to be saying that this is not an Islamic tenet, they just say that the tenet could be misunderstood.

I'm concerned.

---

First of all airmanfour, I don't see why you are concerned, I assume you're not thinking of converting to Islam and then converting back? If this is on general humanistic principles, then I should tell you lots of people convert to other religions from Islam. If the law exists and is as wide-spread as you seem to believe, they all would have been put to death by now. No, the accounts of conversion are not apocryphal, I know of at least two people personally. People can twist religion to their own needs all the time and quite often, others stay by and say nothing for one reason or another. Or, if they do say something, their viewpoint is sidelined because it's not sensationalist
 

---

Posted by Fahim (Member # 5482) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ophelia:
This is what I read yesterday.

---

And as the article itself states:
"This is a totally unnecessary controversy and the local 'community leaders' or whosoever has said it are totally ignorant of Islamic law," said Zafarul-Islam Khan, an Islamic scholar and editor of The Milli Gazette, a popular Muslim newspaper.

"The law clearly says any action under compulsion or in a state of intoxication has no effect. The case of someone uttering something while asleep falls under this category and will have no impact whatsoever," Khan told Reuters.

Another case of people (mis)interpreting the law - just because they can This is why I believe that religion should be a personal thing. When you get "leaders" and "scholars" involved instead of relying on your own conscience and judgement of whatever scriptures you follow, you get led down the garden path by ignorant idiots. But then again, that's a discussion for another time since I know there will be a lot of people who will disagree with that point of view

[Edited to add an extra paragraph from the Yahoo article]
 

---

Posted by Fahim (Member # 5482) on :
 
Sorry, had to add another bit about that news article about the wife having to spend a night with another man before she can be re-married with her husband. This too doesn't quite sound right and sounds either as if the village "elders" have some axe of their own to grind here. Let me tell you another story here, something which happened here in Sri Lanka. There was another divorce issue and a couple went to an Islamic elder. The girl wanted divorce from the man she had been married to by force by her parents (which again is un-Islamic BTW - the girl has to consent to the marriage). The "elder" was not too keen on granting the divorce and he cited various reasons. The real reason? He was related to the man the girl was married to and the man wanted to remain married to the girl. So the "elder" was not being impartial. Of course, if this case were to be sensationalized and put on Yahoo, it would say that Islam gives no freedom to women and that they cannot even get a divorce if they wanted But that had nothing to do with the actual law. So don't confuse the actions of people with what is actually there in the law
 

---

Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
 
Fahim, I appreciate your input. That clears up some of my irrational concern. The smilies make a potent argument themselves
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 
I wondered if one of the elders might be up to something with that also, Fahim.
 

---

Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
 
Fahim, you make some good points. Religion does get twisted to fit agendas. It seems like hollow idealism, though. Many Afghani clerics, and thousands of protestors, disagree with your view.

quote:

---

Abdul Rahman had been held by Afghan authorities for his conversion from Islam to Christianity, punishable by death in Afghanistan, which follows Islamic law. Many Muslim clerics in the country called for his death, and said even if he were freed his life would be in danger.

---

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/03/28/christian.convert/
The ex-Muslim Christian Aghani Rahman immediately went into hiding after his release from jail. He's requested asylum outside of Afghanistan. And at least one fatwa calling for his murder has been issued, apparently by a Taleban cleric. He's got a target painted on him, for leaving Islam. That's a fact.

I don't mean to seem harsh. If that's not your view of Islam, say so, often.
 

---

Posted by Fahim (Member # 5482) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by airmanfour:
Fahim, I appreciate your input. That clears up some of my irrational concern. The smilies make a potent argument themselves

---

Glad to have been of some assistance airmanfour
 

---

Posted by Fahim (Member # 5482) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Morbo:
Fahim, you make some good points. Religion does get twisted to fit agendas. It seems like hollow idealism, though. Many Afghani clerics, and thousands of protestors, disagree with your view.

---

I think what you miss here Morbo, is the fact that the actions of people calling themselves Muslims does not necessarily make their actions Islamic The people do not define a religion, it is supposed to be the the other way around. Sure, Afghanistan says that they have an Islamic government, does that mean that all the actions of the Afghanistani government or the decrees of their clerics are Islamic? I sure would hope that people don't fall into that trap Just because a terrorist calls himself and kills innocents doesn't mean that Islam condones that or says that he should have done it. In the end, all of us do what we want to do, whether it is what our religion decrees or not depends on what we actually want to do - if that makes any sense
 

---

Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
 
Fahim, although I am sympethetic to your emphasis on the difference between what a religion is supposed to be and what religious people actually do, it seems too easy an escape from responsibility. The statement "people do not define a religion, it is supposed to be the other way around" is at best idealist, and at worst a false statement from facts of history. A religion is defined by its people or it becomes a hollow shell. I actually WANT to believe Islam can be a religion of peace, but a lack of a credable counter-movement to the overwhelming nationalist and fundimentalist Islam makes me reject that possibility.

I think what too many moderate Muslims are ignoring is the question of what has Islam become? And, more importantly, do I want to be associated with that? They have gone far enough to at least imply they don't want to be associated with a particular brand of Islam. What they have not done, as Christians eventually did, is disassociate themselves from the most powerful body and proclaim new official directions. I recognize the long and difficult inter-Islam situation that will create. On the other hand, one must question the long and difficult direction Islam is currently taking in relation to the world outside itself.
 

---

Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
 
I guess what I am saying in a round about way is that Moderate and Liberal Muslims have two choices. They must start an Islamic Reformation or accept that most of Islam has become unsalvagable.
 

---

Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fahim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Morbo:
Fahim, you make some good points. Religion does get twisted to fit agendas. It seems like hollow idealism, though. Many Afghani clerics, and thousands of protestors, disagree with your view.

---

I think what you miss here Morbo, is the fact that the actions of people calling themselves Muslims does not necessarily make their actions Islamic The people do not define a religion, it is supposed to be the the other way around. Sure, Afghanistan says that they have an Islamic government, does that mean that all the actions of the Afghanistani government or the decrees of their clerics are Islamic? I sure would hope that people don't fall into that trap Just because a terrorist calls himself and kills innocents doesn't mean that Islam condones that or says that he should have done it. In the end, all of us do what we want to do, whether it is what our religion decrees or not depends on what we actually want to do - if that makes any sense

---

quote:

---

There are 1.1 billion Muslims in the world. We can't forget that these extremists are only a tiny minority, who are struggling to gain power and authority within the Muslim world by attacking Western liberalism.

---

quote:

---

I've no doubt that there are plenty of peaceful, liberal Muslims out there, but, I don't know, telling me that cases like this aren't representative of a large number of the Muslim-oriented societies doesn't ring true to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Occasional:
I guess what I am saying in a round about way is that Moderate and Liberal Muslims have two choices. They must start an Islamic Reformation or accept that most of Islam has become unsalvagable.

---

Occasional, you seem to believe that the issues that everybody talks in relation to Islam these days are due to the religion itself, I don't - that's the difference I don't see the need to reform the religion, the practices that some people preach in the name of Islam aren't Islamic. So just because a few people decide to come up with these things because they are basically being "people", why should I want to give up my religion or to form a breakaway faction. In effect, these people aren't Muslims in the true sense, they could be called a breakaway faction. You seem to want me to say my religion is bad, I'm saying that my religion is good but people will always do bad things in the name of religion
 

---

Posted by Fahim (Member # 5482) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:
You know, I really don't believe that this is true. I'm not placing blame on the religion itself, but from my admitedly limited viewpoint, many of the countries that practice primarily Islam are pretty savage societies.

---

The Rabbit has already answered this one quite effectively I think - the only way to know a society is to live there or to live among the people from that society He talks from personal experience, so I will only add one question - what do you consider "savage"? What yardstick do you use to make this measurement?
 

---

Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
Fahim, I feel exactly the same way about Christianity and even the Mormon version of Christianity. There are alot of Christians out there who are doing and saying things that I think are very un-Christian. Most of them claim or at least imply that Christianity support there positions. It doesn't. I don't feel any need to reform my faith because of the nonsense spouted by a few ideologs who call themselves Christian. I follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, not the teachings of Pat Robertson or Orrin Hatch.

I think that most Americans don't really understand that Islam has no central leadership. There is no Pope, President or living Prophet that guides Islam. Their is no central organization that needs to be reformed. Suni's don't even have Imams. I keep hearing Americans spouting off about what the Islamic leaders should do without even recognizing that their are no Islamic leaders who are followed by more than a tiny fraction of the Muslim world.
 

---

Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
[quote]He talks from personal experience.[quote]

cough, um "she", cough

And actually, I don't have much personal experience living among Muslims. Nearly all of the Muslims I've known have been immigrants to the US or Western Europe. My experience is largely second hand not first hand. But still, I trust the opinion of the Muslims I know who do have first hand experience, far and above the images portrayed in the media.

I've dealt with the press enough to know that reporters are more interested in telling an exciting story than in accurately representing the world. Its not that they intensional mislead or distort the news, its just that stories of ordinary people doing ordinary things aren't "news". I've been told that there are many Muslim leaders writing in Arabic and other languages commonly spoken in the Muslim world who are very moderate, who are calling for an end to violence, who focus on social justice rather than criminal justice, who are doing all the things followers of a true religions should do. But that doesn't make good news. Stories about Christians being persecuted do.
 

---

Posted by Fahim (Member # 5482) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Rabbit:
[quote]He talks from personal experience.[quote]

cough, um "she", cough

---

My apologies, Rabbit - too many cartoons
 

---

Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
That's OK. I chose the moniker originally because I wanted gender neutrality. Its often amusing to see what people assume about my gender. I've been here so longthat most everyone here knows I'm a woman now so I'm often taken back when people assume I'm male.

At any rate, there is not need to apologize. I just wanted to clarify.
 

---

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
 
What do I consider savage?

How about beating and raping women for not wearing a burkha? Or blaming a woman for getting raped? Or it be perfectly acceptable to kill someone for converting to the wrong religion? Or blowing up buses full of children? Or the childish rioting in regards to the Dutch newspaper thing? Or issuing fatwahs of death against people you don't like? Or tribal violence? Or countries ruled by warlords?

I don't know, I think I can judge these things as savagery without living in the culture.

edit: My bad, Danish newspapers. And I remembered the bit from a few years back where the unofficial/official guardians of Islam in Iran (I think) shoved a buch of schoolgirls back into a buring building and watched them die because the girls weren't wearing their full burkhas. That's savagery. These are off the top of my head you understand. I'm sure I can do a quick google search on news stories with "Islam" and "atrocity or violence towards women" and have pages and pages and pages.

And, as I've said, I'm not blaming the religion as a religion. I'm sure it can be and is, in many instances, a wonderful, uplifting religion, but don't expect me to turn a blind eye to the horrific things many Islamic oriented societies have done and are doing, more or less as a matter of course.

[ March 29, 2006, 11:53 PM: Message edited by: MrSquicky ]
 

---

Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
 
Danish newspapers, if you please.
 

---

Posted by Fahim (Member # 5482) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:
And, as I've said, I'm not blaming the religion as a religion. I'm sure it can be and is, in many instances, a wonderful, uplifting religion, but don't expect me to turn a blind eye to the horrific things many Islamic oriented societies have done and are doing, more or less as a matter of course.

---

Oh but you do draw a connection between the religion and the violence when you say "many of the countries that practice primarily Islam are pretty savage societies." There was no need to bring Islam into that statement unless you wanted to draw some sort of a connection. Man is by nature savage. There are many other acts of savagery that I can point to in non-Islamic countries. Am I going to blame another religion and say that "such and such a religious country is a savage place"? Let's define where the savagery comes from and where the blame lies for the religion itslef - that's all I'm saying

[Edited to correct grammar and to add the following]
Of course, your rejoinder might be that there are no other countries which are governed by religious law and that's a valid point. But the fact remains that atrocities aren't limited to Islamic countries - it just depends on what yardstick you use to measure atrocity. What you consider a bad (but still inescapable or not so major) fact of life might be an atrocity to me and vice versa. Which is why I asked about the yardstick
 

---

Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
 
Fahim, you are grasping at straws. There are secular savage countries. However, there are no moderate or nuetral Islamic countries. That should say at least SOMETHING about the state of Islam today. I respect your wanting to see Islam, your religion, as a good thing. What I will not do is divorce what I see happening in the world with what "true Islam" is without better examples. I used to have respect for Islam with its strong beliefs about God. It seemed the last stand against a secularized world. I don't believe I hold that hope or respect any longer.
 

---

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
 
The savagery I'm talking about does come from the religion. Not Islam as a whole or in potential, but from the specific forms of Islam these societies practice. The specific beliefs and structures that the religion takes in these countries conforms to and encourages the development of savagery. Man is not by nature savage. We do not, for example, have an unconquerable drive to push girls back into burning building and to approve of such as part of our makeup. Rather, savagery exists in potential, along with a whole mess of other potential things, which are strengthened or weaked based on the environment and structures humans find themselves in. The religion of Islam, as it is currently practiced in many places (and not so in others), and specifically those countries that are centered around it, seem to really bring out the savage, the hateful, and the power-centric.

---

So, Fahim, what do you think of my examples of savaegry? You told me that I can't judge a society without living in it. Do you think, then, that I'm out of line for calling these things atrocities or for naming those who commit or approve of them as acting savage?
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 

quote:

---

However, there are no moderate or nuetral Islamic countries.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Occasional:
Fahim, you are grasping at straws. There are secular savage countries. However, there are no moderate or nuetral Islamic countries. That should say at least SOMETHING about the state of Islam today.

---

I think Occasional, given the responses that you've already received on this comment, it just states that you've already made up your mind about what Islam is Incidentally, your comment about "Islam today" seems to indicate that you think that Islam has somehow changed today from what it was yesterday. And this where I repeat again, the religion has not changed - but people have

I might be grasping at straws, or I might be able to see the world without simply putting labels on countries as Islamic or non-Islamic. It just isn't that simple. Sure, it's easy to point fingers at others and for the others to behave savagely but blaming a religion, any religion, for the actions of people is (to me at least) a very shallow minded way of reacting to things. Each person however has to make up his own mind. I am not trying to change your mind for you Simply stating a different perspective.
 

---

Posted by Fahim (Member # 5482) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:
The savagery I'm talking about does come from the religion. Not Islam as a whole or in potential, but from the specific forms of Islam these societies practice.

---

This is where you and Occasional seem to tread the same path MrSquicky You both seem to believe that a religion can somehow be transmuted for each region that it is practiced in. If somebody perverts a tenet of religion and makes a mockery of it that it somehow becomes part of the religion. Just because people commit atrocities in the name of any religion, it does not mean it was the fault of that religion. I don't like pointing fingers and so I am not going to do the whole "what about this? or what about that?" bit but most religions have had periods when people who said they upheld the religion did some terrible deeds in the name of their religion. Does that mean that the religion actually said that they should do this? Or did these people take it into their heads to do these things because they *thought* they were doing the right thing? Consider where you place the blame

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:

We do not, for example, have an unconquerable drive to push girls back into burning building and to approve of such as part of our makeup. Rather, savagery exists in potential, along with a whole mess of other potential things, which are strengthened or weaked based on the environment and structures humans find themselves in.

---

We here in the East don't have as huge an issue with specific areas of child abuse and molestation as you do in the West. I'm choosing my words carefully here when I say specific areas (you will point to child labour - I will point to sexual molestation). We have issues with gender equality but we do not objectify women or use scantily clad women to sell products. To you some of this will be objectionable but something that you can't do much about the other stuff you will shrug off in the name of commercialism. The point is, savagery is everywhere - we just get used to it in our own backyard because it's familiar. Doesn't mean that it isn't savage any less, just that *we* don't think of it as savagery. There are things we approve of unconsciously which might not be so squeaky clean after all Again, I'm not trying to point fingers here. There are problems all around and blame on all of us. What I'm saying (again) is don't blame the religion for the actions of people.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:

So, Fahim, what do you think of my examples of savaegry? You told me that I can't judge a society without living in it. Do you think, then, that I'm out of line for calling these things atrocities or for naming those who commit or approve of them as acting savage?

---

The acts you mentioned are indubitably savage - there is no denying it. But what I question is your conclusions drawn based on the action and your verdict on who the guilty party is
 

---

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
 
The problem I have, though, is that you seem, for some reason, to be denying that religion has any effect on these people. From what I'm getting from you, they do really bad stuff, much of which their religion tells them to do, but it's got nothing to do with their religion, which they claim is the central focus of their lives.

To me, that doesn't wash. To me, their religious beliefs and structures have a profound effect on their behavior and we can, to a certain extent, judge these beliefs and structures on the fruits they bear. That other people practice another form of this religion, which shares some points and differs on others, doesn't, in my opinion, take away from this.

edit: Because it seems to bear repeating. I am not talking about Islam as a whole or in potential. I am talking about the specific forms of it as practiced in these countries. I see a very large difference between Muslims who, for example, think it's commendable to beat and rape women who aren't wearing a burkha in public and those who don't. Maybe you don't see this as a significant distinction, such that when I levy a criticism at one group, you think it applies to both, but I think it's very important.
 

---

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
 

quote:

---

but we do not objectify women

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:
And women in our country choose to wear what they wear too, but apparently this means that they are objectified.

---

Come now my dear MrSquicky, when a woman has to parade scantily clad on top of a car so that the car maker can sell the car, you think that it is the woman's choice to parade like that in front of all those gawping boys and men? :-) You think it has nothing to do with the fact that the society accepts that kind of thing in the first place and says, "hey, given money we'll do anything and you should too?" Each to their own and I am in no position to condemn or judge but what I'm not saying is that the religion of these individuals (or the majority religion of the country) has any bearing on their actions. Because I don't think their religion plays a role in what they do

You on the other hand seem to believe that just because a certain country calls itself Islamic that everything they do is somehow some form of Islam. Which is what I'm refuting. I don't believe any action which harms an innocent is Islamic and that's what Islam says too. So, these people just because they call themselves Islamic, don't automatically become Muslims nor does Islam say that they should act the way do.

Incidentally, since you seem to be a bit attached to women being raped for not wearing burkhas, can you please point me to the links supporting this? I mean a link which says that the country's Islamic laws state that a woman can be raped because she didn't wear a burkha? I would be interested in specific cases too to see where it happened and how it happened so that I myself can be better informed of what goes on in the name of Islam. But I reiterate, the misguided actions of a few does not a religion make. If it did, then we'd have a lot more misery in the name of religion than we already do.
 

---

Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 

quote:

---

It's also generally culturally mandated in those Islamic sub-cultures that practice Female Genital Mutilation.

---

quote:

---

when a woman has to parade scantily clad on top of a car so that the car maker can sell the car, you think that it is the woman's choice to parade like that in front of all those gawping boys and men? :-) You think it has nothing to do with the fact that the society accepts that kind of thing in the first place and says, "hey, given money we'll do anything and you should too?"

---

quote:

---

It has been reported among Muslim populations in Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Malaysia, although very little is known about the practice in these countries. In India, a small Muslim sect, the Daudi Bohra, practise clitoridectomy.

In the Middle East, FGM is practised in Egypt, Oman, Yemen and the United Arab Emirates.

---

quote:

---

The people who pushed those little girls back into a burning building were the semi-official guardians of Islam and wield enough power to prevent firefighters and other people from recuing the girls. And afterwards there was no outcry within their country about their actions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:
Rabbit,
From Amnesty International's FGM website:

quote:

---

It has been reported among Muslim populations in Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Malaysia, although very little is known about the practice in these countries. In India, a small Muslim sect, the Daudi Bohra, practise clitoridectomy.

In the Middle East, FGM is practised in Egypt, Oman, Yemen and the United Arab Emirates.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:
This guy has to flee the country because if he didn't, he'd be dead within a week.

---

That is conjecture isn't it MrSquicky? Karzai, the president of Afghanistan, (at least according to some reports) had already stated that the man would not be executed. If you say that that might be true but a mob could still lynch him, then isn't that true of any other country in the world? Heck, people kill other people for wearing turbans, or for being a certain colour or for walking a certain way. Is that all because they are all of a given religion?

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:

People in some of these cultures celebrate when ne of their number blows up a bus full of children.

---

I believe you miss the keyword in your own statement - "people" Yes, certain people everywhere rejoice when something bad happens to somebody else. Does that make it the fault of the whole nation? Or of a religion? How can you be so certain that it was their religion that shaped them to be who they are? First walk a mile in their shoes ...
 

---

Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 

quote:

---

We disapprove and punish rapists and murderers. If you want ot point out subcultures within American society that do not, I'll freely them call them savage as well.

---

quote:

---

Actually, there was a huge out cry through much of the Arab world over this action, including in Saudi Arabia.

---

quote:

---

In what countries is beating and rape of women who don't wear the burkha common. I've heard reports of this in Afghanistan but you said countries. Give me the stats.

---

quote:

---

In what cultures do people celebrate when some one blows up a bus full of children.

---

quote:

---

All you understand about these cultures is what you read in a highly sensationalized US press.

---

quote:

---

You don't understand the interplay of forces in these cultures. If you don't know many people from these cultures first hand, how are you able to tell whether actions or practices are met with approval or not?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:
Amnesty International's FGM website:

quote:

---

It has been reported among Muslim populations in Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Malaysia, although very little is known about the practice in these countries. In India, a small Muslim sect, the Daudi Bohra, practise clitoridectomy.

In the Middle East, FGM is practised in Egypt, Oman, Yemen and the United Arab Emirates.

---

---

MrSquicky, it might interest you to know that I live in Sri Lanka and I'm a Muslim So by all accounts all of my female relatives must have had their genitalia mutilated. The strange thing is, I don't seem to recall this happening ...
 

---

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
 

quote:

---

And these are not the same regions where it is common to wear the Burka, so your association of Burka wearing and female genital mutilation seems inaccurate.

---

quote:

---

MrSquicky, it might interest you to know that I live in Sri Lanka and I'm a Muslim [Smile] So by all accounts all of my female relatives must have had their genitalia mutilated. The strange thing is, I don't seem to recall this happening ...

---

quote:

---

We punish only a very small fraction of rapists and many murderers go free as well.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:

quote:

---

In what countries is beating and rape of women who don't wear the burkha common. I've heard reports of this in Afghanistan but you said countries. Give me the stats.

---

Don't have 'em. Don't really feel like looking for them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:

If you're going to try to prove me wrong, actually do some work to try to do this.

---

The above just seems to indicate that you've already made up your mind and are not interested in a factual and reasoned debate. I see no reason to continue this discussion, at least with you, since I've never been fond of talking to stone walls
[Edited to put quote inside the quote tags ]

[ March 30, 2006, 10:06 PM: Message edited by: Fahim ]
 

---

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
 
Fahim,
In the first quote, Rabbit admits that what I said happens in Afghanistan, but is taking me to task because I said countries. I honestly have little interest in pouring through news reports to establish that something we've already agrred happens in one country happens in others as well. I'm willing to ammend my statement to talk about only one country, because the effort involved in expanding one small part of one small part of my argument is not really worth it for me.

As for the second quote

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:

---

quote:

---

I'm more than a little confused why you are trying to defend the FGMers.

---

quote:

---

quote:We punish only a very small fraction of rapists and many murderers go free as well.

Err...as far as I know, nearly everyone who gets convicted of rape gets punished. Are you suggesting that there's this population of known rapists out there that no one really does anything about? Because that idea is just bizarre to me.

---

quote:

---

Wow. Saying that as far as he knows, it doesn't happen in Sri Lanka = defending FGMers. That's quite the leap, don't you think?

---

quote:

---

Err...as far as I know, nearly everyone who gets convicted of rape gets punished. Are you suggesting that there's this population of known rapists out there that no one really does anything about? Because that idea is just bizarre to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:

quote:

---

We punish only a very small fraction of rapists and many murderers go free as well.

---

Err...as far as I know, nearly everyone who gets convicted of rape gets punished. Are you suggesting that there's this population of known rapists out there that no one really does anything about? Because that idea is just bizarre to me.

---

quote:

---

This is what you are doing to Islamic society. You aren't even looking at the statistics. You are looking at a few sensational stories that get picked up by the western press and making sweeping conclusions about what these societies are like. Even when you are given first hand knowledge about these societies by people who do live there, like quidscribis and Fahim, you reject it and claim that you know better.

---

quote:

---

This is what you are doing to Islamic society. You aren't even looking at the statistics. You are looking at a few sensational stories that get picked up by the western press and making sweeping conclusions about what these societies are like. Even when you are given first hand knowledge about these societies by people who do live there, like quidscribis and Fahim, you reject it and claim that you know better.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:

quote:

---

MrSquicky, it might interest you to know that I live in Sri Lanka and I'm a Muslim [Smile] So by all accounts all of my female relatives must have had their genitalia mutilated. The strange thing is, I don't seem to recall this happening ...

---

Again, you seem to have a problem with not distinguishing among different populations. I think that there is an important distinction between Muslims in Sri Lanka and elsewhere that practice FGM (which, I don't know, are you contesting or what?) and those that don't. I'm not sure why you don't think this difference is important and for that matter I'm more than a little confused why you are trying to defend the FGMers.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Wow. Saying that as far as he knows, it doesn't happen in Sri Lanka = defending FGMers. That's quite the leap, don't you think?

---

That's not at all what Fahim did. He did not claim that it doesn't happen in Sri Lanka. What he said was basically, "That must mean that every Muslim woman I know in Sri Lanka has undergone FGM."

---

quote:

---

This is what you are doing to Islamic society. You aren't even looking at the statistics. You are looking at a few sensational stories that get picked up by the western press and making sweeping conclusions about what these societies are like. Even when you are given first hand knowledge about these societies by people who do live there, like quidscribis and Fahim, you reject it and claim that you know better.

---

quote:

---

, it might interest you to know that I live in Sri Lanka and I'm a Muslim [Smile] So by all accounts all of my female relatives must have had their genitalia mutilated. The strange thing is, I don't seem to recall this happening ...

---

quote:

---

What he did here, what he's done to me multiple times in this thread is to take a statement I've made about a specific, limited population and claim that I made about an entire population. As this is a common appologetics technique and as Fahim seems to be taking issue with me saying that Muslims do bad things, I'm taking that as a defense of these Muslims doing these bad things.

---

quote:

---

r maybe we can do a repeat of the FGM thing, where first it doesn't happen and then ok it happens, but these countries aren't known for mandatory wearing of the burkha, but oh wait, you said from the beginning you were talking about sub-cultures in these countries and now I find that you are right.

---

quote:

---

It's (burkha wearing) also generally culturally mandated in those Islamic sub-cultures that practice Female Genital Mutilation.

---

quote:

---

You are going to have to back this one up with some references MrSquicky. It is my understanding that Female Genital Mutilation was primarily practiced in certain regions of North East Africa, some of which are Christian, and predates Islam by thousands of years. I have never heard that it is a common practice in either Saudi Arabia or Afganistan (the two countries where women are required to wear the Burka by law).

---

quote:

---

So, for example, the religious belief that says "You should kill people who convert from Islam." leads to practice of killing people who convert from Islam. Some versions of Islam have this belief and some don't.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSquicky:
Not at all. As I have said and then emphasized, mulitple times, there are, at least to me, very significant differences between the forms of Islam practiced that we're talking about here. As I've said, I am not talking about Islam as a whole or in potential, but rather specific concrete examples of it. I am not saying that Islam in any form leads to savagery, but rather Islam, in some of the forms that it currently exists in and combined with many other factors, embraces and fosters savagery.

---