Islamic Justice: girl lashed for being raped; rapist pardoned

[Autodidact]

you're confusing me. it is your words, you claim all Muslim scholars would judge th same. is there something i am missing in that meaning? all means "all of them". here i say, it is never all of them.

I know, I think it's an English problem. I'm not saying, "all Muslim scholars," I'm saying "all of this (the problem of rape victims being treated this way)" is being done by (some) Muslim scholars.

i can say from my experiences, this is not seperate matter when it comes to Islam. it is just the second chapter on your path. this is the chapter where you and some other list all the crimes you've heard about and make it look like they are committed just because murderers were Muslims. in the next chapter you or someone else would probably start talking about murderer of thousands -young, old, Turkish, Kurdish, baby, women, men, armed and unarmed- PKK as if they were freedom fighters. who knows? maybe you start talking about killings of this or that minority. we'll see...

of course i've heard about father and his son kill 16 year old girl, Medine, that's her name. it is all over the news. poor kid.

honor killings is a big problem because it is a tribal tradition. it is practiced in the Eastern Turkey by Kurdish tribes. being born into a tribe is not a simple matter. most of tribes don't value life of female. though they show respect to old women. girls can not chose whom to marry and in case they run away from their unloved husbands or weddings, they are treaten to death. there are organization to help these run aways. any women who suffers from her husband can find shelter there. they teach women something else so she could make money on her own. that's a good thing because most of the time women can not walk away just because they depend on their husband financially. so they learn to make money and to be financially independant. this is what happens in general. but with tribes it is not that easy. because it works like vendetta. tribes would not let go. family gathers together and give duty to the youngest member in general. because if the killer was young enough, he would not spend long years in prison and so on. there is no way i can get it. i can not imagine a father or mother being OK with their child being killed by anohter relative. so rules of tribe for them is above laws of this nation as it is more important than laws of God. they are criminals and they end up prison just like father and brother of Medine

Yes, I understand, it's a Kurdish thing more than a Muslim thing. And really, it's a "middle-eastern tribal thing," isn't it? It probably derives more from ancient customs of tribes people in that part of the world than it does from Islam.

Is there much public outcry about the case and about honor killings in Turkey?

 

[Commoner]

you sincerely don't understand what i am saying. have you read OP here? we are talking about an authority that punishes rape victim. we are not talking about citizens and their evil acts. yes, i have never known any rape victim being punished in my nation. because rape is a crime and the one who rapes gets punishment here


.

You're misrepresenting the situation in Turkey, that's all I'm saying. Of course there are no laws to actually punish rape victims per se, that's not the issue. The mentality that condones this kinds of actions is widespread and is recognized by the whole world as a serious issue. So when you offer Turkey as an example of a shining becon of light, you can be quite sure I'll object.

On the other hand, until recently (specifically, until Turkey's ambitions to join EU) laws regarding honour killings were much more lenient and "I was provoked" used to be a common defense. Of course, now women are simply told to commit suicide for dishonouring the family. Much better.

Saying that it doesn't hapen in you capital city isn't really much of an argument as far as I'm concearned. And the number of people living in the areas you describe as "a couple of tribes" in the East is larger than the entire population of many smaller countries.

 

[Autodidact]

well, you can't really agree with me without me, can you?

there is no such a place...what place?


.

IIRC you said that umm, that Westerners are attacking Islam and trying to prevent Muslims from practicing it, didn't you? And I asked where is that happening?

 

[Autodidact]

and you interpret this as she was prisoned for being raped. really? she was mistreated and raped while she was arrested. i agree it is disgusting and it is something that should be corrected. but this is not same with someone being prisoned for being raped


.

Both. She happened to be in prison when she was raped, and she is threatened with more prison for reporting it.

But (reading between the lines) isn't this case really more of a Kurdish political thing? She's being punished more as a Kurd than as a woman?

 

[Commoner]

I think what .lava is trying to say that what these tribal members are doing in certain parts of her country are not legal.

She clearly stated that these people are punished for the acts.

Love

Dallas

Yes, but unlike one would expect, support for such actions in the general population is not close to 0.

 

[Autodidact]

I think what .lava is trying to say that what these tribal members are doing in certain parts of her country are not legal.

She clearly stated that these people are punished for the acts.

Love

Dallas

And it's not so much a Muslim thing as a Kurdish tribal thing.

 

[DallasApple]

Yes, I understand, it's a Kurdish thing more than a Muslim thing. And really, it's a "middle-eastern tribal thing," isn't it? It probably derives more from ancient customs of tribes people in that part of the world than it does from Islam.

This is what Im getting out of all this.Its like some ancient long lived customs taught from generatiton to generation are being "incorporated" into the lives of Muslims.

Sort of like many pagan rituals or symbals incorporated into Christianity.

Love

Dallas

 

[.lava]

I know, I think it's an English problem. I'm not saying, "all Muslim scholars," I'm saying "all of this (the problem of rape victims being treated this way)" is being done by (some) Muslim scholars.

OK, i'll pass this one.

Yes, I understand, it's a Kurdish thing more than a Muslim thing. And really, it's a "middle-eastern tribal thing," isn't it? It probably derives more from ancient customs of tribes people in that part of the world than it does from Islam.

Is there much public outcry about the case and about honor killings in Turkey?

yes, tribal traditions were there before Islam.

i hope i got your question right. tribe issue is not only social. it is also political related. because members of tribe votes for whoever their master votes for. if a politician was willing to turn blind eye to the actions of tribe just to get votes, i personally do not know the cure for it. i believe it happened before. present government appears to be different. they are trying to change somethings in Turkey. they are already dealing with sensetive issues. it seems like they are trying to end tribal killings as well



.

 

[Autodidact]

yes, tribal traditions were there before Islam.

i hope i got your question right. tribe issue is not only social. it is also political related. because members of tribe votes for whoever their master votes for. if a politician was willing to turn blind eye to the actions of tribe just to get votes, i personally do not know the cure for it. i believe it happened before. present government appears to be different. they are trying to change somethings in Turkey. they are already dealing with sensetive issues. it seems like they are trying to end tribal killings as well



.

Yes, tribalism is a big problem in many parts of the world, not just Muslim.

 

[.lava]

Both. She happened to be in prison when she was raped, and she is threatened with more prison for reporting it.

But (reading between the lines) isn't this case really more of a Kurdish political thing? She's being punished more as a Kurd than as a woman?

i can not know mind of those men. i can not know their reasons. only from a distance, as an individual i can say they are sick men and sick men could treat any women the same regardless where they are from or who they are. if they thought their crime would not come out, they would do whatever they want to do



.

 

[.lava]

IIRC you said that umm, that Westerners are attacking Islam and trying to prevent Muslims from practicing it, didn't you? And I asked where is that happening?

sorry, that's not what i tried to say. it is Chinese who prevent Muslims from practicing salaats...etc. not Western. i was refering to what Western governments do inside Muslim nations. they are not preventing us practicing Islam though


.

 

[cottage]

Considering the subject matter, I think I have every right to be sensitive.

You give the overwhelming impression that your sensibilities have a greater prominence than any sympathy for the woman or outrage at the injustice of this incident.

I'm not saying that at all. I'm arguing against the use of the words "Islamic justice" to describe this.

But the facts are, no matter how you deny it, that justice (albeit a perverse form) was dispensed in the name of Islam.

It appears there's a cultural miscommunication here. A reaction that one raised in a certain culture expected was not given, because that culture reacts to such accusations in a different way.

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but it sounds like a special plea.

I agree. I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing against the use of the phrase "Islamic justice" in this sense.

Yes, because you consider that you personally are being victimised for your beliefs by association. You are not. The only victim was woman who was raped. Can you not bring yourself to condemn the way she was treated?

I again say that my sensitivity on this matter is justified. Poor wording can cause even the soundest of arguments to collapse

It wasn’t poor wording. It described what happened: justice meted out by an Islamic court.
I’m sorry but you are too easily offended.

Do you think my analogy is correct or not? You have thus far failed to show how it is not.

What analogy? (!)

 

[Riverwolf]

You give the overwhelming impression that your sensibilities have a greater prominence than any sympathy for the woman or outrage at the injustice of this incident.

So? When you realize how often this kind of thing happens in the world, and when you realize that sympathy and outrage for something you have absolutely NO control over is a waste of time, you learn to refocus your energies.

Believe me: I'm just as horrified as the rest of you. However, I try to not let it control my wording: I'll focus it elsewhere.

But the facts are, no matter how you deny it, that justice (albeit a perverse form) was dispensed in the name of Islam.

I'm not denying that. However, that's not what I read. I read: "This is what happens in Islamic courts."

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but it sounds like a special plea.

Why are Muslims expected to try to disassociate themselves with these people?

Yes, because you consider that you personally are being victimised for your beliefs by association. You are not. The only victim was woman who was raped. Can you not bring yourself to condemn the way she was treated?

No, I'm not thinking I'm being victimized for my beliefs by association, because I'm not Muslim. You may want to take a closer look at the "religion" label underneath my username.

What's the point of condemning something I can't control? I can be emotionally affected by an injustice, disagree with it, but not overtly condemn it.

It wasn’t poor wording. It described what happened: justice meted out by an Islamic court.

I’m sorry but you are too easily offended.

I'm actually not easily offended at all. It was very poor wording, because what I read into it was possible, and I can make a good assumption that all other Muslims saw it, too. So I'm not alone. Maro was also insulted by the use of the phrase.

What analogy? (!)

This:

It's the same as accusing the slave labors carried out by some American-based companies as "American labor."

 

[Autodidact]

One thing I've been wondering--is there anywhere that Sharia law is dispenses that doesn't discriminate against women?

 

[kai]

One thing I've been wondering--is there anywhere that Sharia law is dispenses that doesn't discriminate against women?

There is no where that dispenses real Sharia.

Going back to the OP the legal system in Bangladesh is base on the British legal system there inst even any offical Sharia law in Bangladesh. Like i have been saying all along what happened, happened in a tribal area. Bangladesh has problems big problems.


A number of traditional practices also oppress Bangladeshi women. Many women have been charged with committing "moral" offences before local religious leaders whose views are generally biased against women. The local religious leaders issue a fatwa (ruling) that metes out punishment to women, such as the humiliating and degrading public whipping and stoning. There is no legal sanction for fatwa; it is simply a part of traditional practice.







http://www.hurights.or.jp/asia-pacific/no_32/06.htm


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Bangladesh

 

[Commoner]

One thing I've been wondering--is there anywhere that Sharia law is dispenses that doesn't discriminate against women?

How would that be possible? The distinction between different groups (men, women, muslim, non-muslim...) is in the law itself. The only way not to dicscriminate would be not to enforce it.

 

[Autodidact]

There is no where that dispenses real Sharia.

*sigh* In that case, I don't need to be concerned with Real Sharia, do I? I'm only concerned about the actual Sharia--y'know, the one that some countries are actually using? So is there any place that is using so-called Sharia that is not sexist and oppressive to women?

 

[cottage]

So? When you realize how often this kind of thing happens in the world, and when you realize that sympathy and outrage for something you have absolutely NO control over is a waste of time, you learn to refocus your energies.

Believe me: I'm just as horrified as the rest of you. However, I try to not let it control my wording: I'll focus it elsewhere.[/quote]

You were very quick to assume the worst of somebody who reported an appalling incident, while failing to condemn the actions themselves, which by any standards are abhorrent.

I'm not denying that. However, that's not what I read. I read: "This is what happens in Islamic courts."

Then you misread it, because it said no such thing. It said Islamic Justice: girl lashed for being raped; rapist pardoned All that is states is that it was justice handed down in an Islam Court.

Why are Muslims expected to try to disassociate themselves with these people?

Why? (!) Because what happened was unjust and despicable.

No, I'm not thinking I'm being victimized for my beliefs by association, because I'm not Muslim. You may want to take a closer look at the "religion" label underneath my username.

The point is that you chose to associate yourself with Muslims and you were (supposedly) offended on their behalf.

What's the point of condemning something I can't control? I can be emotionally affected by an injustice, disagree with it, but not overtly condemn it.

And yet you were lightning fast in your condemnation of someone who reported it, as if that were the greater injustice!

I'm actually not easily offended at all. It was very poor wording, because what I read into it was possible, and I can make a good assumption that all other Muslims saw it, too. So I'm not alone. Maro was also insulted by the use of the phrase.

You read into it what you wanted to read, and then argued fallaciously from the particular to the general.

This: [/quote]

It wasn’t ‘American labor’ but Americans’ labor. Americans were involved, not the American state. You don’t blame the country of origin for the actions of individuals, unless their actions were state sponsored or evidence of overall national approval.

 

[Riverwolf]

You were very quick to assume the worst of somebody who reported an appalling incident, while failing to condemn the actions themselves, which by any standards are abhorrent.

I'll focus my energies where they can be effective, not where they are useless. I can't help that poor girl, nor can I protest about the injustice. There's literally nothing I, as an individual, can do about it.

Then you misread it, because it said no such thing. It said

Islamic Justice: girl lashed for being raped; rapist pardoned All that is states is that it was justice handed down in an Islam Court.

Justice isn't limited to the court. I'm not talking at all about the OP itself; ONLY the thread title.

Titles need to be extremely clear to EVERYBODY, not just the most educated and people who are best at reading. Some of us are still learning how to skillfully read.

People who would naturally make such assumptions, as myself and other Muslims here have, need to be taken into account.

Perhaps it would have been better to leave Islam or related words out of the title, and simply mention that a girl got raped and the rapist was pardoned: wait for the OP itself to mention that it was an Islamic court, so the situation as far as we know can be made clear quickly.

Why? (!) Because what happened was unjust and despicable.

And why should we assume Muslims here would disagree? My interaction with the Muslims here has given me reason enough to assume they'd agree fully with the rest of us.

The point is that you chose to associate yourself with Muslims and you were (supposedly) offended on their behalf.

I wasn't so much offended as I was pointing out an error in word choice.

And yet you were lightning fast in your condemnation of someone who reported it, as if that were the greater injustice!

I wasn't condemning; I was correcting.

You read into it what you wanted to read, and then argued fallaciously from the particular to the general.

I read what I saw.

It wasn’t ‘American labor’ but Americans’ labor. Americans were involved, not the American state. You don’t blame the country of origin for the actions of individuals, unless their actions were state sponsored or evidence of overall national approval.

And, there, you've demonstrated my entire point. This wasn't "Islamic Justice," but (in)justice dispensed by a court that happened to follow Islam.

 

[Commoner]

This wasn't "Islamic Justice," but (in)justice dispensed by a court that happened to follow Islam.

But the law that was being practiced/enforced is "Islam"(Sharia), it's not incidental at all. What they were doing was in accordance with the law - it was justice from their perspective, it wasn't the case that it just happened to also be true that they were affiliated with Islam.

An American slaver is not a slaver because of his nationality - that is incidental. But a court that follows Sharia law does make the decisions it makes precisely because of Sharia law. It is not that it just happens to also be an Islamic court it is because of it.

But if there were a law in America allowing you to keep slaves, then you could absolutely say that it's "American Slavery" - and you would have every right to criticize it as such without having to worry about offending an American that opposes it. And you should absolutely expect those Americans that opposed it to disassociate themselves from it.

And you're more worried about offending a couple of "Americans" than addressing the actual problem? Bah!