The tragic murder of three young women and their mother in Canada highlights again the Misogyny of Islam.

http://pjmedia.com/blog/guilty-muslim-family-in-canada-convicted-in-honor-killings/


Quote:

Samira Kanji, president of the Noor Cultural Centre in Toronto, warned against "focusing unduly" on offended honor as the motive for the slaying of the four women and girls, saying that "honor or not, it's a murder and it's going to be treated as murder" by the courts. She claimed that the slayings are a breach of Islamic ethics, while she criticized the judge presiding in the case for having said that the verdict is a clear transmission of "Canadian values." She said, "I don't think the value of life is uniquely Canadian or uniquely Western — I think it's a universal value." Kanji said. "To that extent, his putting it in those terms was problematic." http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=71788

No the problem is women being murdered for adopting western values in western countries. The problem is too much stone age thinking in a major religion of the 21st C.

Quote:

No the problem is women being murdered for adopting western values in western countries. The problem is too much stone age thinking in a major religion of the 21st C.

What to do, what to do?   We can't stop importing them because western societies are enriched so much by their presenece, and we can't force them to assimilate because that would imply that our 'western' values are superior to theirs. 

Oh well, I guess we'll just have to grin and bear it. :'(

... wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 10:57am:

Quote: No the problem is women being murdered for adopting western values in western countries. The problem is too much stone age thinking in a major religion of the 21st C. What to do, what to do?   We can't stop importing them because western societies are enriched so much by their presenece, and we can't force them to assimilate because that would imply that our 'western' values are superior to theirs.  Oh well, I guess we'll just have to grin and bear it. :'(

We don't have much to be smug about Honky. In Australia an averahe of 27 children a year are murdered by their parents. In the vast majority of cases it's men killing their children because the relationship failed. Is that more understandable than refusing to wear a hadjib?

We shouldn't blame all men because some are worse than stupid. We shouldn't blame all Muslims for honour murders. but we should keep up the pressure for Imams to talk against this behaviour before, rather than after the act. That includes accepting that if it's alright for christians to become Muslims then it's alright for Muslims to become Christians or Atheists. 

Grey wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 11:29am:

... wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 10:57am: Quote: No the problem is women being murdered for adopting western values in western countries. The problem is too much stone age thinking in a major religion of the 21st C. What to do, what to do?   We can't stop importing them because western societies are enriched so much by their presenece, and we can't force them to assimilate because that would imply that our 'western' values are superior to theirs.  Oh well, I guess we'll just have to grin and bear it. :'( We don't have much to be smug about Honky. In Australia an averahe of 27 children a year are murdered by their parents. In the vast majority of cases it's men killing their children because the relationship failed. Is that more understandable than refusing to wear a hadjib? We shouldn't blame all men because some are worse than stupid. We shouldn't blame all Muslims for honour murders. but we should keep up the pressure for Imams to talk against this behaviour before, rather than after the act. That includes accepting that if it's alright for christians to become Muslims then it's alright for Muslims to become Christians or Atheists.

How many more people have to die while the "imams" sit and twiddle their thumbs?

Grey wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 11:29am:

... wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 10:57am: Quote: No the problem is women being murdered for adopting western values in western countries. The problem is too much stone age thinking in a major religion of the 21st C. What to do, what to do?   We can't stop importing them because western societies are enriched so much by their presenece, and we can't force them to assimilate because that would imply that our 'western' values are superior to theirs.  Oh well, I guess we'll just have to grin and bear it. :'( We don't have much to be smug about Honky. In Australia an averahe of 27 children a year are murdered by their parents. In the vast majority of cases it's men killing their children because the relationship failed. Is that more understandable than refusing to wear a hadjib? We shouldn't blame all men because some are worse than stupid. We shouldn't blame all Muslims for honour murders. but we should keep up the pressure for Imams to talk against this behaviour before, rather than after the act. That includes accepting that if it's alright for christians to become Muslims then it's alright for Muslims to become Christians or Atheists.

Anyone who even hints in court at their 'cultural differences' as in any was mitigating or excusing or explaining their crimes should have his sentence doubled for being a fooking cheeky bastard.

Quote:

Demographic differences in intimate partner homicides havealso been noted. Racial disparity is one example. Research in the United States reports that minority populations consistently record higher rates of both homicide victimisation and offending (Fingerhut & Kleinman1990; Hawkins 1999). Despite Indigenous persons representing just over two per cent of the total Australian population, they account for just under a quarter of the intimate partner homicides (as both victims and offenders).Previous research on IndigenousAustralian homicide finds that these homicides are quite different from non-Indigenous homicides in that they very rarely occur between strangers, and mostly involve family members, usually intimate partners.

http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/9/C/B/%7B9CBFDFE5-F9B2-4FEB-A14A-3166810B564F%7Dtandi255.pdf

Grey wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 10:54am:

The tragic murder of three young women and their mother in Canada highlights again the Misogyny of Islam.

The murderers were from the small Shi-ite sect, and were not Orthodox Muslims. Some of their victims were from Sunni Orthodox famlies. During the trial their animosity of the Shi-ites towards the Sunni Muslims became clear when the court was told how th ringleader would curse the Sunni victim's father 100's of times (it is part of Shi-ite religion to curse Sunni Muslims)

... wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 11:49am:

Grey wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 11:29am: ... wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 10:57am: Quote: No the problem is women being murdered for adopting western values in western countries. The problem is too much stone age thinking in a major religion of the 21st C. What to do, what to do?   We can't stop importing them because western societies are enriched so much by their presenece, and we can't force them to assimilate because that would imply that our 'western' values are superior to theirs.  Oh well, I guess we'll just have to grin and bear it. :'( We don't have much to be smug about Honky. In Australia an averahe of 27 children a year are murdered by their parents. In the vast majority of cases it's men killing their children because the relationship failed. Is that more understandable than refusing to wear a hadjib? We shouldn't blame all men because some are worse than stupid. We shouldn't blame all Muslims for honour murders. but we should keep up the pressure for Imams to talk against this behaviour before, rather than after the act. That includes accepting that if it's alright for christians to become Muslims then it's alright for Muslims to become Christians or Atheists.  How many more people have to die while the "imams" sit and twiddle their thumbs?

Do you expect the imams to speak out about this?
Would it be considered blasphemy for a muslim to speak out against Islam?

The death penalty for blasphemy protects the Islamic meme from being corrupted.

Islam cannot be reformed,in sura 5:3 it says Islam has been perfected so why would muslims want to reform it?
http://quran.com/5/3

Do some homework on the Ahmadi muslims and see how they are persecuted by mainstream Islam for doing a little reform here and there.

... wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 12:10pm:

Quote: Demographic differences in intimate partner homicides havealso been noted. Racial disparity is one example. Research in the United States reports that minority populations consistently record higher rates of both homicide victimisation and offending (Fingerhut & Kleinman1990; Hawkins 1999). Despite Indigenous persons representing just over two per cent of the total Australian population, they account for just under a quarter of the intimate partner homicides (as both victims and offenders).Previous research on IndigenousAustralian homicide finds that these homicides are quite different from non-Indigenous homicides in that they very rarely occur between strangers, and mostly involve family members, usually intimate partners. http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/9/C/B/%7B9CBFDFE5-F9B2-4FEB-A14A-3166810B564F%7Dtandi255.pdf

Oppressed people, high on alchol, glue and or other drugs, behave very badly shock. But is that on topic?


How many more people have to die while the "imams" sit and twiddle their thumbs?

How many more children have to die while the priests and vicars beat up the 'sanctity of marriage'?

It's no good criticising Muslims while wearing blinkers.

Quote:

We shouldn't blame all men because some are worse than stupid. We shouldn't blame all Muslims for honour murders. but we should keep up the pressure for Imams to talk against this behaviour before, rather than after the act. That includes accepting that if it's alright for christians to become Muslims then it's alright for Muslims to become Christians or Atheists.

You are right on the money, Grey.

Grey wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 11:29am:

We shouldn't blame all Muslims for honour murders. but we should keep up the pressure for Imams to talk against this behaviour before, rather than after the act.

If you look at global murder statistics, "honour" killings are extremely rare.

Murder is clearly forbidden in islam, and so-called "honour" killings are not considered anything other than sinful and dishonourable by the overwhelming majority of Muslims - including the religious scholars and imams.


Fatwa on honour killings by Saudi Islamic Scholar Sheikh Muhammed Salih al-Munajjid:

Killing a Muslim unlawfully is a serious matter and a grave crime. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell to abide therein; and the Wrath and the Curse of God are upon him, and a great punishment is prepared for him”

[al-Nisa’ 4:93]

al-Bukhaari (6355) narrated from Ibn ‘Umar ) that the Prophet of God (peace and blessings of God be upon him) said: “The believer will continue to be encompassed by the mercy of God so long as he does not shed blood that it is forbidden to shed.”...

...that which is called “honour killing” is a transgression and wrongdoing, because it is killing one who does not deserve to be killed, namely the maiden if she performs fornication...

...The one who kills her has killed a believing soul whom God has forbidden to be killed, and there is a stern warning concerning that, as God, may He be glorified and exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning of the Quran):

“...And those who invoke not any other deity along with God, nor kill such person as God has forbidden.... -and whoever does this shall receive the punishment. The torment will be doubled to him on the Day of Judgement, and he will abide therein (the afterlife) in disgrace”

[ al-Furqan (The Criteria) 25, v.68-69]



Imams condemn honour killings

More than 30 North American imams have signed a fatwa condemning honour killings, after a Canadian court convicted Afghan immigrants of murdering four women relatives who had supposedly damaged the family's reputation.

''There is no justification for honour killings, domestic violence and misogyny in Islam,'' said the religious order issued by the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada and signed by 34 imams from Canada and the US.

Such violence, including spousal abuse and child abuse in all forms, is ''forbidden'', it said. ''The relationship between the husband and wife is based upon mutual love and kindness.''...

http://www.smh.com.au/world/imams-condemn-honour-killings-20120205-1qzt0.html

falah wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 12:20pm:

Grey wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 10:54am: The tragic murder of three young women and their mother in Canada highlights again the Misogyny of Islam. The murderers were from the small Shi-ite sect, and were not Orthodox Muslims. Some of their victims were from Sunni Orthodox famlies. During the trial their animosity of the Shi-ites towards the Sunni Muslims became clear when the court was told how th ringleader would curse the Sunni victim's father 100's of times (it is part of Shi-ite religion to curse Sunni Muslims)

I don't know where you get that idea Falah. These were all members of the same family, both murderers and murdered. none of the other Muslim voices raises this issue, they blame country hicks.


Quote:

Syed Soharwardy, an imam who founded the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada, said that "honor killings" are explicitly condemned in the Qur'an, but claimed that such prohibitions do not take root in remote regions of Muslim-majority countries.

We know that such 'Honour killings' take place across the Muslim world in areas as diverse as Pakistan, India, Nigeria, Sudan, Iraq, Palestine, Jordan, Lebabon and Egypt. Hardly fits the notion of a small unorthdox sect?

falah wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 12:49pm:

Grey wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 11:29am: We shouldn't blame all Muslims for honour murders. but we should keep up the pressure for Imams to talk against this behaviour before, rather than after the act.   If you look at global murder statistics, "honour" killings are extremely rare. Murder is clearly forbidden in islam, and so-called "honour" killings are not considered anything other than sinful and dishonourable by the overwhelming majority of Muslims - including the religious scholars and imams.

Falah, I agree that they are haram, but not that they are as rare as you say. And even if honour killings were rare, what about other violence committed (wrongly) against women and girls in the name of Islam. What about female circumcision and forced marriages?

I know they're haram and you know they're haram, but there are plenty of Muslims who believe that it is halal to force their daughters into marriage or mutilate them. A lot of these people wouldn't be able to read the Quran for themselves - it is important for the Imams to speak out louder.

Quote:

How many more children have to die while the priests and vicars beat up the 'sanctity of marriage'?

Please explaaaaaain?

:-?

... wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 1:06pm:

Quote: How many more children have to die while the priests and vicars beat up the 'sanctity of marriage'? Please explaaaaaain? :-?

Well it's not hard to work out Honky. I'd rather you applied yourself to working this out on your own.

Grey wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 1:12pm:

... wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 1:06pm: Quote: How many more children have to die while the priests and vicars beat up the 'sanctity of marriage'? Please explaaaaaain? :-? Well it's not hard to work out Honky. I'd rather you applied yourself to working this out on your own.

Well what I took from it was that you think marriage leads to child murder.  Having a childs father in the house leads to an increased risk of that child being killed?

Am I on the right track?

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 1:06pm:

I know they're haram and you know they're haram, but there are plenty of Muslims who believe that it is halal to force their daughters into marriage or mutilate them. A lot of these people wouldn't be able to read the Quran for themselves - it is important for the Imams to speak out louder.

Nice idea in theory, except that the US-backed puppet regimes have been spending decades silencing imams.

For example, the Saudi sheikh I quoted giving the fatwa against honour killings has been banned from giving fatwas by the Saudi government due to pressure from the US.

falah wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 12:49pm:

''There is no justification for honour killings, domestic violence and misogyny in Islam,'' said the religious order issued by the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada and signed by 34 imams from Canada and the US.

If the woman starts dating a non muslim man then she is considered an apostate because that is haram in Islam.

The death penalty for apostasy is probably used to justify this killing in the name of honour.

Not many men are the victims of homour killings are they falah?

Quran 4:34 is the wife beating verse that allah the most mercifull revealed to help keep 4 wives in line.
How do you think muslim men keep 4 wives in line?
Does this verse encourage wife beating?
http://quran.com/4/34
Read all translations by ticking boxes on left side of page.

Well grey, assuming I did read it correctly....

The opposite is true.

Fathers killing their biological children is a rarity.  STEP-fathers killing their STEP children isn't so rare.


Quote:

The Cinderella effect is a term used by psychologists to describe the high incidence of stepchildren being physically abused, emotionally abused, sexually abused, neglected, murdered, or otherwise mistreated at the hands of their stepparents at significantly higher rates than at the hands of their genetic parents. It takes its name from the fairy tale character Cinderella, who in the story was cruelly mistreated by her stepmother and stepsisters. The effect has been called "one of the poster-children of evolutionary psychology."[1]

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

So if "the sanctity of marriage" were respected, there'd be fewer "step-relationships" and thus, fewer child murders.

And what about women?


Quote:

"How could she?" It's the headline du jour whenever a horrific case emerges of a mother killing her kids, as Lashanda Armstrong did when she piled her children into her minivan and drove straight into the frigid Hudson River. Our shock at such stories is, of course, understandable: They seem to go against everything we intuitively feel about the mother-child bond. But mothers kill their children in this country much more often than most people would realize by simply reading the headlines; by conservative estimates it happens every few days, at least 100 times a year. Experts say more mothers than fathers kill their children under 5 years of age. And some say our reluctance as a society to believe mothers would be capable of killing their offspring is hindering our ability to recognize warning signs, intervene and prevent more tragedies. And so the problem remains.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42634832/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

But WHY do they do it?  The reasons given are usually depression, isolation, being unable to cope.....

You'd have to wonder if these feelings would be as prevalent if women were not encouraged to be single parents - to be told they "doan need no man" to "have it all."  Sometimes we need help, even if it is from a *gasp* man. 

Negative consequnces arising from leftist ideology.  Who woulda thunk it?

falah wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 1:22pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 1:06pm: I know they're haram and you know they're haram, but there are plenty of Muslims who believe that it is halal to force their daughters into marriage or mutilate them. A lot of these people wouldn't be able to read the Quran for themselves - it is important for the Imams to speak out louder. Nice idea in theory, except that the US-backed puppet regimes have been spending decades silencing imams. For example, the Saudi sheikh I quoted giving the fatwa against honour killings has been banned from giving fatwas by the Saudi government due to pressure from the US.

Well, things are changing and, by the looks of it, for the better. The MB in Egypt would have to be against honour killings and FGM, I would think. Not so sure about those Salafis.


How does that Saudi sheikh feel about women driving or being forced to wear niqab?

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 1:51pm:

Well, things are changing and, by the looks of it, for the better. The MB in Egypt would have to be against honour killings and FGM, I would think. Not so sure about those Salafis.

Are these the same people that call FGM a "ritual nick"?

I think porcine animals will become aerodynamic before women get rights in the Islamic world.

http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/01/24/190304.html

Quote:

If you want to understand the Islamic forces that are gaining strength in Egypt and scaring people here and abroad, let me tell you about my dinner in the home of Muslim Brotherhood activists. First, meet my hostess: Sondos Asem, a 24-year-old woman who is pretty much the opposite of the stereotypical bearded Brotherhood activist. Sondos is a middle-class graduate of the American University in Cairo, where I studied in the early 1980s (“that’s before I was born,” she said wonderingly, making me feel particularly decrepit). She speaks perfect English, is writing a master’s thesis on social media, and helps run the Brotherhood’s English-language Twitter feed, @Ikhwanweb. The Muslim Brotherhood has emerged as the dominant political party in parliamentary voting because of people like Sondos and her family. My interviews with supporters suggest that the Brotherhood is far more complex than the caricature that scares many Americans. Sondos rails at the Western presumption that the Muslim Brotherhood would oppress women. She notes that her own mother, Manal Abul Hassan, is one of many female Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated candidates running for Parliament. “It’s a big misconception that the Muslim Brotherhood marginalizes women,” Sondos said. “Fifty percent of the Brotherhood are women.” I told Sondos that Westerners are fearful partly because they have watched the authorities oppress women in the name of Islam in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afghanistan. “I don’t think Egypt can ever be compared to Saudi Arabia or Iran or Afghanistan,” she replied. “We, as Egyptians, are religiously very moderate.” A much better model for Egypt, she said, is Turkey, where an Islamic party is presiding over an economic boom. I asked about female circumcision, also called female genital mutilation, which is inflicted on the overwhelming majority of girls in Egypt. It is particularly common in conservative religious households and, to its credit, the Mubarak government made some effort to stop the practice. Many worry that a more democratic government won’t challenge a practice that has broad support. “The Muslim Brotherhood is against the brutal practice of female circumcision,” Sondos said bluntly. She insisted that women over all would benefit from Brotherhood policies that focus on the poor: “We believe that a solution of women’s problems in Egyptian society is to solve the real causes, which are illiteracy, poverty and lack of education.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/08/opinion/kristof-joining-a-dinner-in-a-muslim-brotherhood-home.html





Positively barbaric. I bet she's a liar, eh?

Grey wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 12:58pm:

falah wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 12:20pm: Grey wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 10:54am: The tragic murder of three young women and their mother in Canada highlights again the Misogyny of Islam. The murderers were from the small Shi-ite sect, and were not Orthodox Muslims. Some of their victims were from Sunni Orthodox famlies. During the trial their animosity of the Shi-ites towards the Sunni Muslims became clear when the court was told how th ringleader would curse the Sunni victim's father 100's of times (it is part of Shi-ite religion to curse Sunni Muslims) I don't know where you get that idea Falah. These were all members of the same family, both murderers and murdered.

They may all have been in the same family, but they were not all of the same religion.


Quote:

Further interesting detail: Tooba [second wife] is Shia, as is Shafia [husband], and Rona [first wife] was Sunni. In Afghanistan, the two Muslim sects revile each other yet Tooba asserted this was never an issue for the Shafias. http://www.thestar.com/mobile/NEWS/article/1112525

In another article, it reported that Sunni Rona was given some of the daughters to raise as her own when Shi-ite Tooba had her hands full with her many children. Presumeably Rona raised her daughters as Sunni too.

In yet another article, it is reported that Shi-ite Shafia cursed Sunni Rona's Sunni father.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 1:51pm:

Well, things are changing and, by the looks of it, for the better. The MB in Egypt would have to be against honour killings and FGM, I would think. Not so sure about those Salafis.

Do you even know what a salafi is? The fatwa I posted against "honour" killings was from an orthodox Salafi scholar. FGM is not even practiced amongst the native Saudis who mostly follow Orthodox salafi islam.

falah wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 2:41pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 1:51pm: Well, things are changing and, by the looks of it, for the better. The MB in Egypt would have to be against honour killings and FGM, I would think. Not so sure about those Salafis. Do you even know what a salafi is? The fatwa I posted against "honour" killings was from an orthodox Salafi scholar. FGM is not even practiced amongst the native Saudis who mostly follow Orthodox salafi islam.

That is the same scholar who says it is ok to kill apostates for the crime of disbelief in Islam.
http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/20327/apostate

If a muslimah dates a non muslim man is she considered an apostate?
The death penalty for apostasy allows honour killings!

FGM is a part of Islam-

Quote:

Female circumcision has not been prescribed for no reason,rather the wisdom behind it brings many benefits. Circumcision reduces excessive sensitivity of the clitoris which may cause it to increase in size,which is very annoying to the husband at the time of intercourse. http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/45528/circumcision

Quote:

Circumcision is not an inherited custom as some people claim,rather it is prescribed in Islam and the scholars are unanimously agreed that it is prescribed. Not a single muslim scholar -as far as we know-has said circumcision is not prescribed. http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/60314/circumcision

The sooner this barbaric practice is outlawed the better.

If you think we will allow a "ritual nick" you are mistaken, anyone who does FGM belongs in jail.

falah wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 2:41pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 7th, 2012 at 1:51pm: Well, things are changing and, by the looks of it, for the better. The MB in Egypt would have to be against honour killings and FGM, I would think. Not so sure about those Salafis. Do you even know what a salafi is? The fatwa I posted against "honour" killings was from an orthodox Salafi scholar. FGM is not even practiced amongst the native Saudis who mostly follow Orthodox salafi islam.

I didn't say Salafi practice FGM. I said I'm not sure about them and that I prefer the Brotherhood because I feel more comfortable with them.

I saw Salafi leaders in Egypt saying they don't want men and women to share the same beach. How are families supposed to go out and spend time together? It's things like this that make me nervous - the world hardly needs another Taliban-like oppressor of women. Anyway, that said, I have limited knowlede of what Salafi policy in Egypt is, apart from that gained from the one program, but it was enough to make me wary.

... wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 1:34pm:

Well grey, assuming I did read it correctly.... The opposite is true. Fathers killing their biological children is a rarity.  STEP-fathers killing their STEP children isn't so rare. Quote: The Cinderella effect is a term used by psychologists to describe the high incidence of stepchildren being physically abused, emotionally abused, sexually abused, neglected, murdered, or otherwise mistreated at the hands of their stepparents at significantly higher rates than at the hands of their genetic parents. It takes its name from the fairy tale character Cinderella, who in the story was cruelly mistreated by her stepmother and stepsisters. The effect has been called "one of the poster-children of evolutionary psychology."[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinderella_effect So if "the sanctity of marriage" were respected, there'd be fewer "step-relationships" and thus, fewer child murders. And what about women? [quote] "How could she?" It's the headline du jour whenever a horrific case emerges of a mother killing her kids, as Lashanda Armstrong did when she piled her children into her minivan and drove straight into the frigid Hudson River. Our shock at such stories is, of course, understandable: They seem to go against everything we intuitively feel about the mother-child bond. But mothers kill their children in this country much more often than most people would realize by simply reading the headlines; by conservative estimates it happens every few days, at least 100 times a year. Experts say more mothers than fathers kill their children under 5 years of age. And some say our reluctance as a society to believe mothers would be capable of killing their offspring is hindering our ability to recognize warning signs, intervene and prevent more tragedies. And so the problem remains.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42634832/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

But WHY do they do it?  The reasons given are usually depression, isolation, being unable to cope.....

You'd have to wonder if these feelings would be as prevalent if women were not encouraged to be single parents - to be told they "doan need no man" to "have it all."  Sometimes we need help, even if it is from a *gasp* man. 

Negative consequnces arising from leftist ideology.  Who woulda thunk it?[/quote]

My point was that killing the wife and /or kids when the marriage falls apart is symptomatic of taking marriage too seriously. But on the face of it your points are fair and  taken. 

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 4:34pm:

If a muslimah dates a non muslim man is she considered an apostate?

Of course not.






Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 4:34pm:

Quote: Female circumcision has not been prescribed for no reason,rather the wisdom behind it brings many benefits. Circumcision reduces excessive sensitivity of the clitoris which may cause it to increase in size,which is very annoying to the husband at the time of intercourse. http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/45528/circumcision

In the same fatwa he says:

"The correct view is that circumcision is obligatory for males and that it is one of the symbols of Islam, and that circumcision of women is...not obligatory."







Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 4:34pm:

Quote: Circumcision is not an inherited custom as some people claim,rather it is prescribed in Islam and the scholars are unanimously agreed that it is prescribed. Not a single muslim scholar -as far as we know-has said circumcision is not prescribed. http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/60314/circumcision

The permissable, but not obligaotry, procedure being talked about here is not FGM, but rather the circumcision in females that is simliar to that of the males - cutting the hood or the covering of the glans, whether it be the that which surrounds the penile glans or the clitoral glans.

The actual organ is to be left intact and fully functional, and no harm is done to the person.


Quote:

Ibn al-Sabbaagh said in al-Shaamil: What is obligatory in the case of a man is to cut the skin on the tip of the penis until the entire glans becomes visible. In the case of a woman, it means cutting the skin that looks like the comb of a rooster at the top of the vagina (clitoral hood), between the two labia; if it is cut the base of it (the clitoris) should be left like a date pit.  Al-Nawawi said: The well-known correct view is that everything covering the (clitoral or penile) glans must be cut. Al-Majmoo’, 1/351 Al-Juwayni said:  The hadeeth indicates that not too much of it should be removed (in the case of women), because he said, “Leave something sticking out and do not go to extremes in cutting.” http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/9412

This differs from FGM practiced in Africa, where all external genitalia is removed and sewn closed. This FGM practiced in Africa is referred to as Pharonic Cricumcision, and is practiced by Christians and Muslims alike.

The African Pharonic excision of all external genitalia, has no basis in Islam.

Quote:

Circumcision reduces excessive sensitivity of the clitoris which may cause it to increase in size,which is very annoying to the husband at the time of intercourse.

Funnily enough, the same things happens to a penis. Let's cut those off too.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 6:14pm:

Quote: Circumcision reduces excessive sensitivity of the clitoris which may cause it to increase in size,which is very annoying to the husband at the time of intercourse. Funnily enough, the same things happens to a penis. Let's cut those off too.

The equivalent is done to men in Jewish and Islamic rites eg. removal of the superfluous skin covering the glans.

The removal of the foreskin in male circumcision doesn't reduce "excessive" sensitivity and it's not done out of consideration for women. To say they are equal is ridiculous.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 8^th, 2012 at 9:43am:

The removal of the foreskin in male circumcision doesn't reduce "excessive" sensitivity

I really don't know how qualified you are to make that claim.



Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 8^th, 2012 at 9:43am:

and it's not done out of consideration for women.

Nobody said it is. That was description of a benefit of male circumcision, not the rationale for performing.

However there have been many studies which suggest that circumcision is beneficial for women:

Kigozi et al. reported on a prospective study of 455 female partners of men circumcised as part of a randomised trial. 39.8% reported improved sexual satisfaction following circumcision, 57.3% reported no change, and 2.9% reported reduced sexual satisfaction after their partners were circumcised.
[Kigozi G, Lukabwe I, Kagaayi J, et al. (June 2009). "Sexual satisfaction of women partners of circumcised men in a randomized trial of male circumcision in Rakai, Uganda". BJU Int. 104 (11): 1698–701.]

Williamson et al. (1988) studied randomly selected young mothers in Iowa, where most men are circumcised, and found that 76% would prefer a circumcised penis for achieving sexual arousal through viewing it.
http://www.circs.org/index.php/Library/Williamson

Wildman and Wildman (1976) surveyed 55 young women in Georgia, US, reporting that 47 (89%) of respondents preferred the circumcised penis (the remainder preferred the uncircumcised penis).
http://www.circs.org/index.php/Library/Wildman

Bailey et al. report that there is a preference by women for circumcised men, mentioning that the circumcised penis enters a woman more easily and is less likely to cause injury to the vagina.
AIDS Care. 2002 Feb;14(1):27-40. The acceptability of male circumcision to reduce HIV infections in Nyanza Province, Kenya. Bailey RC, Muga R, Poulussen R, Abicht H.

There other studies which have shown that circumcision even helps prevent the spread of dieases like AIDS.




Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 8^th, 2012 at 9:43am:

To say they are equal is ridiculous.

In female human anatomy, the clitoral hood, (also called preputium clitoridis and clitoral prepuce), is a fold of skin that surrounds and protects the clitoral glans...and is homologous with the foreskin (equally called prepuce) in male genitals.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clitoral_hood
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreskin

I have no problem with mutilating male genitalia. Both my husband and son are circumcised.


Quote:

Circumcision reduces excessive sensitivity of the clitoris which may cause it to increase in size,which is very annoying to the husband at the time of intercourse.

This is what I originally quoted and referred to. Do you really think he's talking about the clitoral hood here? If it is just a piece of skin similar to a foreskin that covers the clitoris, then how does its removal reduce sensitivity?


Do you have daughters? Are they circumcised?

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 8^th, 2012 at 11:08am:

This is what I originally quoted and referred to. Do you really think he's talking about the clitoral hood here?

Yes.



Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 8^th, 2012 at 11:08am:

If it is just a piece of skin similar to a foreskin that covers the clitoris, then how does its removal reduce sensitivity?

In the same way that it does for men.

How is it annoying for men?

Hardly surprising that an Islamic site gives that response.